“That is part of the OP's overall concern but to claim vindication for all digressing from the overall concern is misguided cherrypicking. The question isn't really is One D&D going to be backward compatible with 5e, but whether the OP's D&D Beyond _investment_ mentioned in the title of their post will be compatible with however whatever OneD&D becomes will carry over as D&D Beyond evolved into whatever it will be to support the new official rules.”
I’m sorry, but did you really just say that I was cherry picking because the question asked wasn’t: is the stupid new name d&d stuff being developed backwards compatible with the 5e stuff the op buys now, but rather is the stuff the op buys now going to be compatible with the stupid new name d&d stuff that will be released….
“That is part of the OP's overall concern but to claim vindication for all digressing from the overall concern is misguided cherrypicking. The question isn't really is One D&D going to be backward compatible with 5e, but whether the OP's D&D Beyond _investment_ mentioned in the title of their post will be compatible with however whatever OneD&D becomes will carry over as D&D Beyond evolved into whatever it will be to support the new official rules.”
I’m sorry, but did you really just say that I was cherry picking because the question asked wasn’t: is the stupid new name d&d stuff being developed backwards compatible with the 5e stuff the op buys now, but rather is the stuff the op buys now going to be compatible with the stupid new name d&d stuff that will be released….
I think what Plat is trying to say is that you responded to the headline instead of the article. You ignored 95% of what they had to say as an excuse to stand on a soap box.
At Carvana they have a position called a MOM. Yeah, that's their title, but it doesn't make them a mother. The way that you've been responding looks like you believe each MOM at Carvana is in fact a mother.
I kinda feel like the squabbling over whether something was off topic is actually dragging things much further off topic than the discussion was, especially since the OP has shown no interest since post #3.
“That is part of the OP's overall concern but to claim vindication for all digressing from the overall concern is misguided cherrypicking. The question isn't really is One D&D going to be backward compatible with 5e, but whether the OP's D&D Beyond _investment_ mentioned in the title of their post will be compatible with however whatever OneD&D becomes will carry over as D&D Beyond evolved into whatever it will be to support the new official rules.”
I’m sorry, but did you really just say that I was cherry picking because the question asked wasn’t: is the stupid new name d&d stuff being developed backwards compatible with the 5e stuff the op buys now, but rather is the stuff the op buys now going to be compatible with the stupid new name d&d stuff that will be released….
I think what Plat is trying to say is that you responded to the headline instead of the article. You ignored 95% of what they had to say as an excuse to stand on a soap box.
At Carvana they have a position called a MOM. Yeah, that's their title, but it doesn't make them a mother. The way that you've been responding looks like you believe each MOM at Carvana is in fact a mother.
I don’t have the faintest clue what a carvana or a mom is so whatever motives you are trying to ascribe to me are incorrect. I also pasted in the OP’s question which was very specifically asking if the material the op buys now going to be compatible with the new stuff. Saying no it’s unlikely based on the UA released so far is perfectly on topic and a reasonable response.
I’m actually looking forward to One D&D overall. It sounds like it’s going to streamline the game a lot, which I feel like is a good thing on the whole.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I really like D&D, especially Ravenloft, Exandria and the Upside Down from Stranger Things. My pronouns are she/they.
Hi everyone. I wasn’t getting alerts so didn’t notice the responses. I appreciate the comments and the ideas born from how the current test content fits into the topic of compatability.
As some have pointed out, the major concern is how this is going to look for me as a DM moving forward. I pay for the DM package, and as an always DM, share that content with my players so they can build characters on DnDBeyond for use in my games.
I wonder how that is going to change. If I am in a campaign that we have played with 5e and a “switch” is thrown, can new players create 5e characters still, can I still share all that content. Ideally there will be a toggle in the campaign setting for 5e content, One content, etc.
I anticipate part of the backwards compatibility statement is to keep sales of announced and upcoming content steady. I bought the Dragonlance novels when they came out, and really want the Dragonlance pre-order, but with everything up in the air, I wonder if it will be usable in a year or two.
I understand that this is part of the digital license risk, but again, being in Japan, books are hard to come by at reasonable costs, and online gaming is 90% of my sessions. Having these tools become depreciated or require another investment of the PH, DMG, etc, would be a major bummer.
The other concern I have is with the idea that it can work with a “little” work from the DM to merge classes, subclasses, etc. As I am sure all you DMs know, when running 4 campaigns, the last thing you want to have to do is put in more work to get basic character concepts to fit into your game. I would much prefer using that energy elsewhere.
Not going to let it keep me from having fun with my groups right now though!
So, based on the claim of backward compatibility, and what we've seen in the playtest material so far, I don't think there's much to worry about. They don't seem to be changing the basic mechanics significantly, nor are the numbers being thrown around for things like HP and damage changing much.
That ought to mean that you'll be able to run new characters in old adventures, or old characters in new adventures, or a mixture of old and new characters, and it'll work with few, if any, bumps under either set of rules.
If you're trying to cross the streams within one character, such as by multiclassing a mix of new and old classes, or by using a subclass from one edition in a class from the other, that is more likely to give you some headaches. (But trouble is far from guaranteed. Old races with the new character generation has one point of incompatibility: stat boosts, and they have an explicit rule to handle it.)
Will new classes be stronger or weaker than the old? Seems likely, but not so much as to really throw things out of balance. You get plenty of effectiveness variation in characters built under a single set of rules, and there's no reason to think it'll be notably worse than it is now.
Edit: As for DDB, it seems likely that they're going to keep the old books around as legacy content, like they did with the monster books. The real unanswered question is whether you'll be able to play with the old mechanics. I expect that you'll be forced to use the new, but they're not likely to be very different at the level DDB operates on.
“That is part of the OP's overall concern but to claim vindication for all digressing from the overall concern is misguided cherrypicking. The question isn't really is One D&D going to be backward compatible with 5e, but whether the OP's D&D Beyond _investment_ mentioned in the title of their post will be compatible with however whatever OneD&D becomes will carry over as D&D Beyond evolved into whatever it will be to support the new official rules.”
I’m sorry, but did you really just say that I was cherry picking because the question asked wasn’t: is the stupid new name d&d stuff being developed backwards compatible with the 5e stuff the op buys now, but rather is the stuff the op buys now going to be compatible with the stupid new name d&d stuff that will be released….
I think what Plat is trying to say is that you responded to the headline instead of the article. You ignored 95% of what they had to say as an excuse to stand on a soap box.
At Carvana they have a position called a MOM. Yeah, that's their title, but it doesn't make them a mother. The way that you've been responding looks like you believe each MOM at Carvana is in fact a mother.
I kinda feel like the squabbling over whether something was off topic is actually dragging things much further off topic than the discussion was, especially since the OP has shown no interest since post #3.
Want to play D&D? Try the following resources first (each section withing vertical bars is a clickable link to find the resource).
|The free Basic Rules.|
|Some free short adventures| and |some more here too.| |Here is a series of encounters, some of which link together form a mini-adventure|.
You've played a few games and now want to buy materials? |Here's my guide on what to buy next|.
I don’t have the faintest clue what a carvana or a mom is so whatever motives you are trying to ascribe to me are incorrect. I also pasted in the OP’s question which was very specifically asking if the material the op buys now going to be compatible with the new stuff. Saying no it’s unlikely based on the UA released so far is perfectly on topic and a reasonable response.
I’m actually looking forward to One D&D overall. It sounds like it’s going to streamline the game a lot, which I feel like is a good thing on the whole.
I really like D&D, especially Ravenloft, Exandria and the Upside Down from Stranger Things. My pronouns are she/they.
Hi everyone. I wasn’t getting alerts so didn’t notice the responses. I appreciate the comments and the ideas born from how the current test content fits into the topic of compatability.
As some have pointed out, the major concern is how this is going to look for me as a DM moving forward. I pay for the DM package, and as an always DM, share that content with my players so they can build characters on DnDBeyond for use in my games.
I wonder how that is going to change. If I am in a campaign that we have played with 5e and a “switch” is thrown, can new players create 5e characters still, can I still share all that content. Ideally there will be a toggle in the campaign setting for 5e content, One content, etc.
I anticipate part of the backwards compatibility statement is to keep sales of announced and upcoming content steady. I bought the Dragonlance novels when they came out, and really want the Dragonlance pre-order, but with everything up in the air, I wonder if it will be usable in a year or two.
I understand that this is part of the digital license risk, but again, being in Japan, books are hard to come by at reasonable costs, and online gaming is 90% of my sessions. Having these tools become depreciated or require another investment of the PH, DMG, etc, would be a major bummer.
The other concern I have is with the idea that it can work with a “little” work from the DM to merge classes, subclasses, etc. As I am sure all you DMs know, when running 4 campaigns, the last thing you want to have to do is put in more work to get basic character concepts to fit into your game. I would much prefer using that energy elsewhere.
Not going to let it keep me from having fun with my groups right now though!
Thanks again.
So, based on the claim of backward compatibility, and what we've seen in the playtest material so far, I don't think there's much to worry about. They don't seem to be changing the basic mechanics significantly, nor are the numbers being thrown around for things like HP and damage changing much.
That ought to mean that you'll be able to run new characters in old adventures, or old characters in new adventures, or a mixture of old and new characters, and it'll work with few, if any, bumps under either set of rules.
If you're trying to cross the streams within one character, such as by multiclassing a mix of new and old classes, or by using a subclass from one edition in a class from the other, that is more likely to give you some headaches. (But trouble is far from guaranteed. Old races with the new character generation has one point of incompatibility: stat boosts, and they have an explicit rule to handle it.)
Will new classes be stronger or weaker than the old? Seems likely, but not so much as to really throw things out of balance. You get plenty of effectiveness variation in characters built under a single set of rules, and there's no reason to think it'll be notably worse than it is now.
Edit: As for DDB, it seems likely that they're going to keep the old books around as legacy content, like they did with the monster books. The real unanswered question is whether you'll be able to play with the old mechanics. I expect that you'll be forced to use the new, but they're not likely to be very different at the level DDB operates on.
Either play one or play 5e. There are things you're not going to be able to reconcile.
Completely agree. I just hope there is a way to select 5e or One on the platform.