If it is not, then there will be additional battles to be fought by 3PP, but at that point I can say for myself, I'm not buying 6e if it is not backwards compatible. If it is, 3PP can make content based on 5e which is now as free as free gets in a world with private property. So I hope the D&D One creative team sticks to the original plans, because I smell a complete disaster for WotC if they change course now.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM for life by choice, biggest fan of D&D specifically.
If it is not, then there will be additional battles to be fought by 3PP, but at that point I can say for myself, I'm not buying 6e if it is not backwards compatible. If it is, 3PP can make content based on 5e which is now as free as free gets in a world with private property. So I hope the D&D One creative team sticks to the original plans, because I smell a complete disaster for WotC if they change course now.
The war is over regardless. If the outcome of this is a decision that 6th edition will be an entirely new game and not backwards compatible, against everything said so far, then all that Wizards will have done is created competition against themselves. The new changes out of the OGL fiasco mean that 5th edition is protected so even if Wizards stop supporting 5th edition 3rd party creators can continue making enough material to keep the game going. You would get another split like you got when Pathfinder was created, only this time a game fully protected and able to continue using Wizards trademarked content.
This would then lead to Wizards effectively creating there own competition twice. Pathfinder all those years ago and then whatever 5th edition morphs into.
Is it just me that thinks being backwards compatible sounds really boring? I'd rather take something that feels like a real new edition and not just a 5e evolution.
Is it just me that thinks being backwards compatible sounds really boring? I'd rather take something that feels like a real new edition and not just a 5e evolution.
For those of us who have lived through one or more edition changes, we know that edition changes are awful for the consumer. We, as players, are left with hundreds or even over a thousand dollars in content that is suddenly rendered void, and left with an edition that contains the PHB, DMG, MM, and not much else. This leaves us two choices--stick where the content is, but not have the shiny new edition where folks might actually be playing, or upgrade and enter the scant domains of the new edition, waiting months, if not years, for content to finally catch up to where it once was.
A soft rollout solves these problems and is drastically more consumer friendly than an edition upgrade. It also means Wizards can do whatever they will with the OneD&D licenses and folks can still choose to use 5e's license if they so choose, and still have it be compatible with the current version of the games.
Ultimately, the real winner of a backwards compatible edition is the players--not Wizards.
I don’t think 1DD is really all that backwards compatible. It’s somewhat compatible, but the changes to subclasses & feats alone make it pretty darned incompatible in a lot of ways.
Is it just me that thinks being backwards compatible sounds really boring? I'd rather take something that feels like a real new edition and not just a 5e evolution.
I don't want all my money I've invested into 5e wasted. I'm fine with them creating a ruleset that is incompatible (ie you can't play an adventure with both 5e and 1D&D characters simultaneously, you have to match the rules to the characters), but I want to be able to use my 5e adventures with 1D&D rules.
If you really want a different engine for the sake of them being different (as opposed to objectively good reasons for specific changes), then you don't need to wait for another edition; there are plenty of options right now.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I don’t think 1DD is really all that backwards compatible. It’s somewhat compatible, but the changes to subclasses & feats alone make it pretty darned incompatible in a lot of ways.
The PHB's won't be compatible, but the supplementsshould be. Unless they decide to scrap compatibility entirely, which would be a disaster for me.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM for life by choice, biggest fan of D&D specifically.
I don’t think 1DD is really all that backwards compatible. It’s somewhat compatible, but the changes to subclasses & feats alone make it pretty darned incompatible in a lot of ways.
The PHB's won't be compatible, but the supplementsshould be. Unless they decide to scrap compatibility entirely, which would be a disaster for me.
Not really, no. The way they are changing all subclasses to have features @ 3rd, 6th, 10th, & 14th levels; and the way they are making the “older” (current) subclasses compatible by shoehorning in features is just garbage on so many levels. And the fact that they are giving feats levels where none of the current feats have levels except for the Dragonlance feats makes some of the current feats super OP and others worthless. It’s a mess.
If they release it under a new license, as they will after that desaster the OGL 1.0a "war" was for them, there is noting to war over for 3PP creators, they will (have to) make separate deals, or sign as is to create supplementary works for 1D&D - or support other games. If this puts WotC between a hammer and a hard place will have to be seen, in any way their way to success now will be a rocky one, but as i guess, they will switch their business model and part of the target audience for D&D alltogether, to better monetize the game, which still won't be off the table by then, just not under the old OGL for the "legacy content".
If they release it under a new license, as they will after that desaster the OGL 1.0a "war" was for them, there is noting to war over for 3PP creators, they will (have to) make separate deals, or sign as is to create supplementary works for 1D&D - or support other games. If this puts WotC between a hammer and a hard place will have to be seen, in any way their way to success now will be a rocky one, but as i guess, they will switch their business model and part of the target audience for D&D alltogether, to better monetize the game, which still won't be off the table by then, just not under the old OGL for the "legacy content".
Which puts 3PPs between a hammer and a hard place. I wish the “OGL1.0a or bust” crowd wouldn’t have done 3PPs like me any favors by sticking so wholeheartedly to that relic of an OGL.
I believe they’ve been saying the adventures will be compatible. So you can play Frostmaiden with characters from either version. That’s not the same as, use the chassis from the new PHB and slap a xanathar’s subclass onto it.
My thinking is also, you’ll need to use monsters consistently with a PHB. If you’re using 1D&D’s PHB, and the fight calls for 4 goblins, you’ll need to use 1D&D goblins, not 5e goblins.
I don’t think it will be truly mix and match across all books from both versions. Still, if they pull it off, it will be the closest to compatible they’ve ever made a new edition.
I wish the “OGL1.0a or bust” crowd wouldn’t have done 3PPs like me any favors by sticking so wholeheartedly to that relic of an OGL.
One of the most frustrating parts of this whole mess was watching people dig in their heels on something they clearly didn't have any real understanding of
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I believe they’ve been saying the adventures will be compatible. So you can play Frostmaiden with characters from either version. That’s not the same as, use the chassis from the new PHB and slap a xanathar’s subclass onto it.
I don’t use canned adventures, so as far as I’m concerned that’s not backwards compatible at all. 🤷♂️
I wish the “OGL1.0a or bust” crowd wouldn’t have done 3PPs like me any favors by sticking so wholeheartedly to that relic of an OGL.
One of the most frustrating parts of this whole mess was watching people dig in their heels on something they clearly didn't have any real understanding of
I believe they’ve been saying the adventures will be compatible. So you can play Frostmaiden with characters from either version. That’s not the same as, use the chassis from the new PHB and slap a xanathar’s subclass onto it.
My thinking is also, you’ll need to use monsters consistently with a PHB. If you’re using 1D&D’s PHB, and the fight calls for 4 goblins, you’ll need to use 1D&D goblins, not 5e goblins.
I don’t think it will be truly mix and match across all books from both versions. Still, if they pull it off, it will be the closest to compatible they’ve ever made a new edition.
MotM is 100% backwards compatible, they said so several times. As for subclasses, you are allowed to use existing subclasses with One D&D classes. They wouldn't have allowed that if they didn't plan on some sort of backwards compatibility. As for feats and subclass levels, most feats are PHB anyway and that is being replaced, and subclass levels can be ironed out in a playtest and guidelines given to accomodate them. I so far haven't seen anyone saying that JUST the adventures will be compatible. Going by 3e, you can basically still use a 3e prestige class in a Pathfinder 1e game with minimal issue.
If they release it under a new license, as they will after that desaster the OGL 1.0a "war" was for them, there is noting to war over for 3PP creators, they will (have to) make separate deals, or sign as is to create supplementary works for 1D&D - or support other games. If this puts WotC between a hammer and a hard place will have to be seen, in any way their way to success now will be a rocky one, but as i guess, they will switch their business model and part of the target audience for D&D alltogether, to better monetize the game, which still won't be off the table by then, just not under the old OGL for the "legacy content".
Which puts 3PPs between a hammer and a hard place. I wish the “OGL1.0a or bust” crowd wouldn’t have done 3PPs like me any favors by sticking so wholeheartedly to that relic of an OGL.
Yes and no, the community made clear they like their 3PP supplements, loud. WotC might present more cooperative deals for them, and 3PP anyway will have to make decisions about creating content for OneD&D. For that, the product has to be published, as terms and conditions will have to be. At least now its not on a "comply or die" basis. Until they make their decision, they can - if they didn't step back from it already - at least now (more or less) work safely on more 5e content, as it won't dissapear spontaneously from the TTRPG market.
Is it just me that thinks being backwards compatible sounds really boring? I'd rather take something that feels like a real new edition and not just a 5e evolution.
For those of us who have lived through one or more edition changes, we know that edition changes are awful for the consumer. We, as players, are left with hundreds or even over a thousand dollars in content that is suddenly rendered void, and left with an edition that contains the PHB, DMG, MM, and not much else. This leaves us two choices--stick where the content is, but not have the shiny new edition where folks might actually be playing, or upgrade and enter the scant domains of the new edition, waiting months, if not years, for content to finally catch up to where it once was.
A soft rollout solves these problems and is drastically more consumer friendly than an edition upgrade. It also means Wizards can do whatever they will with the OneD&D licenses and folks can still choose to use 5e's license if they so choose, and still have it be compatible with the current version of the games.
Ultimately, the real winner of a backwards compatible edition is the players--not Wizards.
I've been playing since 1986 so I've got a few editions in the bookshelf that are out of date. I love looking at those old books and remembering the good times they brought, but no way would I turn back time to stop a new edition from making my old stuff obsolete. Change can hurt, but change is also needed to keep the hobby fresh. So out with 5e and bring on something new.
(And I do play other rpgs too, so the argument that if I want change I should play something else doesn't work. I already do that, but I want a real new D&D edition.)
From my understanding, 6e (OneDnD) was not just described as backward Compatible, but rather it is supposed to be a system that allows 5e to be forward compatible with the additions and changes 6e will bring.
From my understanding, 6e (OneDnD) was not just described as backward Compatible, but rather it is supposed to be a system that allows 5e to be forward compatible with the additions and changes 6e will bring.
Exactly.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM for life by choice, biggest fan of D&D specifically.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
If it is not, then there will be additional battles to be fought by 3PP, but at that point I can say for myself, I'm not buying 6e if it is not backwards compatible. If it is, 3PP can make content based on 5e which is now as free as free gets in a world with private property. So I hope the D&D One creative team sticks to the original plans, because I smell a complete disaster for WotC if they change course now.
DM for life by choice, biggest fan of D&D specifically.
The war is over regardless.
If the outcome of this is a decision that 6th edition will be an entirely new game and not backwards compatible, against everything said so far, then all that Wizards will have done is created competition against themselves. The new changes out of the OGL fiasco mean that 5th edition is protected so even if Wizards stop supporting 5th edition 3rd party creators can continue making enough material to keep the game going. You would get another split like you got when Pathfinder was created, only this time a game fully protected and able to continue using Wizards trademarked content.
This would then lead to Wizards effectively creating there own competition twice. Pathfinder all those years ago and then whatever 5th edition morphs into.
Is it just me that thinks being backwards compatible sounds really boring? I'd rather take something that feels like a real new edition and not just a 5e evolution.
For those of us who have lived through one or more edition changes, we know that edition changes are awful for the consumer. We, as players, are left with hundreds or even over a thousand dollars in content that is suddenly rendered void, and left with an edition that contains the PHB, DMG, MM, and not much else. This leaves us two choices--stick where the content is, but not have the shiny new edition where folks might actually be playing, or upgrade and enter the scant domains of the new edition, waiting months, if not years, for content to finally catch up to where it once was.
A soft rollout solves these problems and is drastically more consumer friendly than an edition upgrade. It also means Wizards can do whatever they will with the OneD&D licenses and folks can still choose to use 5e's license if they so choose, and still have it be compatible with the current version of the games.
Ultimately, the real winner of a backwards compatible edition is the players--not Wizards.
I don’t think 1DD is really all that backwards compatible. It’s somewhat compatible, but the changes to subclasses & feats alone make it pretty darned incompatible in a lot of ways.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I'm afraid that they'll pull the backwards compatibility in order to get their way with the things they wanted to achieve with OGL 1.1 etc.
I don't want all my money I've invested into 5e wasted. I'm fine with them creating a ruleset that is incompatible (ie you can't play an adventure with both 5e and 1D&D characters simultaneously, you have to match the rules to the characters), but I want to be able to use my 5e adventures with 1D&D rules.
If you really want a different engine for the sake of them being different (as opposed to objectively good reasons for specific changes), then you don't need to wait for another edition; there are plenty of options right now.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
The PHB's won't be compatible, but the supplementsshould be. Unless they decide to scrap compatibility entirely, which would be a disaster for me.
DM for life by choice, biggest fan of D&D specifically.
Not really, no. The way they are changing all subclasses to have features @ 3rd, 6th, 10th, & 14th levels; and the way they are making the “older” (current) subclasses compatible by shoehorning in features is just garbage on so many levels. And the fact that they are giving feats levels where none of the current feats have levels except for the Dragonlance feats makes some of the current feats super OP and others worthless. It’s a mess.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
If they release it under a new license, as they will after that desaster the OGL 1.0a "war" was for them, there is noting to war over for 3PP creators, they will (have to) make separate deals, or sign as is to create supplementary works for 1D&D - or support other games. If this puts WotC between a hammer and a hard place will have to be seen, in any way their way to success now will be a rocky one, but as i guess, they will switch their business model and part of the target audience for D&D alltogether, to better monetize the game, which still won't be off the table by then, just not under the old OGL for the "legacy content".
Which puts 3PPs between a hammer and a hard place. I wish the “OGL1.0a or bust” crowd wouldn’t have done 3PPs like me any favors by sticking so wholeheartedly to that relic of an OGL.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I believe they’ve been saying the adventures will be compatible. So you can play Frostmaiden with characters from either version. That’s not the same as, use the chassis from the new PHB and slap a xanathar’s subclass onto it.
My thinking is also, you’ll need to use monsters consistently with a PHB. If you’re using 1D&D’s PHB, and the fight calls for 4 goblins, you’ll need to use 1D&D goblins, not 5e goblins.
I don’t think it will be truly mix and match across all books from both versions.
Still, if they pull it off, it will be the closest to compatible they’ve ever made a new edition.
One of the most frustrating parts of this whole mess was watching people dig in their heels on something they clearly didn't have any real understanding of
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I don’t use canned adventures, so as far as I’m concerned that’s not backwards compatible at all. 🤷♂️
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Word
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
MotM is 100% backwards compatible, they said so several times. As for subclasses, you are allowed to use existing subclasses with One D&D classes. They wouldn't have allowed that if they didn't plan on some sort of backwards compatibility. As for feats and subclass levels, most feats are PHB anyway and that is being replaced, and subclass levels can be ironed out in a playtest and guidelines given to accomodate them. I so far haven't seen anyone saying that JUST the adventures will be compatible. Going by 3e, you can basically still use a 3e prestige class in a Pathfinder 1e game with minimal issue.
DM for life by choice, biggest fan of D&D specifically.
Yes and no, the community made clear they like their 3PP supplements, loud. WotC might present more cooperative deals for them, and 3PP anyway will have to make decisions about creating content for OneD&D. For that, the product has to be published, as terms and conditions will have to be. At least now its not on a "comply or die" basis. Until they make their decision, they can - if they didn't step back from it already - at least now (more or less) work safely on more 5e content, as it won't dissapear spontaneously from the TTRPG market.
I've been playing since 1986 so I've got a few editions in the bookshelf that are out of date. I love looking at those old books and remembering the good times they brought, but no way would I turn back time to stop a new edition from making my old stuff obsolete. Change can hurt, but change is also needed to keep the hobby fresh. So out with 5e and bring on something new.
(And I do play other rpgs too, so the argument that if I want change I should play something else doesn't work. I already do that, but I want a real new D&D edition.)
From my understanding, 6e (OneDnD) was not just described as backward Compatible, but rather it is supposed to be a system that allows 5e to be forward compatible with the additions and changes 6e will bring.
Exactly.
DM for life by choice, biggest fan of D&D specifically.