D&D (2024) First playtest thread! One D&D Character Origins.

[FitzTheRuke]

Sniff test for edition change: when the new rules come out, if I’m using those, will I still say I’m playing 5e DnD?

Looks like no, so I’ll think of it as a new edition.

They really, really didn't want you to say "I'm playing 5e" in the first place. They wanted (and still want) you to say that you're "playing Dungeons & Dragons".

 

[cbwjm]

Sniff test for edition change: when the new rules come out, if I’m using those, will I still say I’m playing 5e DnD?

Looks like no, so I’ll think of it as a new edition.

Incidentally, I get the impression that a number of people will stick with 5e, but interestingly it seems most if those won’t use Tasha’s optional rules except for rangers and maybe some subclasses.

I will, I still use 3e to encompass 3e/3.5. I expect I'll still use 5e to cover the start of 5e and this revision.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Exactly. 4e is not an edition of 3e. It's the Zoo to the planes of 3e and 3.5. You've chosen something completely different, but if you like, you're saying that the the jumbo jet(3e) is backwards compatible with the WWI fighter(3.5), because it's even less compatible with a car(4e). Then they are all vehicles(RPGs).

4e was an edition of the Tabletop Role-playing Game Dungeons and Dragons published by Wizards of the Coast. 3.0 was an edition of the Tabletop Role-playing Game Dungeons and Dragons published by Wizards of the Coast. 3.5 was an edition of the Tabletop Role-playing Game Dungeons and Dragons published by Wizards of the Coast.

These are HIGHLY comparable, unlike planes and cars.

It's also possible to kludge 3e and 4e together. It would just take more work. Possibility =/= compatibility.


Why do you think it's impossible? I could convert a 3e character to 4e. It would have the same level, class, stats, items, etc. The powers would be different, but it would still be the character converted.

No, actually it isn't. The fundamental math and expectations are incompatible.

Your 4e wizard could have the same level, but 4e was a core 30 level game, where 3E was a core 20 level game with splat expansion. Being called a wizard in 4e meant fundamentally different things, for example. a 4e wizard didn't make scrolls and have a familiar, those were core to 3e wizards. Your stats were WILDLY different. They looked the same, but they were applied in completely different ways with completely different outcomes. For 4e having a high dexterity for a wizard was fundamentally worthless, while having a high wisdom OR charisma was far more useful. None of the items worked the same way, they may share a name if you are talking the high level stuff, but sharing a name does not the same thing make.

I'm not claiming it is. Backwards compatibility = easy, though. If it's hard and/or takes a lot of work, it's not backwards compatible.

Backwards compatibility does not mean easy. If it meant easy, then you wouldn't need to buy adapters for technology.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

They really, really didn't want you to say "I'm playing 5e" in the first place. They wanted (and still want) you to say that you're "playing Dungeons & Dragons".

Yeah, and the thing is, we will, but we'll mean a specific edition, usually the current one, but sometimes we'll need to specify, and this WotC thing where they're trying to deny anyone the ability to specify is just pissing in the wind, frankly. It's like, unless WotC make their own name for 1D&D that actually sticks and isn't dumb (so not 1D&D), it's going to be called 6E in the longer-term. Doesn't matter if that's wrong or whatever, like even if 5.5E was "more accurate", because WotC won't popularize it, whatever is most simple and distinguishes it most obviously will stick, and that, in say, four years, will almost certainly be 6E (again, even if that's "wrong").

The only way that doesn't happen is if basically every playtest rejects most of the changes, which I very much doubt.

 

[Maxperson]

4e was an edition of the Tabletop Role-playing Game Dungeons and Dragons published by Wizards of the Coast. 3.0 was an edition of the Tabletop Role-playing Game Dungeons and Dragons published by Wizards of the Coast. 3.5 was an edition of the Tabletop Role-playing Game Dungeons and Dragons published by Wizards of the Coast.

These are HIGHLY comparable, unlike planes and cars.

Planes and cars have engines, wheels, use fuel, etc. They are just as comparable as two editions of D&D.

No, actually it isn't. The fundamental math and expectations are incompatible.

Your 4e wizard could have the same level, but 4e was a core 30 level game, where 3E was a core 20 level game with splat expansion. Being called a wizard in 4e meant fundamentally different things, for example. a 4e wizard didn't make scrolls and have a familiar, those were core to 3e wizards. Your stats were WILDLY different. They looked the same, but they were applied in completely different ways with completely different outcomes. For 4e having a high dexterity for a wizard was fundamentally worthless, while having a high wisdom OR charisma was far more useful. None of the items worked the same way, they may share a name if you are talking the high level stuff, but sharing a name does not the same thing make.

Much like planes and cars.

Backwards compatibility does not mean easy. If it meant easy, then you wouldn't need to buy adapters for technology.

Yes it does. Otherwise you are putting a jet engine and wings on a car to get it to fly.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Yeah, and the thing is, we will, but we'll mean a specific edition, usually the current one, but sometimes we'll need to specify, and this WotC thing where they're trying to deny anyone the ability to specify is just pissing in the wind, frankly. It's like, unless WotC make their own name for 1D&D that actually sticks and isn't dumb (so not 1D&D), it's going to be called 6E in the longer-term. Doesn't matter if that's wrong or whatever, like even if 5.5E was "more accurate", because WotC won't popularize it, whatever is most simple and distinguishes it most obviously will stick, and that, in say, four years, will almost certainly be 6E (again, even if that's "wrong").

The only way that doesn't happen is if basically every playtest rejects most of the changes, which I very much doubt.

Oh, I agree. I wasn't implying that I thought it was sensible. I'm pretty sure "One D&D" is the name of the playtest (well, the name of the initiative, really) and the books will be called "D&D 50th Anniversary Edition" (So we can call it 50th, if we need to).

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Oh, I agree. I wasn't implying that I thought it was sensible. I'm pretty sure "One D&D" is the name of the playtest (well, the name of the initiative, really) and the books will be called "D&D 50th Anniversary Edition" (So we can call it 50th, if we need to).

Yep. Just like the last big playtest was D&D Next. But no one still says that we are playing D&D Next.

 

[jmartkdr2]

They really, really didn't want you to say "I'm playing 5e" in the first place. They wanted (and still want) you to say that you're "playing Dungeons & Dragons".

Yeah, someone in marketing has told them to never say the word “edition” again.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Yeah, someone in marketing has told them to never say the word “edition” again.

Lolol it’s funny to me how folks refuse to acknowledge that the designers themselves agree with these decisions and may well be the starting point of them.

Like…you don’t think the 4e edition wars changed how the people who make D&D view the idea of editions?

 

[Maxperson]

Like…you don’t think the 4e edition wars changed how the people who make D&D view the idea of editions?

Do you think there won't be editions wars out there just because they'll call it One D&D or whatever they decide to call 6e when it comes out? People argue because of the changes, not because they're labeled editions.