D&D (2024) Do you plan to adopt D&D5.5One2024Redux?

[Hriston]

Sorry this response took so long, but due to the recent changes on the site, one of my devices can no longer make posts.

Yes, it was exactly this.

The feature facilitates this by describing how the character’s background affects the world around them. It’s possible the DM could arrive at the same determination by adjudicating directly from the character’s background, but I don’t think it’s likely. I think the feature is additive in this regard. For example, outside of the Heart of Darkness feature, the Haunted One background doesn’t mention how the world reacts to the HO other than they are isolated and of questionable sanity which is more about the HO’s experience than how other people see them. HoD forms the basis of an agreement between the players and the DM that, in interactions with commoners specifically, the background will have certain effects. Without the feature, extrapolating directly from the background, the DM could rule the commoners, seeing the "darkness" in the HO’s eyes, react by attempting to capture and imprison the "crazy person" in their midst or by trying to drive them out of town.

Maybe or maybe not. Sometimes thing just work. If there was not such a feature, you would not invalidate it by just letting it slide.
That is the problem with features that work automatically. If someone tries it without that feature, you have to penalize them by rollig, because otherwise the feature would be useless.

Just because a specific DM could choose to just let it slide doesn’t mean the absence of the feature would have no effect on gameplay. The player wouldn't have the predictability of the feature to rely on in their interactions with commoners, and the DM might not know what the player is expecting as a reaction. To replace the work currently being done by the feature would require the players and DM to form an agreement about who the HO is and their place in the world.

Some DMs rule that noncombat features only work outside combat.

Okay, I'm not sure why such a ruling might be made. I mean, your character doesn't stop being an HO when initiative is rolled. From your example, it seems that everyone had forgotten about your background until combat was about to begin. Maybe initiative had already been rolled, I don't know. At that point, you made some kind of declaration that pointed towards HoD to remind the DM how commoners were supposed to behave towards your character, and the DM decided (retroactively perhaps) that combat wasn't starting after all. Now, it seems to me HoD should have been in play as soon as your character started interacting with the commoners, possibly averting the move towards combat, but without more detail about the situation and the gameplay around it, it's difficult to say how I would see this going myself.

EtA: Also, I'm not sure what bearing the rulings of "some DMs" have on the value of background features.

 

[Parmandur]

The feature facilitates this by describing how the character’s background affects the world around them. It’s possible the DM could arrive at the same determination by adjudicating directly from the character’s background, but I don’t think it’s likely. I think the feature is additive in this regard. For example, outside of the Heart of Darkness feature, the Haunted One background doesn’t mention how the world reacts to the HO other than they are isolated and of questionable sanity which is more about the HO’s experience than how other people see them. HoD forms the basis of an agreement between the players and the DM that, in interactions with commoners specifically, the background will have certain effects. Without the feature, extrapolating directly from the background, the DM could rule the commoners, seeing the "darkness" in the HO’s eyes, react by attempting to capture and imprison the "crazy person" in their midst or by trying to drive them out of town.

But this doesn't seem to be changing in any way...in fact, recent books that are specifically future proofed still have thus style of Background included...?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Sorry this response took so long, but due to the recent changes on the site, one of my devices can no longer make posts.

Thanks for your time!

The feature facilitates this by describing how the character’s background affects the world around them. It’s possible the DM could arrive at the same determination by adjudicating directly from the character’s background, but I don’t think it’s likely. I think the feature is additive in this regard. For example, outside of the Heart of Darkness feature, the Haunted One background doesn’t mention how the world reacts to the HO other than they are isolated and of questionable sanity which is more about the HO’s experience than how other people see them. HoD forms the basis of an agreement between the players and the DM that, in interactions with commoners specifically, the background will have certain effects. Without the feature, extrapolating directly from the background, the DM could rule the commoners, seeing the "darkness" in the HO’s eyes, react by attempting to capture and imprison the "crazy person" in their midst or by trying to drive them out of town.

This flavour text could be changed, so it encompasses the heart of darkness feature.

Just because a specific DM could choose to just let it slide doesn’t mean the absence of the feature would have no effect on gameplay. The player wouldn't have the predictability of the feature to rely on in their interactions with commoners, and the DM might not know what the player is expecting as a reaction. To replace the work currently being done by the feature would require the players and DM to form an agreement about who the HO is and their place in the world.

I don't disagree. My experience sadly says, without forming an agreement, the feature gets always forgotten. I take the blame on me though.

Okay, I'm not sure why such a ruling might be made. I mean, your character doesn't stop being an HO when initiative is rolled. From your example, it seems that everyone had forgotten about your background until combat was about to begin. Maybe initiative had already been rolled, I don't know. At that point, you made some kind of declaration that pointed towards HoD to remind the DM how commoners were supposed to behave towards your character, and the DM decided (retroactively perhaps) that combat wasn't starting after all. Now, it seems to me HoD should have been in play as soon as your character started interacting with the commoners, possibly averting the move towards combat, but without more detail about the situation and the gameplay around it, it's difficult to say how I would see this going myself.

I have always seen background features as "downtime" or "exploration" features. Maybe I am wrong.

EtA: Also, I'm not sure what bearing the rulings of "some DMs" have on the value of background features.

The other DM could have been me.

 

[Scott Christian]

I think you are remembering wrong.

There was never really any attempt to claim that the books were backward compatible considering they virtually instantly replaces all the 3e books.

Thanks Hussar. I must have remembered it incorrectly. And the time frame, I do remember it being a bit quick, but two years - wow! Thanks again for the answer.

 

[Scott Christian]

Page 4 of the 3.5e DMG says this...

"This is an upgrade of the d20 System, not a new edition of the game. This revision is compatible with existing products, and these products can be used with the revision with only minor adjustments."

Oops... maybe I answered too soon. Thank you both for the answers.

 

[DEFCON 1]

As I said to TwoSix much earlier in the thread, I doubt WotC's position will be borne out by most gaming tables. I think most tables will stay with 5e or move on to 5.5e and not allow both to be mixed and matched.

Heh... I don't even think "allow" is a necessary word in the sentence... because I suspect most tables out there in D&D world don't even care enough about individual game elements where there would be queries about whether something could be mixed and matched. I think most tables will just decide to buy and play with the new books as-is, or not buy and play with the new books as-is... and the thought of bringing one or two things forward or backward will never come up. Nothing will need to be "allowed" because most tables won't even think about doing it in the first place.

Sure there might be that one table where one of the players gets a burr up their butt about not being able to play their overpowered Moon Druid build anymore with the 5E24 books and puts up enough of a caterwaul where a DM finally gives in and "allows" them to use the 5E14 Moon Druid... but those will be few and far between. Most tables will probably just go "New books? New rules? Okay!" and then just play them no real questions asked.

 

[Hussar]

Oops... maybe I answered too soon. Thank you both for the answers.

Compatible with existing products. But, the thing is, within a year or so of 3.5 coming out, virtually everything 3e had been rereleased. All the character splats were redone, as were all the racial splats as well. And the revised versions were always presumed to be the "valid" ones. You had zero support if you wanted to play a 3e style Thaumaturge, for example.

Thing is, even back then, there might have been some quibbles, but, by and large, everyone shrugged and moved on. It certainly wasn't a huge issue at the time.

 

[Scott Christian]

Compatible with existing products. But, the thing is, within a year or so of 3.5 coming out, virtually everything 3e had been rereleased. All the character splats were redone, as were all the racial splats as well. And the revised versions were always presumed to be the "valid" ones. You had zero support if you wanted to play a 3e style Thaumaturge, for example.

Thing is, even back then, there might have been some quibbles, but, by and large, everyone shrugged and moved on. It certainly wasn't a huge issue at the time.

I see. They were compatible, but the time frame of the release meant they didn't really have to be compatible.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I see. They were compatible, but the time frame of the release meant they didn't really have to be compatible.

And there was also (and always will be) a quibble over what constitutes "minor adjustments".

One person's "Minor adjustment" that constitutes a product as being legitimately "compatible" with the new product is another person's "Major f-ing change that I have to waste all my time fixing because the game company are money-grubbing liars and hate their customers!!!"

 

[Hriston]

But this doesn't seem to be changing in any way...in fact, recent books that are specifically future proofed still have thus style of Background included...?

The list of "background features" in the Character Origins UA doesn't include a 2014 style background feature, nor do the sample backgrounds. Instead, there's a 1st-level feat on the order of the Lucky feat. Of course, the Haunted One background doesn’t appear in the playtest to use as an example, but take the Sailor background. The 2014 Sailor has the background feature Ship’s Passage which allows the Sailor to call in a favor with former crewmates to obtain free passage on a sailing ship for the party in exchange for their assistance of the crew during the voyage. It’s a limited but tangible benefit which connects the Sailor to the world through crewmates with which they’ve formerly served. The UA, on the other hand, gives no indication the Sailor can obtain any such benefit. The fluff-text is limited to backstory prompts that could possibly be leveraged to recall information about undersea lore or posit various connections with ship’s crews or the inhabitants of ports of call, so basically what you’d already expect from the 2014 Sailor’s backstory, and there’s literally no benefit specified upon which the player can rely. The UA sample Sailor also gets the Tavern Brawler feat, giving benefits to using unarmed strikes and allowing using furniture as clubs, so some minor combat-related benefits instead of a player-facing ability to posit and draw upon connections with former crewmates.

I don’t use the recent books you mention. What’s being compared here is the 2014 core books and 2024 editions of those books as revealed through the UA playtest.