D&D General Does D&D (and RPGs in general) Need Edition Resets?

[haakon1]

Even to the thickest of players I've only ever had to explain descending AC maybe twice.

Misunderstandings happen. Around 2002, Iwas a player in 3e, aka d20.

One guy had an archer who almost never hit, for like a year. One night, Glenn said, “Dude, there’s gotta be something wrong with your dice. Let me see it.” It was a d12.

 

[Clint_L]

How many editions were more popular than their predecessor, comparing saying 1-2 years in for each (long enough for people to get past the Gee Whiz new phase):

I think Yes: Basic & AD&D (both versus OD&D), 3e, 5e

I think No: 2e, 3.5e, 4e

So, not clear 6e will be more liked than 5e. 5e set a very high bar. And it was smart to CUT rather than add as it’s basic “less is more, bloat doesn’t work” approach.

What's 6e?

 

[Lanefan]

Misunderstandings happen. Around 2002, Iwas a player in 3e, aka d20.

One guy had an archer who almost never hit, for like a year. One night, Glenn said, “Dude, there’s gotta be something wrong with your dice. Let me see it.” It was a d12.

We roll initiative on a d6, rerolled each round, higher is faster.

One night a player was having awful luck with her initiatives...until we finally realized she was rolling a six-sided d3.

 

[Lanefan]

What's 6e?

Depending what the designers - and hindsight - end up doing with it, quite possibly it's what's coming out this year.

 

[Staffan]

Misunderstandings happen. Around 2002, Iwas a player in 3e, aka d20.

One guy had an archer who almost never hit, for like a year. One night, Glenn said, “Dude, there’s gotta be something wrong with your dice. Let me see it.” It was a d12.

We had a similar situation once over the course of an evening, when one player kept rolling really bad... until they rolled a 0. Turns out they had grabbed an old-school 20-sided d10 (0–9, twice) from the communal dice pool rather than an actual d20.

 

[Minigiant]

I know very little about football, but I went to elementary school with two of his grandkids.

Baseball I follow pretty closely. The MLB rules changed a lot last season, after testing in MLB Partner Leagues and the Minor Leagues. They made the game faster, which is more fun for most people.

But stuff like “Bananaball“ rules, for Savannah Bananas games (not affiliated or partnered with any league), annoy me. Popular, but not nearly as popular as the close-to-classic every other league rules. That almost made this aside related to the topic!

Happy 2024 - we’ll all see what it holds.

Just saying.

Every good idea hasn't been thought up. D&D has decades to still grow. 2024 is another year to steal ideas.

 

[LordEntrails]

What's 6e?

A passive aggressive way to suggest that WotC is evil and corrupt and lies to the world?

 

[haakon1]

A passive aggressive way to suggest that WotC is evil and corrupt and lies to the world?

No, in this case I was replying to someone who was talking about actual 6e, when it is eventually released as such.

I never refer to 2024 as a new edition, whether or not that will turn out to be an accurate description because people whine about that name for it.

 

[GrimCo]

Not read whole thread, just first couple of pages, so if someone already said the same, cudos

Personally, i'm all for new version every decade or so. It gives clean slate and evens the playing field for both newbies and old players since everybody starts with new system and virtually no system mastery. So far, every edition sooner or later becomes bloated through various splatbooks (3/3.5/PF1 i'm looking at you), so much so that it can be overwhelming for new and less experienced players and sometimes abundance of options leads to choice paradox.

Also, there is just system saturation. You get good enough at the game part. You know all the good combos, all the trap choices to avoid. You just need something new and exciting, yet in the same time familiar enough that you don't feel out of comfort zone.

From the pure business perspective, new editions are good. It creates commotion, generates hype, people start talking, excitement rises. Edition change is perfect time for old players to return to game and for new ones to join.

Since we are in digital age, iterative changes can be done throughout the life cycle of single edition via various erratas or optional rules. No need for half editions. They can simply compile it all in single pdf and release it digitally as mid cycle update ( people will pay if they think they get good value for their money). Like cars and facelifts.

 

[haakon1]

Not read whole thread, just first couple of pages

I hear you. Threads get so long here.

Personally, i'm all for new version every decade or so.

Personally, I hate edition change. Too many bad changes and infighting.

It gives clean slate and evens the playing field for both newbies and old players since everybody starts with new system and virtually no system mastery.

To me, system mastery is for the DM - you need to understand it deeply to run it, so a new edition is another bloody tax on my time.

As for differential system mastery among players, I feel (as DM or player), it’s the job of more experienced players (and DM) to teach the rules to new players in any version. If your concern is players “out mastering“ others and therefore lacking “balance” between players, ugh, I’m so tired of those discussions here. The party should be a team, helping each other. If it’s a competition, I think someone is being a jerk, imho. Or just playing in a different way, I suppose.

So far, every edition sooner or later becomes bloated through various splatbooks (3/3.5/PF1 i'm looking at you), so much so that it can be overwhelming for new and less experienced players and sometimes abundance of options leads to choice paradox.

IMHO, that started with 2e, the edition that invented the term “splatbook”.

And my solution to loathing 2e was to revert to 1e Core Rules Only.

You don’t have to incorporate - and imho definitely should avoid - all the late in edition rules bloat.

I think 5e has been admirable in avoiding splatbook-itis. (I also think 3e & 5e were both very needed clean of previous problems, whereas I think 5e doesn’t need to be cleaned up.)

Also, there is just system saturation. You get good enough at the game part. You know all the good combos, all the trap choices to avoid. You just need something new and exciting, yet in the same time familiar enough that you don't feel out of comfort zone.

Rules are NEVER where I get my jollies in D&D. Rules change just gets in the way for me. Some D&Ders are crunch centric, some are fluff centric.

I’m all about fluff, stories, and the 3 pillars.

From the pure business perspective, new editions are good. It creates commotion, generates hype, people start talking, excitement rises. Edition change is perfect time for old players to return to game and for new ones to join.

Rules change split the community. But what you say did happen in 3e and 5e, at least.

Since we are in digital age, iterative changes can be done throughout the life cycle of single edition via various erratas or optional rules. No need for half editions. They can simply compile it all in single pdf and release it digitally as mid cycle update ( people will pay if they think they get good value for their money). Like cars and facelifts.

Yeah, probably.