D&D (2024) In Interview with GamesRadar, Chris Perkins Discusses New Books

[MNblockhead]

The least time I played a monk, I tanked pretty hard.

I got "stuck" playing a monk at a one-shot D&D 50th anniversary in a party that was not optimized at all for the adventure. Warlock, Wizard, Cleric, and Monk. I was sucking hard through most of the session. But during the final battle with the big boss we were getting our asses handed to us. The earth genie (Dao) kept disappearing in the ground walls, etc. And the DM had a stricter ruling on readied actions then we were used to (you had to call where you thought the genie was going to appear, rather than just holding a ranged attack until you can see it). It came out of a wall next to my monk, wailed on me, but I was still up. I tried a stunning strike, even though I knew that dao would almost certainly make its save, but the dice were against the GM. So my monk got to have his save-the-party moment near the end of the session.

 

[Maxperson]

It's about historical equivocation around tge word "edition."

By the standard publishing term "edition," this is obviously a new edition since they will have new ISBNs, just like the mid-80's refresh of 1E was a new edition, and the black cover 2E books from the 90's were a new edition, and "3.5" was a new edition. These will be the 9th editions for both the PHB and DMG.

But TSR and later WotC adopted idiosyncratic, ad hoc uses under the moniker of "edition." 1E was not the original version of D&D. 2E started with the third typical edition of the rulebooks. 3E wasn't the third of anything, being the 5th typical editionof the big rulebooks and like the 10th version of the game.

If WotC could talk a out editions normally, that would be nice, but that ship sailed in the 80's.

Not just TSR and WotC. I have seen TONS of RPGs and board games use it. Vampire 2nd edition. Shadow 3rd edition. Talisman 4th edition. And on and on. It's how these industries use the term edition. How publishers use it simply does not apply.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It's popular because many people also like the game. Implying that people are too stupid to know what the really like gets old.

You just said you prefer it because it works well for a lot of people. In what way is that different from liking it because it's popular?

 

[Maxperson]

At this point, the edition terminology is largely marketing barring major changes like we saw 2 to 3, 3 to 4, 4 to 5. Those were all pretty major revisions and I think qualified. As to whether the new version justifies edition change or not, I don't think it matters.

Whether or not monks can be tanks is far, far more important.

It's a half edition. There are some significant changes, but 5e and 5.5e work well together with a bit of work. Just like 2e and Skills and Powers, 3e and 3.5e, and 4e and Essentials.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

You just said you prefer it because it works well for a lot of people. In what way is that different from liking it because it's popular?

No. He did not. Sorry. He said a lot of people seem to like it. So it is popular. Again mixed up cause and effect.

 

[Parmandur]

Not just TSR and WotC. I have seen TONS of RPGs and board games use it. Vampire 2nd edition. Shadow 3rd edition. Talisman 4th edition. And on and on. It's how these industries use the term edition. How publishers use it simply does not apply.

And whose lead were they following...?

Still, point is, these books are the 9th typical edition of the PHB and DMG, but not a new capital E "EDITION" of the game rules: more like the 2E black books (which had a different ISBN and were a new edition, the 4th one actually) than "3.5" (the 6th edition of the books).

 

[Micah Sweet]

No. He did not. Sorry. He said a lot of people seem to like it. So it is popular. Again mixed up cause and effect.

Ok, it looks like I misread @Oofta 's post. Sorry about that.

 

[Maxperson]

And whose lead were they following...?

I don't think it matter anymore. Done is done and it's not going to change. It's been this way for too long and among too many companies for change to happen.

Still, point is, these books are the 9th typical edition of the PHB and DMG, but not a new capital E "EDITION" of the game rules: more like the 2E black books (which had a different ISBN and were a new edition, the 4th one actually) than "3.5" (the 6th edition of the books).

Okay, but that doesn't matter even a smidge. When discussing editions, we are using the industry definition, not the publishing definition. 1st, 3rd, 12th or 1 millionth publishing edition, it doesn't matter. In D&D there have been 5 editions(capital E) and that's what people discussing D&D editions are talking about.

 

[Oofta]

You just said you prefer it because it works well for a lot of people. In what way is that different from liking it because it's popular?

I said nothing of the sort. I said it's popular because it works for a lot of people and they enjoy the game. I like it because I have fun playing it.

EDIT: ninja'd by @UngeheuerLich

 

[Azzy]

Everyone thinks they are the exception and only engage with the good stuff. 90% of the things you enjoy are crap, too. Beat the curve. Lean into loving crap. Accept it. You’ll be happier.

I developed an early love for crap. Terrible comic books, novels, games, and movies. The worse the better. Late night movies with wise-ass horror hosts. Thanks Elvira, Joe Bob, and Sven. Movies so bad even they wouldn’t show them. Basket Case is high art. Troma is amazing. Psychotronic lucha libre movies. Mutants from atomic wastelands. Terrible parody comics like What The--?!

But have you seen the movie Robo Vampire? Now there's a celluloid train wreck.