I feel like this is the "cutting the baby" sort of moment, where you really can't revise the rules without invalidating things. I also feel like that's more the argument for some of us than what it's being called: in trying to keep everything, you end up making it so that improvements might not take in the community because those improvements might be nerfs. It's less about calling it a new edition as much as calling a new edition makes a clear delineation compared to mess of trying to keep it all.
IME from selling D&D since 1993, calling it a new edition would make it much, much harder to sell the existing 5e books. They'd have to start from "scratch" without the very, very lucrative backstock of books. They've discovered the same thing. This is why they're branding it this way, and why "backwards compatibility" is important to THEM. New books usually sell better than old books (this hasn't been true with 5e) but old books that keep selling make much better profits. They want to keep the old books alive and in-print as much as is possible. (Which is much more possible than ever before in history).
Like, 10 years for a gaming edition isn't bad at all. In fact, that's pretty damn long compared to, say, tabletop wargaming. If WotC were to actually put out an RCR or whatever, I feel like few would think of it as an "expansion treadmill" because the output rate of these things isn't the same, plus it doesn't really affect the most numerous product: adventures.
It
does, though! As a FAN, I'd be happy with a 6e, but as a retailer - no thanks!
See, I feel like the reality is disagreeing with you right now, given how many times Wizards has to say that this isn't an edition change. If even if a small, vocal minority were saying that, I don't think they'd address it. Instead, I think people see a "playtest" and think "new rules".
This has been a huge problem with the Playtest in the online community. (Though I would say that it hasn't actually reached very much of the non-online community, which is far, far more important (and more relaxed) than us hardcore crazies.) Every new rule in the PLAYTEST (and it's simply that - a test) has been treated as if it is hard-etched in stone. A definite preview of what 2024 rules will look like. It was never meant to be that. It's a playtest. They've been doing this since 2012 (or maybe '13, I'm sure someone can correct me). Anyone who has been following along knows that MOST of the UA stuff NEVER SEES PRINT. This was always going to be true here, too.
I think they'd be better off leaning into just admitting it's a new edition and saying "Your adventures won't be invalidated by this" because it needs to do less work to actually guide people to where they want.
You might think so, but you'd be wrong, I'm afraid.
Also I think more experienced people are way more willing to make jumps, hack things, etc, than newer people to the hobby. In fact, especially newer people to the hobby. I don't think we should look at that as a good way to on-board GMs because I think most people, when they come into this sort of game, see rules as rules. It takes time to build up a knowledge of how things work to where you feel comfortable modifying things on the fly without mussing things up. At least, that's been my experience in teaching new GMs over the years. It's easy to feel like you can just jump into this stuff when you've been reading rules for years, but for many it isn't.
The situation is not without it's faults. People are going to have to decide what books they want to use. As the 2014 CORE books will almost certainly go out of print, eventually the choice will be 2024, unless you really want the "old" game. Yes, THAT part is like how you could start fresh with 4e now, but you'd need to buy OOP books. That'll probably happen to 5e core, but the rest of the books can remain in print, depending on sales - and whether they replace them - HotDQ and RoT are OOP, replaced by Tyranny of Dragons, and VGtM & MToF are still available, but probably not going back to press in favor of MMoM. I expect 2024 Core will be the same.
Most "new" players will just get and use the new books, simply due to availability.
Eh, I think there's a point for the game makers to curate things more firmly and then let GMs make their individual choices as they come. I think it's easier to have a strong baseline game and then hash out details rather than potentially picking and choosing between two books.
Sure, but I think that they are likely (in particular due to all the recent online misunderstandings) to make new-player FAQs and sidebars that explain all this.
