D&D (2024) The 2024 Core D&D Rulebooks Are Coming In May

21st May 2024 is the official release date!

Update--WotC has taken down the promo image and replaced it with one without a release date. See more here.

 

[Maxperson]

My impression is, the shift from 3.0 to 3.5 seemed at first a minor tweak, that turned out to be a big deal, that effectively forced players to repurchase all of the same books.

There was no need to purchase new books if you didn't want to. I never bought a 3.5 DMG for example. The changes were less severe than we are seeing now.

 

[Remathilis]

sure, but at the time they started this, the outcome was still unknown, and when your business depends on the OGL sticking around if you do nothing, doing nothing was not a smart move in Dec 2022 / Jan 2023


I mostly see 3 here, but would phrase it differently… they do not want to risk their business on the OGL sticking around, now that 5e moved to CC and most people who made a fuzz about the OGL changes before that probably do not care much any more.

I agree that the risk of WotC messing with the OGL again is reduced, but when someone points a gun at me, I won’t feel comfortable when they keep doing so, even if they have not pulled the trigger yet in the time they have done so until now - and esp not when they did pull the trigger once but the gun jammed, and they are now fiddling with it…

The issue I have is not necessarily that they opted to move from an OGL-based system to something wholly their own, but I don't think they were under any sort of necessity to do it right now. Especially after getting a lot of influx because of the very situation that caused the change. Regardless of intent, it has a feeling of forced obsolescence the same way 3.5 did.

 

[Parmandur]

Yeah, but none of those were editions of the AD&D. They were a separate D&D game. Basic, BECMI, etc. The 2e books with new art changed next to nothing as far as rules go, so those weren't even a half edition. So we have 1e, 2e, 3e, 3.5e, 4e(maybe essentials was a .5) and 5e. And soon 5.5e.

I am fascinated that you bought this bit of TSR marketing gimmickery as being legit.

 

[Maxperson]

Maxperson said:
I disagree. There were no other editions than 1e and 2e. Basic and it's expansions were a different game of D&D and not different editions, and the skills and powers books were not a new edition or a .5. They were just optional rules for 2e.

I imagine that your thoughts on the subject would have been very different if the Skills and Powers material had been included in the Black-version PHB instead of offered in their own book. The game was SIGNIFICANTLY changed by the addition of that book, even if, as you say, it was only "optional". The monsters were quite different in the Monstrous Manual. The 2e black books were definitely 2.5 (If you are one to think of things in .5s, like you are, @Maxperson). They just weren't called that.

My view would be different if they had replaced the old rules in the new 2e books, creating new core rules for the classes. As optional splatbook rules, though, the skills and powers books are not a new edition.

Essentials in 4e was also definitely 4.5 and not called that. 2024 is also 5.5 AND NOT CALLED THAT. The only thing that was called .5 was 3.5. There's no precedent for it, except for in the heads of those who are HEAVILY influenced by 3.x. It's just a name chosen once, 20 years ago. It's not better nor more accurate than any other name they give it.

If anything we have 3e and it's .5, and 4e and it's not .5, which means that there is precedent to go either way.

If I had played 4e, though, I'd have viewed essentials as a gimmick when it was released and called it 4.5e.

 

[Maxperson]

I am fascinated that you bought this bit of TSR marketing gimmickery as being legit.

Because there's nothing gimmicky about it. The changes were not significant enough to warrant 3.5 being 4e and an incremental increase having a number isn't gimmicky. 1.5 is halfway between the numbers 1 and 2. It makes sense to do the same with an edition change that is in-between two editions.

Avoiding the logical numbering in order to try and trick people into thinking it's the exact same edition. Or that there will be no more editions and D&D is just eternally changing 5e. That's the gimmick.

 

[mamba]

The issue I have is not necessarily that they opted to move from an OGL-based system to something wholly their own, but I don't think they were under any sort of necessity to do it right now. Especially after getting a lot of influx because of the very situation that caused the change. Regardless of intent, it has a feeling of forced obsolescence the same way 3.5 did.

agree to disagree, there was a lot of uncertainty around the OGl, and Paizo could not wait and see how that shakes out if it could mean they are unable to sell any products until they shed the OGL (or pay a fee to WotC).

I am certain we would not be seeing a remastered edition now, if it had not been for the OGL debacle.

 

[Remathilis]

Yeah, but none of those were editions of the AD&D. They were a separate D&D game. Basic, BECMI, etc. The 2e books with new art changed next to nothing as far as rules go, so those weren't even a half edition. So we have 1e, 2e, 3e, 3.5e, 4e(maybe essentials was a .5) and 5e. And soon 5.5e.

Not a separate game, but a different iteration of the same game. A fork in software speak. To be honest, the edition tree of D&D looks like something like this:

OD&D -> Basic (Holmes) -> Basic (B/X) -> Basic (BECMI) -> Rules Cyclopeida -> D&D3e (continues below)
------- \-> AD&D 1e -> 2e -> D&D 3e -> v3.5 -> 4e -> 4e Essentials -> 5e (2014) -> 5e (2024).

Now I base my argument of Edition based on what version of the Player Rules the game references back to. While Skills & Powers or Unearthed Arcana (1e) certainly feel like half-editions, they still build off the original PHB. Whereas 4e Essentials, while compatible with original 4e, could be played without ever touching the 4e PHB. (RC + Heroes of X + DM Kit + Monsters of Nentir = a perfectly playable 4e).

 

[Remathilis]

agree to disagree, there was a lot of uncertainty around the OGl, and Paizo could not wait and see how that shakes out if it could mean they are unable to sell any products until they shed the OGL (or pay a fee to WotC).

I am certain we would not be seeing a remastered edition now, if it had not been for the OGL debacle.

I'll agree on the latter, but I still think by the time Paizo even realized this product was a necessity, the OGL dust had settled. This was a product that they wanted to get out to rid themselves of Wizards taint and jump start ORC, not that they needed to make to print books in 2024.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

My view would be different if they had replaced the old rules in the new 2e books, creating new core rules for the classes. As optional splatbook rules, though, the skills and powers books are not a new edition.

If anything we have 3e and it's .5, and 4e and it's not .5, which means that there is precedent to go either way.

If I had played 4e, though, I'd have viewed essentials as a gimmick when it was released and called it 4.5e.

A lot of people did.

None of that changes that they've had many many silly and gimmicky ways of naming "editions" or "non-editions" over the years - enough that there's no one way that can possibly considered "the right way". You can prefer .5s if you want (I personally think it's terrible) but you ought to admit that it's just your preference and not some kind of "proper naming convention".

2024 core will be a "new way to play D&D" as much as the other 16 times (I think is the correct number) that there's been a product (or three) that details a new way to play D&D. The rest is semantics.

 

[Parmandur]

Because there's nothing gimmicky about it. The changes were not significant enough to warrant 3.5 being 4e and an incremental increase having a number isn't gimmicky. 1.5 is halfway between the numbers 1 and 2. It makes sense to do the same with an edition change that is in-between two editions.

Avoiding the logical numbering in order to try and trick people into thinking it's the exact same edition. Or that there will be no more editions and D&D is just eternally changing 5e. That's the gimmick.

No, I meant that OD&D, BD&D and AD&D were "different games."

Realistically, I see at least ten editions of D&D prior to 3E.