D&D 5E Using "D&D 2024" instead of "5e24"

[DEFCON 1]

I was writing over in the M.T. Black '5E Revival' thread and came to a realization there that I think directly relates to the discussion here. Which is that it doesn't matter if we call the new revision 'D&D 2024' or '5E24' so that we can distinguish WotC Dungeons & Dragons products from the greater landscape of products that use the D&D 5E game engine. Because unfortunately... the people who want us to change our terminology are hoping us to do so in order to use the term '5E' as the generic branding of all games that use that engine. They wish to be able to talk about 5E product and not have all of us immediately connect the product or the conversation to D&D and Wizards of the Coast.

But as I said in the other thread... I think that is virtually impossible. And it is not worth wasting time trying to get it done.

The term '5E' was specifically created and used by people to talk about the Fifth Edition of Dungeons & Dragons. That's precisely why the term exists. If you say '5E', most people will assume you mean 'D&D 5E'. That's just how it is. It is in no way a generic brand identifier for games that use the 5E game engine.

Now many years ago, there WAS a generic brand identifier created in the 3E era for specifically this kind of purpose-- the 'd20' branding. If you used 'd20' in your marketing or your conversations about gaming, it was generally assumed you might not be talking about Dungeons & Dragons. But if you used '3E'? Then you most likely were. And that's why everything was clearer-- '3E' was shorthand for D&D-related games and products... 'd20' for games that used the 3E SRD game engine but were quite possibly unrelated to D&D.

So I think this is what the greater 5E gaming populace actually needs-- a term that is not 'D&D' nor '5E' that can imply it uses the SRD of fifth edition, but is not meant to be connected to WotC or the D&D brand. Once you have that term in place, then that greater populace can talk about and within that sphere and be more confident that rando D&D and WotC stans will not jump into the conversation and use D&D as their reference point back to argue whatever it is the convo might be about.

 

[payn]

I was writing over in the M.T. Black '5E Revival' thread and came to a realization there that I think directly relates to the discussion here. Which is that it doesn't matter if we call the new revision 'D&D 2024' or '5E24' so that we can distinguish WotC Dungeons & Dragons products from the greater landscape of products that use the D&D 5E game engine. Because unfortunately... the people who want us to change our terminology are hoping us to do so in order to use the term '5E' as the generic branding of all games that use that engine. They wish to be able to talk about 5E product and not have all of us immediately connect the product or the conversation to D&D and Wizards of the Coast.

But as I said in the other thread... I think that is virtually impossible. And it is not worth wasting time trying to get it done.

The term '5E' was specifically created and used by people to talk about the Fifth Edition of Dungeons & Dragons. That's precisely why the term exists. If you say '5E', most people will assume you mean 'D&D 5E'. That's just how it is. It is in no way a generic brand identifier for games that use the 5E game engine.

Now many years ago, there WAS a generic brand identifier created in the 3E era for specifically this kind of purpose-- the 'd20' branding. If you used 'd20' in your marketing or your conversations about gaming, it was generally assumed you might not be talking about Dungeons & Dragons. But if you used '3E'? Then you most likely were. And that's why everything was clearer-- '3E' was shorthand for D&D-related games and products... 'd20' for games that used the 3E SRD game engine but were quite possibly unrelated to D&D.

So I think this is what the greater 5E gaming populace actually needs-- a term that is not 'D&D' nor '5E' that can imply it uses the SRD of fifth edition, but is not meant to be connected to WotC or the D&D brand. Once you have that term in place, then that greater populace can talk about and within that sphere and be more confident that rando D&D and WotC stans will not jump into the conversation and use D&D as their reference point back to argue whatever it is the convo might be about.

So you're saying there needs to be a D20 revival?

 

[TwoSix]

So I think this is what the greater 5E gaming populace actually needs-- a term that is not 'D&D' nor '5E' that can imply it uses the SRD of fifth edition, but is not meant to be connected to WotC or the D&D brand. Once you have that term in place, then that greater populace can talk about and within that sphere and be more confident that rando D&D and WotC stans will not jump into the conversation and use D&D as their reference point back to argue whatever it is the convo might be about.

That makes sense. The difficulty, of course, is that "d20" was the WotC-approved and communicated brand name to use to identify 3E compatible material. I don't see anything to indicate that WotC is interested in using their leverage to create that type of branding again.

What's confusing to me is that WotC's focus on brand-building would seem to indicate that they'd want variant 5e material to carry some kind of "D&D" branding on it. Even if you're using TotV or A5E as your main books, they'd still want you to identify as a "D&D player" so you buy D&D toys or go see the next D&D movie.

 

[DEFCON 1]

So you're saying there needs to be a D20 revival?

As I just offered up over in the 5E Revival thread... I'd suggest using the term 'd50'.

d50 games are ones (like D20) that use the standard 20-sided die style of engine, but are built off the version of the engine that was in existence for the 50th Anniversary of D&D... the 5E game engine.

 

[DEFCON 1]

That makes sense. The difficulty, of course, is that "d20" was the WotC-approved and communicated brand name to use to identify 3E compatible material. I don't see anything to indicate that WotC is interested in using their leverage to create that type of branding again.

What's confusing to me is that WotC's focus on brand-building would seem to indicate that they'd want variant 5e material to carry some kind of "D&D" branding on it. Even if you're using TotV or A5E as your main books, they'd still want you to identify as a "D&D player" so you buy D&D toys or go see the next D&D movie.

That would be true if this was meant as a WotC initiative. But to me this is more what the great gaming community wants, outside of the WotC and D&D-specific sphere.

They are the ones looking to be able to talk about games that use the 5E engine but not are meant to invoke the D&D game itself (and especially not provoke D&D stans from thinking the discussions are meant to include D&D, which would make them respond in ways that take D&D into account in the discussion, and thus change a lot of the pathways of said convos.) A different term other than 'D&D' or '5E' might help in that-- moreso that getting everybody onboard with the idea that the term '5E' can be genericized.

 

[TwoSix]

That would be true if this was meant as a WotC initiative. But to me this is more what the great gaming community wants, outside of the WotC and D&D-specific sphere.

They are the ones looking to be able to talk about games that use the 5E engine but not are meant to invoke the D&D game itself (and especially not provoke D&D stans from thinking the discussions are meant to include D&D, which would make them respond in ways that take D&D into account in the discussion, and thus change a lot of the pathways of said convos.) A different term other than 'D&D' or '5E' might help in that-- moreso that getting everybody onboard with the idea that the term '5E' can be genericized.

I get that. I just think that a community-generated term-of-use for the "5e core rules engine", like d20 was for the 3e core rules, is pretty much a non-starter for a 10 year old game that's about to undergo a rules revision. Especially a rules revision which also doesn't have a single agreed-upon handle.

d20 got traction because it was specifically promoted by WotC. Unless someone comes up with an absolutely perfect term, which manages to encapsulate the nuances of what's being talked about in a pithy little phrase, we'll just continue to see lots of "sort of" terms that try to capture the idea of "non-WotC 5e variants". Just like "5.5" or "6e" or "5e24" or "D&D 2024" for the new rules revision.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I get that. I just think that a community-generated term-of-use for the "5e core rules engine", like d20 was for the 3e core rules, is pretty much a non-starter for a 10 year old game that's about to undergo a rules revision. Especially a rules revision which also doesn't have a single agreed-upon handle.

d20 got traction because it was specifically promoted by WotC. Unless someone comes up with an absolutely perfect term, which manages to encapsulate the nuances of what's being talked about in a pithy little phrase, we'll just continue to see lots of "sort of" terms that try to capture the idea of "non-WotC 5e variants". Just like "5.5" or "6e" or "5e24" or "D&D 2024" for the new rules revision.

I do agree. As I just mentioned over in the other thread... I do think the only way any term would ever actually stick would be that one of the larger games companies would need to decide on one that they use, and it become popular enough the with the masses that they then incorporate the term into their own lexicon. Because no individual poster or set of posters on say a board like this would be able to come up with an idea and then see it cross over to other places like the Reddit boards and have them embrace it too. That'll never happen.

For something to stick, someone of stature needs to be able to make a declaration of use and have a large enough platform for everyone else to be able to hear it... and then go "Oh! Yeah! That sounds good! Great idea! I'll use that too!"

 

[TwoSix]

I do agree. As I just mentioned over in the other thread... I do think the only way any term would ever actually stick would be that one of the larger games companies would need to decide on one that they use, and it become popular enough the with the masses that they then incorporate the term into their own lexicon. Because no individual poster or set of posters on say a board like this would be able to come up with an idea and then see it cross over to other places like the Reddit boards and have them embrace it too. That'll never happen.

For something to stick, someone of stature needs to be able to make a declaration of use and have a large enough platform for everyone else to be able to hear it... and then go "Oh! Yeah! That sounds good! Great idea! I'll use that too!"

100% agree. And unlike the AD&D->3e change, I don't see the 5e revisions creating a large enough pool of disaffected players to generate the intellectual energy that eventually led to the OSR. There just isn't enough change in the upcoming books (or so it seems at this point) to create a "purist 5e" need. I know quite a few people in my own play groups who have little-to-no interest in the new PHB but also have no desire to switch away from 5e.

 

[Micah Sweet]

100% agree. And unlike the AD&D->3e change, I don't see the 5e revisions creating a large enough pool of disaffected players to generate the intellectual energy that eventually led to the OSR. There just isn't enough change in the upcoming books (or so it seems at this point) to create a "purist 5e" need. I know quite a few people in my own play groups who have little-to-no interest in the new PHB but also have no desire to switch away from 5e.

It doesn't have to be purist. It just has to be basically 5e, but not following all the playstyle and content dictates that WotC follows. A lot of 3pp, nearly all of it, already does that.

 

[TwoSix]

It doesn't have to be purist. It just has to be basically 5e, but not following all the playstyle and content dictates that WotC follows. A lot of 3pp, nearly all of it, already does that.

"Purist" was strong. Say, rather, that it doesn't assume or integrate the changes coming in the 2024 books.