D&D 5E With Respect to the Door and Expectations....The REAL Reason 5e Can't Unite the Base

[Imaro]

Yeah, not really. Its a reprint of all the core rules with the errata included. Not entirely new rules like 3.5 was.

It would be akin to reprinting the rules every couple of years and including the few errata that pop up.

Whereas 3.5 is all about remaking the entire game with huge sweeping changes.

So we're moving goalposts... it was a new set of corebooks that replaced (removed) and overwrote things...hence a "revised edition" just as 3.5 was.

 

[Imaro]

So, errata means it's a new edition, then?

Not sure how strong this argument is seeing as how Call of Cthulthu, amongst numerous other games (OwoD) do exactly this and it's called a new edition every time.

 

[Lokiare]

So we're moving goalposts... it was a new set of corebooks that replaced (removed) and overwrote things...hence a "revised edition" just as 3.5 was.

Not moving goal posts at all.

You can take an Essentials class from an Essentials splat book and play right alongside someone using the original 4E PHB, DMG, and MM with no changes.

You can't do that with a 3.5 splat book class (play with the 3.0 PHB, DMG, and MM)...

Its pretty simple Essentials was just a marketing name to try to get the grognards back who didn't like 4E. It did not change the game fundamentally from the ground up like 3.5 did to 3.0.

 

[billd91]

Its pretty simple Essentials was just a marketing name to try to get the grognards back who didn't like 4E. It did not change the game fundamentally from the ground up like 3.5 did to 3.0.

I think you're seriously overestimating the changes from 3.0 to 3.5 if you think they fundamentally change the game.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Not sure how strong this argument is seeing as how Call of Cthulthu, amongst numerous other games (OwoD) do exactly this and it's called a new edition every time.

Uh, you do realize that every time the edition treadmill speed of D&D is brought up and compared to CoC, etc., those competing rulesystems are vigorously defended as "not really being new editions; they don't really change anything; just errata; etc."?

 

[ForeverSlayer]

Yeah, not really. Its a reprint of all the core rules with the errata included. Not entirely new rules like 3.5 was.

It would be akin to reprinting the rules every couple of years and including the few errata that pop up.

Whereas 3.5 is all about remaking the entire game with huge sweeping changes.

3.5 DMG pg 4
This is an upgrade of the d20 System, not a new edition
of the game. This revision is compatible with existing products, and these
products can be used with the revision with only minor adjustments.

Just to clear up any confusion.

 

[Shadeydm]

Uness you consider essentials, which can arguably be called a half edition or revision of the 4e rules (with new "evergreen" corebooks). Also, as noted by Monte Cook, 3.5 was planned before 3.0 was even released.

It goes further than just essentials remember they were able to incorporate fixes every month and load it into the character builder. I suspect if you looked at the total changes made across all those monthly updates over 4 years it would be quite sizable. I think its a great thing though I hope they can fix 5E on the fly in a similar manner. Think about how many time you've heard people say they wouldn't play the game without the CB and Compendium there is a good reason for this...

 

[Imaro]

Not moving goal posts at all.

You can take an Essentials class from an Essentials splat book and play right alongside someone using the original 4E PHB, DMG, and MM with no changes.

You can't do that with a 3.5 splat book class (play with the 3.0 PHB, DMG, and MM)...

Its pretty simple Essentials was just a marketing name to try to get the grognards back who didn't like 4E. It did not change the game fundamentally from the ground up like 3.5 did to 3.0.

So what is the criteria for a new edition? The first thing you asked was did it replace or overwrite things... which it did. Now your criteria seems to be...does it invalidate character classes.

EDIT: I'm also confused about how you're using the phrase "from the ground up" because the math used in the first three corebooks is substantially different from that in essentials.

 

[Imaro]

Uh, you do realize that every time the edition treadmill speed of D&D is brought up and compared to CoC, etc., those competing rulesystems are vigorously defended as "not really being new editions; they don't really change anything; just errata; etc."?

Yeah, I realize they are argued as being mostly compatible (which IMO is a good thing) whereas D&D usually isn't... yet they are still new editions with new corebooks.

 

[Umbran]

Again they are just not listening to their fan base...

There is a difference between "listening to" and "doing everything requested by". I can listen to you, and understand your desires and point of view, and still have reason to not do as you request.