RPG Evolution: The Half-Edition Shuffle

The next edition of Dungeons & Dragons is finally on the horizon, but it's not here just yet. So when do publishers makes the shift?

The next edition of Dungeons & Dragons is finally on the horizon, but it's not here just yet. So when do publishers makes the shift?

thehalfeditionshuffle.png

A Historical Model​

D&D has been through several editions in recent memory, but few match the recent transition between two compatible editions. Although backwards compatibility is often promised, it's rarely delivered. And there's also the consideration of the thousands of small press publishers created through the Open Game License movement, which didn't exist before Third Edition. Of all the edition shifts, the 3.0 to 3.5 transition seems closest to what D&D is going through right now, so it's a good place to start this thought experiment.

Compatible, Sort Of​

Fifth Edition's transition to Sixth involves tweaks to the game. Those tweaks seemed largely cosmetic, at first. With the release of Mordenkainen's Monsters of the Multiverse, it's clear that the spellcasting section of monsters is going to be significantly changed. In short, while players may find their characters compatible with the latest edition of D&D, DMs may find their monsters aren't. And that's a problem for publishers. But mechanically, all of these issues can be addressed. What really matters is what customers think. And that's often shaped by branding.

What a Half-Edition Means​

The transition between Third Edition and 3.5 was more significant than many publishers were expecting. You can see a list on RPG Stack Exchange, which shows just how much the new edition changed the game.

This did not go unnoticed by consumers. The OGL movement was still developing but it caught many publishers by surprise, including the company I wrote for at the time, Monkeygod Publishing (they're no longer in business). When we released my hardcover book Frost & Fur, the only identifier was the D20 System logo. Little did we know that it was imperative to identify the book as 3.5-compatible (which it was), because stores wouldn't carry it and consumers wouldn't buy it if it wasn't.

There wasn't nearly as much communication from WIzards of the Coast back then as to how to prepare for the edition change, much less columns from the company explaining their strategy. More communication about the upcoming edition may mitigate its impact on third-party publishers.

Between the DM's Guild and DriveThruRPG, there is now an ecosystem that can more readily update itself without taking up shelf space or clogging up inventory. Digital products can be changed, covers can be rebranded, and newsletters can announce the update. Wizards of the Coast has also given considerable lead time on the coming changes by announcing the edition well in advance and updating books piecemeal so developers can see what changed. But there's still one important piece of the puzzle.

What Do Consumers Think?​

One of the ongoing concerns for supporting publishers of Third Edition was how the Open Game License would be updated and, at least as important, how to identify that compatibility.

Updating the OGL enables publishers to ensure their products are compatible. The OGL doesn't specify stat block structure, so it may not even be necessary to update the license much if at all.

Identifying compatibility will be even more critical. At some point, publishers will start identifying their products as Sixth Edition compatible. And that will happen when consumers shift their spending habits.

The Changeover​

But first, WOTC has to declare that Sixth Edition has officially arrived. Wizards was hesitant to put a number on Fifth Edition, preferring instead to indicate it was simply D&D to potentially head off edition controversy. Failure to do that in a timely fashion (or worse, failure to recognize a new edition at all and continue calling it Fifth Edition) will cause potential confusion in the marketplace, with both consumers and publishers.

At some point the tide will turn and consumers will expect compatibility with the new edition. That change is complicated by the fact that Sixth Edition should be largely compatible with Fifth Edition. But only consumers can decide that for sure; if they don't feel it is, there will be a sharp drop off in Fifth Edition buying habits. For smaller publishers, they'll stay close to the market to determine when that shift is happening and how to transition smoothly without harming their business model.

Getting it right can be lucrative. Getting it wrong can sink a company. The market convulsed massively when 3.5 came out, wiping out publishers and game store stock that were unprepared for the change. Here's hoping with enough foresight and planning, we don't have a repeat of the 3.0 transition.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Michael Tresca

Michael Tresca

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
This is where Wizards marketing will matter more than the actual changes. Will they be promoting this like a new edition or will it be more of a "this is the same game, we're just doing a special book with new art for our anniversary and we're incorporating some errata and some changes in presentation along with it". Selling the changes to races as "changes in presentation" is part of this - you can still use the PHB races alongside the new ones without mechanical issues. If all of their changes are like that, it'll be easier to sell it as "same game, new presentation".

I personally suspect that at this point its actually in Wizards best interest to try to not have this be perceived as a "new edition". Where previously new editions came about when sales were low on core books and the rationale for a new edition was as much economic on the company's part as it was to update the game, Wizards is right now riding an all-time high on their core book sales. Killing that goose with a new edition is a bad idea, and I suspect they know it.
This.

Some people really think that compatible means you can run the 5e adventures with "6e" PCs. What it almost certainly actually means is that you don't need to care which "era" of 5e books are being used to make a PC, outside of knowing that the anniversary monk got patched to not run out of ki so easily, the Warlock got a 1/day ability to regain spell slots as an action, the Ranger got Ritual Casting added to it's spellcasting and a new "Primal Companion" variant of the whole BM subclass.

I mean honestly the most radical change I actually expect to see is something like changing the two weapon fighting style to allow you to make the offhand attack as part of the same attack action, reducing the damage bonus of the -5+10 feats (even though they aren't broken, people just wildly overprioritise DPR), etc. And even those, they'll be careful about and err on the side of keeping things consistent.

You'll be able to play a "2014" Elf Ranger with a "2024 Ranger subclass" and feats from Xanathar's and from whatever comes out after 2024.

Will the game go forward under the assumption of 2024 style content? Sure. But there won't be any actual incompatibility, and it will be absurd to call it a new edition.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

MGibster

Legend
And when 4e was released, it was so badly received by many gamers. (Do you remember the shirts at GenCon that said "4e killed Gary?")
Oh, wow. That's just awful and in truly poor taste. I hope the people who wore those shirts have the decency to be embarrassed by it now.

I generally look forward to newer editions of the game I loved. Very often, these newer editions will fix some of the problems that have been discovered and worked out over the years. I was very happy with D&D 3rd edition but on occasion I've been unhappy with changes. I didn't buy 3.5 because I didn't feel as though the changes warranted a new edition. Even if it was just a half edition. I skipped out on 4th because I didn't like it but they hit it out of the park with 5th so far as I'm concerned. I may purchase 5.5 if they consolidate all the rules into the core books.
 



TerraDave

5ever, or until 2024
IMO, it's almost inevitable they screw this one up. There's no clear direction for where the game should go. Almost no matter what they do either A) they fracture the community again or B) very few buy the new books because not enough has changed.
Yes, its tricky and its possible. They certainly can screw it up.

But, they just need to keep the new players coming. We don't all have to get it for it to be a success.

But, they have to keep the new players coming in.
 

overgeeked

B/X Known World
Basic D&D...which did change a bit, but not that much, across box sets, was in print for about 20 years.
Those were also explicitly called out as new editions. Though likely not meaning the same sense we use it now in D&D. Though other games, like Call of Cthulhu have minimal changes across editions, with the most recent 7th edition being the biggest change. Though the changes there are no more drastic than AD&D to 2E.

B/X 1981:

"Edited by Tom Moldvay
Previous edition edited by J. Eric Holmes
© 1974,1977,1978,1981
TSR Hobbies, Inc., All Rights Reserved." B1

"The following is a summary of new material in the 2nd edition of
D&D Basic not found in this book, the D&D Expert rules." X4

Basic Red Box 1983:

"this edition is dedicated to the president and founder of TSR Hobbies: E. GARY GYGAX." p1

"This edition has been completely revised to introduce the game to you, step by step." p2

Blue Expert Box 1983 also has a call out about prior editions of D&D.
 

Yaarel

He Mage
Bonus actions work fine.

Even so, I kinda agree with Mearls that designing the same feature, such as two-weapon fighting, without using a bonus action mechanic feels like a better design.
 

TerraDave

5ever, or until 2024
Those were also explicitly called out as new editions. Though likely not meaning the same sense we use it now in D&D. Though other games, like Call of Cthulhu have minimal changes across editions, with the most recent 7th edition being the biggest change. Though the changes there are no more drastic than AD&D to 2E.

B/X 1981:

"Edited by Tom Moldvay
Previous edition edited by J. Eric Holmes
© 1974,1977,1978,1981
TSR Hobbies, Inc., All Rights Reserved." B1

"The following is a summary of new material in the 2nd edition of
D&D Basic not found in this book, the D&D Expert rules." X4

Basic Red Box 1983:

"this edition is dedicated to the president and founder of TSR Hobbies: E. GARY GYGAX." p1

"This edition has been completely revised to introduce the game to you, step by step." p2

Blue Expert Box 1983 also has a call out about prior editions of D&D.

Yes, and they are sometimes tracked as editions of (O)D&D. Its not a perfect reference, but it is a period of pretty high rules stability.

Rules changes, and really clarity, biggest changes from Holmes to Moldvay. But then it is quite stable for about 15 years. They do keep changing the format, and make the big mistake of taking out B2 from the set.
 

Yaarel

He Mage
Yes, and they are sometimes tracked as editions of (O)D&D. Its not a perfect reference, but it is a period of pretty high rules stability
Yeah, defacto I refer to both Original D&D (the booklets) and Basic D&D (BECMI) as 0e (zero edition). In the sense of "ground zero", that point started it all.
 

overgeeked

B/X Known World
I honestly wish they'd have done a half edition between 4E and 5E. I absolutely love everything about 4E there is to the game, except how clunky combat was. If that edition could have been cleaned up with the smoother play, less bloat, easier use, etc of 5E. Man. That would sing. It does make me happy that WotC basically has to go back to the gods and cosmology of 4E when they work with Critical Role products.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top