• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

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

HammerMan

Legend
Things that I want for the 50e:

Each feat and each spell doublechecked and updated if necessary to make sure it is balanced, useful and appealing, for its design space and level.

The more recent versions of classes and subclasses that prove popular.
maybe even updated and new classes... add Artificer right into the core (and I know I will be told no but warlord too)

Two Psion classes, one for a full caster using normal mechanics, but innate without components, and one using nontraditional experimental mechanics. But these classes depend on being well received by D&D players ahead of time.
I think the abberant mind psion and the far relm pact warlock already covers alot of this... if you throw the rouge and fighte subclasses in I don't see a reason for it.
I am happy with the current direction for formatting races. A beefier version of Custom Lineage to qualify for various races and creature types would be nice.
me too
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Yaarel

Hurra for syttende mai!
The fact that removing ASI makes subclasses [subraces?] pointless is, to me, proof that they were pointless in the first place.
Yeah, in the case of the over hundred D&D elf traditions, each elf subrace is pretty much nothing but an ability swap.

Now that abilities are handled by individual, rather than by race, it seems possible to consolidate all of these variants into a single elf race.

Elf
. Choice of cantrip
. Magic Resistance
. Trance can swap proficiency
. Choice of spell per short rest (including the Darkvision spell as a choice, or Feystep, etcetera)

Done.



That said, some concepts of elf feel different. One is an animistic sky spirit of magic, beauty, and success. An other is an agile gishy human of nature, plants, and soil. These concepts can merit different race variants, but then I want them to be significantly different from each other.
 

Yaarel

Hurra for syttende mai!
maybe even updated and new classes... add Artificer right into the core (and I know I will be told no but warlord too)


I think the abberant mind psion and the far relm pact warlock already covers alot of this... if you throw the rouge and fighte subclasses in I don't see a reason for it.

me too
Yes, of course, Artificer and Warlord. It seems like players are happy with the Artificer, and hopefully will be happy with a future Warlord.

I am in the camp of psi fans who want normal mechanics and personal mind flavor.

For me, the flavors of psionic Warlock and Sorcerer are too squick. But they fulfill a desire among an other camp of psi fans.

The Psi Knight has good flavor, and I also want a full caster Psion along these lines.
 

Yeah, in the case of the over hundred D&D elf traditions, each elf subrace is pretty much nothing but an ability swap.
Actually, elves are the one race that does need subraces in my opinion; mostly due to tradition, but different elves all get different kinds of magic. And I wouldn't want to make every elf a custom elf subrace (not that custom elf subraces shouldn't be a thing)

But like, halflings, gnomes? They're already practically the same race as each other. Dwarves that aren't duergar are either standard dwarves except for skin color (or ablest stereotypes). Tieflings and dragonborn get variants - that works, because tiefling should all be custom and dragonborn really only vary in energy type (although they should get claws and scales standard). Genasi as four races makes more sense... I could go on, but I think I'm pretty normal here.
 

Yaarel

Hurra for syttende mai!
Actually, elves are the one race that does need subraces in my opinion; mostly due to tradition, but different elves all get different kinds of magic. And I wouldn't want to make every elf a custom elf subrace (not that custom elf subraces shouldn't be a thing)

But like, halflings, gnomes? They're already practically the same race as each other. Dwarves that aren't duergar are either standard dwarves except for skin color (or ablest stereotypes). Tieflings and dragonborn get variants - that works, because tiefling should all be custom and dragonborn really only vary in energy type (although they should get claws and scales standard). Genasi as four races makes more sense... I could go on, but I think I'm pretty normal here.
Some races will have "variant races".

If the elf race has variants, I hope they are meaningfully different from each other. And customizable.

(For a one-size-fits-all elf race, each elf individual chooses a cantrip and a spell for oneself. An elven community may or may not have its members tend to make the same choices.)
 
Last edited:

SkidAce

Legend
Supporter
Things that I want for the 50e:

...
Two Psion classes, one for a full caster using normal mechanics, but innate without components, and one using nontraditional experimental mechanics. But these classes depend on being well received by D&D players ahead of time.
...
If they held back psionics to add it to a "new" edition, I'm out.
 

Not surprising unfortunately.

In my opinion:

PF2 was introduced into a bad position to begin with because Pazio never cleaned up the underlying issues of 3.5 with PF1e. And IMHO, PF1 was the wrong design direction to go in from day one.

They doubled down on the design elements that were making 3.5 increasingly unwieldly in play. And pazio is known for hitting the splat treadmill HARD. They painted themselves into a design corner that would only service a subset of fantasy RPG fans once WotC reacted with 5e.

Of course all of this is 20/20 hindsight. To go another direction would have meant Pazio taking a real risk that they just weren't going to do when they rolled the dice on Pathfinder when 4e dropped.

In the past few days, I have suddenly seen all sorts of P2E comments on Twitter saying how wonderful it is and how it is easier to play than D&D 5E, and all sorts of other stuff. That is awfully random to happen at one time, so I wonder if Paizo is getting desperate and paying people to plug the game on social media.
 

Jaeger

That someone better
In the past few days, I have suddenly seen all sorts of P2E comments on Twitter saying how wonderful it is and how it is easier to play than D&D 5E, and all sorts of other stuff. That is awfully random to happen at one time, so I wonder if Paizo is getting desperate and paying people to plug the game on social media.

Ehh... They don't need to pay anyone. That could easily be just an organized fandom push.

PF2 issue was that it was in a no win situation. What design direction was it supposed to go in? And how soon after 5e should it have been dropped?

PF1e briefly was the #1 RPG, but they were the #1 RPG by outselling 4e by a bit. They were not the #1 RPG the way D&D is usually the #1 RPG: i.e. being at least 4-5 times orders of magnitude bigger than the #2 RPG.

They were really kind of put to the question when 5e hit only 4 years after they came out with PF1e. What were they to do with so many players invested in PF1e? Switch to a new edition so soon?

They were just not in a position to meaningfully challenge WotC's release of 5e.

Any way they jumped would have meant taking a risk and asking their fanbase to follow along with them. And ultimately they took the least risky option in waiting 7 more years and releasing PF2 that more or less doubled down on the design direction of PF1e.

20/20 hindsight backseat driving... By 2015 they should have seen that 5e was going leaps and bounds beyond them. So they should have either downsized and become the preeminent supporter of 3rd party 5e material, or taken a more bold and challenging design direction with PF2 and challenged 5e more head to head.

Now they are going to wind up wherever they are going to wind up, given their current evolving issues...
 

Azzy

ᚳᚣᚾᛖᚹᚢᛚᚠ
Under the new paradigm, there are some subraces that will have to be fundamentally reimagined or dropped. Without fixed ASIs and cultural abilities, what's left of mountain dwarves and rock gnomes?
Hopefully, 5.5e will give them (actually) interesting abilities in their place.
 


Remove ads

Remove ads

Top