D&D General There are no "Editions" of D&D

[Warpiglet-7]

This seems very semantical to me. Whether you call it an edition and think of the various "editions" as revisions of the same game, or each "edition" being a new game, it's all the same when it comes to discussion. We're just talking about the differences between them or what one or another does about a particular thing.

Yeah I think this wordplay.

You could grab 2e or 3.5 material and use it with 1e or 3.0 without much hassle.

I have never used Monopoly money in chess..

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Yeah I think this wordplay.

You could grab 2e or 3.5 material and use it with 1e or 3.0 without much hassle.

I have never used Monopoly money in chess..

the concept of a 2e (the first edition I played) and a 4e (the most different from others edition I played) are still pretty much the same game... but the editions just tell us what sets go together.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

the concept of a 2e (the first edition I played) and a 4e (the most different from others edition I played) are still pretty much the same game... but the editions just tell us what sets go together.

Agreed. They are not different games which I thought was the statement.

But I am beerified so….

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Agreed. They are not different games which I thought was the statement.

But I am beerified so….

yes I was agreeing

 

[Warpiglet-7]

yes I was agreeing

 

[Reynard]

2nd, says who? Who determines what amount of rewriting is needed to make it a new edition?

I mean, no one "determines" it but my personal litmus test is: if you can't use the PHB from one edition at the same table you use the PHB from another, they are in fact different editions. As it relates to 1D&D, if you can't easily play characters created with the 2014 PHB alongside characters created with the 2024 PHB, that's an edition shift (whatever the publisher says).

 

[Shiroiken]

Basically, the term "Edition" has been screwed up by D&D pretty bad, so doesn't convey useful information anymore.

There is a logic to it, but it's not one that's obvious nor popularly used by the player base. There's been 5 editions of Dungeons & Dragons, plus 2 editions of a spin-off game called Advanced Dungeons & Dragons (not to mention 2 editions of a spin-off game called Pathfinder). Some of those editions has some revisions that could be argued as a "new edition," but were technically backwards compatible enough to not warrant a full edition change.

D&D Editions
1E - OD&D plus B/X starter rules
2E - BECMI plus several minor revisions and reinterpretations
3E - includes 3.5
4E - includes essentials
5E - includes 1D&D

AD&D Editions
1E - a new game to screw Arneson out of royalties
2E - includes 1 minor revision

Pathfinder Editions
1E - a new game by a different company under the OGL
2E

 

[doctorbadwolf]

As it relates to 1D&D, if you can't easily play characters created with the 2014 PHB alongside characters created with the 2014 PHB, that's an edition shift (whatever the publisher says).

Well, that’s what they’re doing.

 

[glass]

D&D Editions
1E - OD&D plus B/X starter rules
2E - BECMI plus several minor revisions and reinterpretations
3E - includes 3.5
4E - includes essentials
5E - includes 1D&D

AD&D Editions
1E - a new game to screw Arneson out of royalties
2E - includes 1 minor revision

Apart from the very odd numbering, you missed out Holmes Basic, B/X and 3.5 are separate editions (and probably so will OneD&D be) so you cannot just include them in something else to fit your thesis, and B/X is part of the same edition family as BECMI, not OD&D.

Also, while you are correct that the AD&D was created at least in part to screw Arneson out of royalties, 3e was explicitly a new edition of the AD&D branch not the basic branch (the reason it was called third is that it was considered a direct successor to AD&D 2e).

 

[Clint_L]

For me it, "Have they made enough changes that they have to reprint the core material?" We've already past that point. Not only did Tasha's reprint core material with new changes, but Mordenkainen's Monster's of the Multiverse reprinted a large chunk of the MM and the PHB races with new rules and mechanics.

Once you have to look in new books to see how core material is used, you really need to just reprint the core books with that new material to make it easy on people to track and use the changes.

I don't follow. I have had no problem integrating both Tasha's and MotM into my ongoing campaigns. If that is what OneD&D releases continue to feel like, then that is fundamentally different than when they released new editions in the past.

Someone earlier referred to D&D becoming more of a "Ship of Theseus" situation. I think that's exactly right, and is exactly what WotC means when they say that they are switching from the old "editions" model to a slow evolution model. Over time, you might get substantial change, but unlike with "editions" there will be no clean break between what are essentially different games.

In the past, you had distinct editions. If WotC achieves their stated goals, in the future you will have incremental change in response to changes in the game's environment (the wider culture, but also the specific culture of RPGs). As with biological evolution, there won't be a clearly defined point where one thing became another, and there won't be a clearly defined point where they stop being able to interbreed.