D&D (2024) What is positive?

[Clint_L]

They are calling it something: D&D. Honestly, did people even watch the OneD&D announcement? They will no longer be referring to it in the context of editions.

"...of course they want to have everyone rush out to replace there PHB/DMG/MM..." Why is this an "of course"? The whole point of moving away from editions is to move away from boom/bust cycles. Because when everyone feels pressured to "rush out to replace there PHB/DMG/MM," that's when you give folks a great jumping off place and wind up dividing your fan base, as we have seen happen repeatedly.

Instead of relying on having folks "rush out to replace" their books (or simply quitting instead, as often happens), the goal for D&D is to keep the core books evergreen, trading periodic booms for managed growth. Large corporations do not like to rely on a "rush" of business, they like to have well-established brands that they can build predictable budgets and investment around.

And we have emphatically not seen "whole new versions" of pretty much anything. We have seen exactly one new species mooted, Ardlings, and everything else is minor tweaks, compatible with the existing game. I have seen nothing in the test packets thus far that is more revolutionary than anything I saw in Tasha's or Multiverse.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

They are calling it something: D&D. Honestly, did people even watch the OneD&D announcement? They will no longer be referring to it in the context of editions.

why yes we DID all hear what they said... but that doesn't mean it's the way it will work. an edition change by a new name is still a duck/rose...

"...of course they want to have everyone rush out to replace there PHB/DMG/MM..." Why is this an "of course"?

so you think that they are putting 2 years of work into something to keep the exact same sales amount they are currently gettin?!? I don't even understand your argument.

IF they DIDN'T want to replace the books these would be tasha's like books but no they are changing the PHB.

The whole point of moving away from editions is to move away from boom/bust cycles.

that is the spin, now what is the truth? The truth is they want people useing the 2024 PHB/DMG/MM and going forward will support only those. This will lead to a boom/bust cycle again... BUT they want to claim it's different.

Because when everyone feels pressured to "rush out to replace there PHB/DMG/MM," that's when you give folks a great jumping off place and wind up dividing your fan base, as we have seen happen repeatedly.

yup and that is what we see happening already with the playtest, just look at the posters all around you saying they are sticking with 2014 or a modification of 2014.

Instead of relying on having folks "rush out to replace" their books (or simply quitting instead, as often happens), the goal for D&D is to keep the core books evergreen, trading periodic booms for managed growth. Large corporations do not like to rely on a "rush" of business, they like to have well-established brands that they can build predictable budgets and investment around.

then why not relase an updated cleric in a new 'Players Options Divine'? Why change everything all at once instead of taking the next 2 years to slowly parcel it out organically

And we have emphatically not seen "whole new versions" of pretty much anything.

Bard
Cleric
Exhaustion
Race
Sharp Shooter
Lucky
Backgrounds
feat no longer being optional
new conditions (dazed, slowed)
Spells (bark skin, guidance, resistance, aide)

We have seen exactly one new species mooted, Ardlings, and everything else is minor tweaks, compatible with the existing game.

Mtn dwarf no longer gets +2 str +2 con now they get no stat mod but a background that gives a floating +1/+2

I have seen nothing in the test packets thus far that is more revolutionary than anything I saw in Tasha's or Multiverse.

then go compare bards and what bardic inspiration means and when they get subclasses

 

[Clint_L]

We have posters claiming that OneD&D is obviously a new edition, and others claiming that it is not worth buying because there is so little change and they want a new edition.

Folks are so stuck in the old "editions" paradigm that they do not understand what Hasbro/WotC is trying to do. And what they are trying to do is not remotely unusual, except in the context of D&D's previous weird "editions" model of sales. What they are trying to do is create a consistent brand identity. They are satisfied that they have a strong basis in 5e, so now they are just making that "D&D." Period, full stop. No edition added. Changes will still happen as the game slowly evolves with the culture of D&D in particular and the wider culture in general. But no more throwing the baby out with the bathwater as in the old editions.

That is why they don't want you rushing out to replace all your books. Because that is a sucker's game, a short term tactic originally concocted by amateurs at TSR who were in a perpetual financial crisis from 1984 onwards. Like every other big corporation, they want to create lifelong customers with loyalty to the brand, not to one particular edition. They can make a lot more money in the long term by keeping you around, occasionally updating your PHB when you feel like it is time, rather than feeling coerced to do it because it is time for the new edition.

This is how brands are managed. McDonalds doesn't chuck their whole menu every 5-10 years and suddenly become a taco place, then a chicken place, then a pizza place. They might tinker at the edges (value meals, larger sizes, now you can get a salad), but the core product, the items that define them, are settled.

All Hasbro is trying to do is move D&D off the short-sighted TSR strategy (you know, the one that doomed the company) and towards conventional brand management. It's not really complicated.

The things you are citing as significant changes are not. They can happen and little will change at my tabletop. I could still run "Last Mine of Phandelver" with them and have zero problems. Do you think a new rule for Great Weapon Master will fundamentally change the game? And if it does make you uncomfortable, you can still use the old one - it's all built off the same chassis. Nothing will stop working.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

We have posters claiming that OneD&D is obviously a new edition, and others claiming that it is not worth buying because there is so little change and they want a new edition.

hey look at that... a split, just like an edition change.

Folks are so stuck in the old "editions" paradigm that they do not understand what Hasbro/WotC is trying to do.

pretending that people that disagree with you 'just don't understand' is a weak argument.

They are satisfied that they have a strong basis in 5e,

if they were satisficed why all the changes?

so now they are just making that "D&D." Period, full stop. No edition added. Changes will still happen as the game slowly evolves with the culture of D&D in particular and the wider culture in general. But no more throwing the baby out with the bathwater as in the old editions.

they can change the terms all they want (although I bet it wont stick anyway) but you need a term for the new version and one for the old version (notice I avoided the word edition) and right now that is 5e vs 1D&D.

That is why they don't want you rushing out to replace all your books. Because that is a sucker's game, a short term tactic originally concocted by amateurs at TSR who were in a perpetual financial crisis from 1984 onwards. Like every other big corporation, they want to create lifelong customers with loyalty to the brand, not to one particular edition.

that;s great... that is what they wanted in 2000 with the d20 system
that is what they wanted with a 'new but still the same' 4e
and they actually SAID they wanted that in 2014 with 5e.
but here we are 8 years after 2014 5e came out and we are testing 1D&D.

I don't think they lied, I think they wanted to make it just D&D each of those times (maybe an argument can be made that in 2000 they already had a .5 in mind). but they will not be the same people in power for ever, and sooner or later there will be new ideas and sales will look like they could use a boost, and a New D&D will form... now maybe they call it 2D&D, or D&D Eternal, or 7e, or 17e (an argument can be made that is close to right) or maybe something we can't imagine today...

Either way at some point there will be a new D&D PHB and there will be a way to identify it against 5e, 4e, 3.5, 3e and even 1D&D ect.

They can make a lot more money in the long term by keeping you around, occasionally updating your PHB when you feel like it is time, rather than feeling coerced to do it because it is time for the new edition.

that is just a new edition by a diffrent term... if the new PHB is new rules, new ways to do classes new concept like daze and how feats work... then what ever term you use it is a split. It is a start point for some and an end point for others. Why not just call it what we have called it since the 90;s?

This is how brands are managed. McDonalds doesn't chuck their whole menu every 5-10 years and suddenly become a taco place, then a chicken place, then a pizza place. They might tinker at the edges, but the core product, the items that define them, are settled.

but notice D&D is STILL chucking Bard, CLeric, Ranger, feats, races, backgrounds ect ect ect...

All Hasbro is trying to do is move D&D off the short-sighted TSR strategy (you know, the one that doomed the company) and towards conventional brand management. It's not really complicated.

then why make large sweeping changes in 2024?

 

[Zardnaar]

New edition vs .5 is really number and severity of the changes.

If they're rewriting all the classes, races, monsters and tweaking other stuff that's a bigger change than say OD&D to Basic or 1E to 2E. Or possibly Basic to 1E ymmv.

3.5 is mostly a cut and paste from 3.0 it's a .5 edition. The Basic line essentially is a few .1 editions. OD&D us 0 edition, Holmes is 0.5, Moldvay 0.51, Mentzer 0.52 etc.

WotC is just spinning things to head off an edition war. By any sane metric it's a new edition regardless of what WotC calls it.

That or your paying for expensive errata. Take your pick.

 

[FrogReaver]

To be fair, based on all their backward compatibility talk I initially assumed it would be 99% 5e with a few minor tweaks. The more we see from the playtest the more it looks like it's quite a bit more than that. Of course the initial Next playtest had quite a few packets that look nearly nothing like the final version so there's a chance it could end up drastically different than what we are seeing - I don't think it will based on timeframes left for playtesting but it's possible IMO.

The other thing I note is that most of the design decisions seem to already be made. Like them touting the subclasses as 3rd level - which ends up killing alot of thematic flavor for clerics and likely warlocks as well.

 

[codo]

New edition vs .5 is really number and severity of the changes.

If they're rewriting all the classes, races, monsters and tweaking other stuff that's a bigger change than say OD&D to Basic or 1E to 2E. Or possibly Basic to 1E ymmv.

3.5 is mostly a cut and paste from 3.0 it's a .5 edition. The Basic line essentially is a few .1 editions. OD&D us 0 edition, Holmes is 0.5, Moldvay 0.51, Mentzer 0.52 etc.

WotC is just spinning things to head off an edition war. By any sane metric it's a new edition regardless of what WotC calls it.

That or your paying for expensive errata. Take your pick.

Who cares if it is a new "edition". Edition is a vague term that has numerous different meaning in different context.

In the past, new editions of D&D have meant that the new books are not compatible with old content. The designers have flat out stated they intend for the old adventures and supplements with be compatible with the new books. You don't see why they don't call 1dnd a new edition? Using the definition of edition the d&d has always used, the is NOT a new edition. Not calling it a new edition is actually more useful, and conveys more information about the game, than calling it a new edition would. Calling it a new edition would actually be MORE confusing.

Just because WotC is using a different definition of edition than someone prefers it doesn't mean they are lying to you, or are trying to trick you.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Who cares if it is a new "edition". Edition is a vague term that has numerous different meaning in different context.

In the past, new editions of D&D have meant that the new books are not compatible with old content. The designers have flat out stated they intend for the old adventures and supplements with be compatible with the new books. You don't see why they don't call 1dnd a new edition? Using the definition of edition the d&d has always used, the is NOT a new edition. Not calling it a new edition is actually more useful, and conveys more information about the game, than calling it a new edition would. Calling it a new edition would actually be MORE confusing.

Just because WotC is using a different definition of edition than someone prefers it doesn't mean they are lying to you, or are trying to trick you.

They're not lying, but they are trying to change the narrative by making a multitude of small to medium changes to the aspects of the game that players engage with, and then claiming it's still 5e because the core math is the same.

 

[codo]

They're not lying, but they are trying to change the narrative by making a multitude of small to medium changes to the aspects of the game that players engage with, and then claiming it's still 5e because the core math is the same.

Trying to change the narrative from what? What is it exactly that you think they game designers are trying to do?

What I see is game designers trying their best to explain what their goals and expectations are for the new "version" of the game. They don't want to call it a new "edition" because in the past new editions of D&D where not compatible with older editions. They designers have been telling us over and over again, that their intention is that 5e adventures and supplements will work with the new version. Calling it a new edition would actually cause more confusion and lead to people making incorrect assumptions about the game.

WotC/Hasbro doesn't actually care what version of D&D the game someone is playing. Just that they are playing D&D. D&D is fundamentally a ridiculously cheap hobby. My current D&D group has probably bought under a dozen book between them over the 5 years we have played.

If the new D&D movie is successful it will easily make more money than every D&D book ever sold. All editions ever, combined.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Trying to change the narrative from what? What is it exactly that you think they game designers are trying to do?

What I see is game designers trying their best to explain what their goals and expectations are for the new "version" of the game. They don't want to call it a new "edition" because in the past new editions of D&D where not compatible with older editions. They designers have been telling us over and over again, that their intention is that 5e adventures and supplements will work with the new version. Calling it a new edition would actually cause more confusion and lead to people making incorrect assumptions about the game.

WotC/Hasbro doesn't actually care what version of D&D the game someone is playing. Just that they are playing D&D. D&D is fundamentally a ridiculously cheap hobby. My current D&D group has probably bought under a dozen book between them over the 5 years we have played.

If the new D&D movie is successful it will easily make more money than every D&D book ever sold. All editions ever, combined.

You don't think they want people to buy their new corebooks?

And the movie looks pretty good, but that's very much putting their eggs in one basket if they're counting on it.