D&D (2024) Jeremy Crawford: “We are releasing new editions of the books”

[Remathilis]

I see nothing bad about what you're proposing.

If you think the 5e PHB is perfect, then go for it. I will tolerate NO complaints, gripes, or requests for errata from you or anyone else who thinks this.

Fifth edition: perfect the first time.

 

[Micah Sweet]

If you think the 5e PHB is perfect, then go for it. I will tolerate NO complaints, gripes, or requests for errata from you or anyone else who thinks this.

Fifth edition: perfect the first time.

I never said it was perfect. I said I see nothing wrong with your "Everything book 2" idea re-working classic concepts into new classes, new takes on monsters, and what not, while not directly a second version of the same set of classes for the same edition. A 5e Essentials line for 2024 would have been far more to my preference, and accomplished most if not all of what they appear to be trying to do with 1D&D.

 

[Remathilis]

I never said it was perfect. I said I see nothing wrong with your "Everything book 2" idea re-working classic concepts into new classes, new takes on monsters, and what not, while not directly a second version of the same set of classes for the same edition. A 5e Essentials line for 2024 would have been far more to my preference, and accomplished most if not all of what they appear to be trying to do with 1D&D.

You want Pathfinder Unchained. I want actual fixes to the core. I don't want a class masquerading as a ranger, I want the ACTUAL ranger fixed. I want to make True Strike good, not create a new spell called Shmoo Shmike that fixes it. I want the feedback from 10 years put into fixing 5e, not into a bunch of bandaids.

 

[Hussar]

Speaking of Essentials.

I never realized it was a .5 style upgrade.

The name made me think it was just more extra stuff like a DM screen and an adventure etc.

If they had called it 4.5, I might have bought it.

It wasn't a .5 style upgrade at all.

First off, it replaced nothing. You were expected to use both the Core PHB and the Essentials books side by side. Nothing was being deprecated. But, again, 4e was a different animal from 3e in that the rules were constantly being updated. The dreaded Errata of 4e. But, the idea that the 4e rules were ever set in stone just never existed. They were constantly being changed. The biggest issue was that it was virtually impossible to keep up with the changes since they were banging out new rule books virtually every month.

except going forward tasha's has been optional add on, and nothing in 4e essentials replaced anything in 4e PHB.
the 2014phb is being replaced with 2024 phb

edit: did the player options of 2e like the name said just give new options?

Yes and no. After all, all the spell updates in Tashsa's are meant to supersede the original PHB. The race rules are meant to supersede the PHB and are the default in all 5e material going forward. The rules in Xanathar's, as well, add on and are considered default, not really optional. For example the rules for tool use or the newer downtime rules. So on and so forth.

Where did this idea come from that 5e was like 3e in that you had core and then nothing else? 5e's been pretty explicit that anything and everything adds together. If you filter spells for "Core D&D" on D&D Beyond, Absorb Elements shows up right there at the top of the list, right above Abi-Dalzim's Horrid WIlting, despite both spells coming from the Elemental Evil Player's Companion.

 

[Micah Sweet]

You want Pathfinder Unchained. I want actual fixes to the core. I don't want a class masquerading as a ranger, I want the ACTUAL ranger fixed. I want to make True Strike good, not create a new spell called Shmoo Shmike that fixes it. I want the feedback from 10 years put into fixing 5e, not into a bunch of bandaids.

Fair enough. I guess that's why people get to have different opinions then. I like 5e and would prefer new material over re-writing the old. If they're going to do that, my preference would be for a new edition.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It wasn't a .5 style upgrade at all.

First off, it replaced nothing. You were expected to use both the Core PHB and the Essentials books side by side. Nothing was being deprecated. But, again, 4e was a different animal from 3e in that the rules were constantly being updated. The dreaded Errata of 4e. But, the idea that the 4e rules were ever set in stone just never existed. They were constantly being changed. The biggest issue was that it was virtually impossible to keep up with the changes since they were banging out new rule books virtually every month.


Yes and no. After all, all the spell updates in Tashsa's are meant to supersede the original PHB. The race rules are meant to supersede the PHB and are the default in all 5e material going forward. The rules in Xanathar's, as well, add on and are considered default, not really optional. For example the rules for tool use or the newer downtime rules. So on and so forth.

Where did this idea come from that 5e was like 3e in that you had core and then nothing else? 5e's been pretty explicit that anything and everything adds together. If you filter spells for "Core D&D" on D&D Beyond, Absorb Elements shows up right there at the top of the list, right above Abi-Dalzim's Horrid WIlting, despite both spells coming from the Elemental Evil Player's Companion.

Well, if you're operating under the assumption that most players will go along with whatever is currently being sold as D&D by the IP holder (and I don't know if that's you), it makes logical sense for most such people to work out of the books you actually need to play as opposed to optional add-ons, and for such people to be far more familiar with those books than any others. No reason for that not to hold true in 2024.

To present my bias in the interest of transparency, I'm talking about physical books and not DDB, because I don't care for or use DDB.

 

[Remathilis]

Fair enough. I guess that's why people get to have different opinions then. I like 5e and would prefer new material over re-writing the old. If they're going to do that, my preference would be for a new edition.

But that's kinda the catch 22. The switches from 2e though 5e has made edition changes major shakeups. This doesn't need a major overall*, it needs edits bigger than mere errata but less than a full redo. And they are stressing this time that the next PHB doesn't invalidate your 5e collection the way 5e invalidates all your 4e books. There is nothing calling this 6e adds except adding yet another excuse for some people to ignore it

*Ymmv on this

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

Then you're not updating the PHB, you're making PHB 2. You're making 12 similar classes but not fixing any problems. You still have problems with twin spell and moon druids, you still haven't fixed guidance, true strike, or other broken or bad spells. You still have GWM/SS feats that are mandatory, but now they can be used with weapon mastery. The ranger, monk and sorcerer still have major issues, short rests are still a recharge mechanic and the PHB races still don't conform to MotM standards. You've fixed nothing and you are better off releasing another Guide to Everything and continue to sell the 14 Core Rulebook as is.

but fixing all of those but saying they still are viable options is pretty weird... just look at the OTHER response I got

only if you choose to replace the 2014 version with it instead of mixing the two or staying with 2014 outright (or come to the game fresh in 2025 and on)

it is, they exist in parallel if you want them to

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

If you think the 5e PHB is perfect, then go for it. I will tolerate NO complaints, gripes, or requests for errata from you or anyone else who thinks this.

Fifth edition: perfect the first time.

how about the complaint I either want a break that fixes or a continuation that allows the old to be used not a continuation that fixes and negates the old...

 

[Vaalingrade]

I maintain Essentials was a divine punishment ala the Tower of Babel for daring to reach toward the face of god. We were soundly struck down and cast from the light.