D&D (2024) The 2024 Core D&D Rulebooks Are Coming In May

21st May 2024 is the official release date!

Update--WotC has taken down the promo image and replaced it with one without a release date. See more here.

 

[Parmandur]

The current 5e PHB is different from the one a few years ago which is different from the 2014 PHB. Every new printing they update errata to reflect sage advice rulings. Has the ISBN number changed to reflect those changes as you suggest should be the case? Did they do that for 4e and 3e(and I know 3e had such errata changes)? Because if they are updating ISBN as you say they should, then we're about to hit 50th edition or higher

No, because there is actually a threshold difference between a printing and an edition in general publishing. Changes thst are great enough that require a new ISBN from the LoC are called Editiona, changes that don't are errata. Etween printings.

Both 1E and 2E got second typical editions, maing 3E the 5th Edition of AD&D steictly speaking. It's marketing gimmick insanity all the way down.

 

[Yaarel]

Just look at the differences between the 2014 monk and the current playtest monk. There's a reason folks are saying the new one is much better, and it's not because they are the same.

Ok, I can see the 2024 Monk is better than 2014 Monk.

I see this as calibration. The 2014 Monk was flawed. The 2024 Monk is updated to be on par with other 5e classes.

In other words, I view this example as "errata" for 5.0.

 

[Maxperson]

No, because there is actually a threshold difference between a printing and an edition in general publishing. Changes thst are great enough that require a new ISBN from the LoC are called Editiona, changes that don't are errata. Etween printings.

Both 1E and 2E got second typical editions, maing 3E the 5th Edition of AD&D steictly speaking. It's marketing gimmick insanity all the way down.

That seems kinda arbitrary to me. Not saying you're being arbitrary, but rather that the company deciding if the amount of errata is enough to warrant a new ISBN or not is arbitrary. If they decide yes, then it is. If they decide no, then it isn't and is just errata.

I'm sticking with the differences needing to be significant rules changes like 1e to 2e, 2e to 3e, 3e to 3.5e, 3.5e to 4e, 4e to 5e, and 5e to 5.5e. I seen no reason to go based on arbitrary decisions to change an ISBN number over some artwork, a new layout, and a few errata updates.

 

[Parmandur]

That seems kinda arbitrary to me. Not saying you're being arbitrary, but rather that the company deciding if the amount of errata is enough to warrant a new ISBN or not is arbitrary. If they decide yes, then it is. If they decide no, then it isn't and is just errata.

I'm sticking with the differences needing to be significant rules changes like 1e to 2e, 2e to 3e, 3e to 3.5e, 3.5e to 4e, 4e to 5e, and 5e to 5.5e. I seen no reason to go based on arbitrary decisions to change an ISBN number over some artwork, a new layout, and a few errata updates.

OK, look at this way: have you ever heard of Call of Cthulu fans arguing about what constitutes a new Edition?

No, because Chaosium has followed standard publishing industry practice, so an edition is an edition regardless of how big or small the changes were. And that's wirh all 7 editions of the game being fully interoperable!

 

[Yaarel]

That seems kinda arbitrary to me. Not saying you're being arbitrary, but rather that the company deciding if the amount of errata is enough to warrant a new ISBN or not is arbitrary. If they decide yes, then it is. If they decide no, then it isn't and is just errata.

I'm sticking with the differences needing to be significant rules changes like 1e to 2e, 2e to 3e, 3e to 3.5e, 3.5e to 4e, 4e to 5e, and 5e to 5.5e. I seen no reason to go based on arbitrary decisions to change an ISBN number over some artwork, a new layout, and a few errata updates.

Arguably, there was a 4.5, when switching from the 4e Players Handbook to Heroes of the Fallen Lands and Heroes of the Forgotten Kingdoms. The mechanics became more fluid, relative to the earlier highly regimented variegated advancement schedule. It was interoperable.

 

[Maxperson]

OK, look at this way: have you ever heard of Call of Cthulu fans arguing about what constitutes a new Edition?

No, because Chaosium has followed standard publishing industry practice, so an edition is an edition regardless of how big or small the changes were. And that's wirh all 7 editions of the game being fully interoperable!

One google of call of Cthulhu shows me that there are 7 and 18 editions of it, with the 18 editions including 5e, 5.2e, 5.5e and 5.6e.

Call of Cthulhu - RPGnet RPG Game Index

Maybe it's not as clearcut as you think.

 

[Maxperson]

Arguably, there was a 4.5, when switching from the 4e Players Handbook to Heroes of the Fallen Lands and Heroes of the Forgotten Kingdoms. The mechanics became more fluid, relative to the earlier highly regimented variegated advancement schedule. It was interoperable.

I never include 4e, because I didn't play it. So I can't rightly say that there was or was not a .5. Where does essentials fall into the above?

 

[Yaarel]

Where does essentials fall into the above?

Essentials is the arguable 4.5.



We will all have a better sense, when we can read and play the core books in 2024. I am sure a consensus will emerge whether it will be 5.0 or 5.5.

For my part, if at my table, one player can have 2014 Players Handbook character and an other player can have 2024 Players Handbook character − and everything works smoothly enough − then I will consider it 5.0. This goal seems to be what the 2024 designers are aiming for.

 

[mamba]

My point is that having the same engine doesn't make something the same. I mean, look at all the different games out there that use the unreal engine. What you do with the engine is more important for determining if the game or edition is the same.

sure, but a videogame engine is not the same as a TTRPG core, then you would have to compare the unreal engine from a few years back to the current one, which maybe added some shaders and better parallelization

The games using the unreal engine translate to adventures for TTRPGs, and those can be pretty varied with the 2014 engine

If you insist on giving 2024 a new version number, to me that is 5.1, but WotC obviously will not do that, as it undermines the whole strategy, so (new) 5e will do. You can run the new adventures with the 2014 rules or Curse of Strahd etc. with the 2024 ones. I do not really see any compatibility issues, I wish I did, because they reverted some changes I would have liked, just to stay compatible to something inferior (from my perspective). I’d gladly have accepted those minor compatibility speedbumps

 

[Horwath]

I will probably get a lot of flak for this idea, but,

would it maybe be better that PHB be printed as two separate books, shipped in bundle?

PHB and PHB: Spell compendium, which only has spellcasting and spell description. Maybe with magic items in there also?

2014 PHB comes with 322 pages, of which 90 is for spellcasting.
And they promised more art, more features, more everything.

That will cause a page bloat.
I love my PF1 core book, but that 580 page book is huge and I would be happier if it were a 300-300 split, or something similar.
And in general, books with less pages are more durable.

I know that everyone wants a 600 page 2024 PHB, but it's a little bit impractical.