D&D (2024) We’ll be merging the One D&D and D&D forums shortly

[Parmandur]

That's a lot of chutzpah calling 46 years of D&D edition names dead. The "normal" naming conventions don't matter. A company can name their product whatever they want without it being "dead." I also very strongly doubt that the reason for the name change was that they and TSR didn't follow the standard naming conventions. Far more likely they have another reason for it. Do you have an article or something where they say that's the reason?

The first nigh seven years of the game were Edition-less, by your own personal system, and WotC has avoided talking about 5E using the language of "5E" for a decade as much as they could. Regular publishing terminology ia, in fact, more "objective" than TSR or WotC marketing BS: 2E was the third typical edition of the PHB & DMG lines, 3E qas rhe 5th, 4E was the 8th, we are coming up on the 9th. Those are objective facts based on ISBNs, not marketing double talk or feelings.

The D&D team has, in fact, discussed their nomenclature:

D&D (2024) - Jeremy Crawford discusses what are the 2024 Fitfh Edition Core Rulebooks.

What are the 2024 Fifth Edition Core Rulebooks? | D&D via @YouTube From the latest Community Update. Hey @darjr this may be relevant to the OP: "As we continue playtesting and discussing materials for the upcoming Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master's Guide, and Monster Manual, and even...

www.enworld.org

 

[Parmandur]

What they have been doing is apples to 5.5e's oranges. They haven't had to clarify yet since everything put out relates to 5e and it's current core books. Putting out new core books with a new name strongly implies a new edition. That WILL cause confusion.

Only to people who think in terms of "Editions": and most people playing now started with 5E, so the danger of confusion is overriden by the clear communication of continuity and interoperability.

 

[Irlo]

Not if they don't make it easy to understand the difference. If they name it only D&D, or anything other than some version of 5e that isn't just 5e, it will cause confusion as those low information people don't know that it's the same edition. Revised 5e would work to avoid that confusion, as it still has 5e there.

I don't know about that. The people I play with don't say they're playing 5e. They say they're playing D&D. When they browse the game store for a gift for their DM or for a book of adventures to try their hand at running a one-shot for the group, they look for the D&D logo. "5e" isn't even on the covers of the current publications, is it?

EDIT: and no mention of "5e" in the Amazon product listing for the current D&D PHB. No one is going to get confused if the revised books are branded as simply D&D. They'll know it's the same game, same edition.

 

[Maxperson]

The first nigh seven years of the game were Edition-less, by your own personal system, and WotC has avoided talking about 5E using the language of "5E" for a decade as much as they could. Regular publishing terminology ia, in fact, more "objective" than TSR or WotC marketing BS: 2E was the third typical edition of the PHB & DMG lines, 3E qas rhe 5th, 4E was the 8th, we are coming up on the 9th. Those are objective facts based on ISBNs, not marketing double talk or feelings.

The D&D team has, in fact, discussed their nomenclature:

D&D (2024) - Jeremy Crawford discusses what are the 2024 Fitfh Edition Core Rulebooks.

What are the 2024 Fifth Edition Core Rulebooks? | D&D via @YouTube From the latest Community Update. Hey @darjr this may be relevant to the OP: "As we continue playtesting and discussing materials for the upcoming Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master's Guide, and Monster Manual, and even...

www.enworld.org

ISBNs have no ability to alter the definitions the companies used. You are claiming objectivity in a metric the companies did not use and did not have to use.

And the recent books still say 5th edition on the back of them. They may not put it front and center, but it's there on the books because this IS the 5th edition. Not the 8th, and the next one will not be the 9th.

 

[Maxperson]

I don't know about that. The people I play with don't say they're playing 5e. They say they're playing D&D. When they browse the game store for a gift for their DM or for a book of adventures to try their hand at running a one-shot for the group, they look for the D&D logo. "5e" isn't even on the covers of the current publications, is it?

It's on the back cover. At least as recently as Spelljammer. I haven't purchased a book from them since then.

 

[Irlo]

It's on the back cover. At least as recently as Spelljammer. I haven't purchased a book from them since then.

"Fifth edition," but not "5e", and not prominently. It's not what people look for when they're browsing the shelves at the game store or the product listings online. But the point is that people are not going to get confused if the revised books are simply branded "D&D." They'll know it's the same game.

Now, if "Revised 5E" started appearing on the covers of the books where there was no mention of "5E" before, that might confuse some people ... .

 

[Parmandur]

ISBNs have no ability to alter the definitions the companies used. You are claiming objectivity in a metric the companies did not use and did not have to use.

And the recent books still say 5th edition on the back of them. They may not put it front and center, but it's there on the books because this IS the 5th edition. Not the 8th, and the next one will not be the 9th.

Objectively, it will be the 9th. But TSR and WotC messed thst up royally, so they can't use normal words in a normal fashion: giving up the ghost is not the marketing BS, stuff like "3E" and "3.5" were.

For most people confusion is unlikely, because WotC is being loud and clear about what they are doing.

 

[Maxperson]

Objectively, it will be the 9th.

But only by a metric that isn't being used, making it irrelevant. It's like claiming that the PHB costs X rubles. I mean, sure objectively you can covert dollars to X rubles, but in the US it's just not relevant as we don't use rubles. The publishers metric is not relevant as TSR and WoTC don't/didn't use them.

But TSR and WotC messed thst up royally, so they can't use normal words in a normal fashion: giving up the ghost is not the marketing BS, stuff like "3E" and "3.5" were.

"Messed that up royally" is in fact an opinion which is valid, but doesn't change what I'm saying. In 41 years of game play I have yet to hear, "I'm confused by X edition since the publishers use a different one." Truth is, I've never heard anyone mention the publishers metric until you brought it up here.

My opinion is that it's hard to be correct in an assertion that they "messed that up royally" if virtually no one knows about it or cares.

 

[Parmandur]

But only by a metric that isn't being used, making it irrelevant. It's like claiming that the PHB costs X rubles. I mean, sure objectively you can covert dollars to X rubles, but in the US it's just not relevant as we don't use rubles. The publishers metric is not relevant as TSR and WoTC don't/didn't use them.

The standard publishing industry usage if edition is equally relevant to modern D&D as any other, since they are ignoring the TSR and WotC oddball decisions as well.

"Messed that up royally" is in fact an opinion which is valid, but doesn't change what I'm saying. In 41 years of game play I have yet to hear, "I'm confused by X edition since the publishers use a different one." Truth is, I've never heard anyone mention the publishers metric until you brought it up here.

My opinion is that it's hard to be correct in an assertion that they "messed that up royally" if virtually no one knows about it or cares.

You never saw anyone be confused by the madness of D&D editions...? Absurdities like "3.5"?

 

[Maxperson]

The standard publishing industry usage if edition is equally relevant to modern D&D as any other, since they are ignoring the TSR and WotC oddball decisions as well.

You have yet to show anything at all that shows that they are changing things due to the very obscure standard publishing industry usage. I've seen nothing at all to indicate that's true.

You never saw anyone be confused by the madness of D&D editions...? Absurdities like "3.5"?

Not a single person. At least not over editions. Some 1e rules were confusing as all hell.