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

[EzekielRaiden]

It's still basic math. 5.5 is more than 5, yet still in the 5 range. Not many will be confused by that since they pretty much all learned basic math a long time ago. As for another revision in 2034, WotC will have to release another completely new set of rules at some point that is probably before that date. A lot of people get bored with the same rules year in and year out, and making minor changes as a revision doesn't change the game enough.

I think Pathfinder 1e shows that even an extremely popular edition does slowly lose its luster. At least IME, most folks who have stuck with PF1e did so because they like a bunch of very popular 3PP that rip out huge sections of the core rules. Frex, the Spheres of Power/Might stuff (which ditch Vancian casting for narrower "spheres" and spell-point casting), the Path of War stuff (basically a rebuild of Bo9S), Dreamscarred Press's psionics rules, etc. The community at large has had almost two and a half decades to examine the fundamental rules of the 3.x engine, and most folks know its flaws pretty well by now, particularly the sharp class-tier divisions and how much effort it is to run for high-level characters.

Around the 15-year mark, 3.X/PF1e had clearly begun showing its age. By the time you hit 20, many had started looking for something new, and 5e offered that.

I would be very much unsurprised if they announce a long-term public playtesting process sometime in 2030 or maybe early 2031, with its own ridiculous buzzword title like "D&D: Resurrected" or whatever. Especially if the revised version of 5e ends up being, as some have argued here, effectively identical apart from rewriting some of the classes and subclasses.

 

[payn]

I think Pathfinder 1e shows that even an extremely popular edition does slowly lose its luster. At least IME, most folks who have stuck with PF1e did so because they like a bunch of very popular 3PP that rip out huge sections of the core rules. Frex, the Spheres of Power/Might stuff (which ditch Vancian casting for narrower "spheres" and spell-point casting), the Path of War stuff (basically a rebuild of Bo9S), Dreamscarred Press's psionics rules, etc. The community at large has had almost two and a half decades to examine the fundamental rules of the 3.x engine, and most folks know its flaws pretty well by now, particularly the sharp class-tier divisions and how much effort it is to run for high-level characters.

Around the 15-year mark, 3.5e/PF1e had clearly begun showing its age. By the time you hit 20, many had started looking for something new, and 5e offered that.

I would be very much unsurprised if they announce a long-term public playtesting process sometime in 2030 or maybe early 2031, with its own ridiculous buzzword title like "D&D: Resurrected" or whatever. Especially if the revised version of 5e ends up being, as some have argued here, effectively identical apart from rewriting some of the classes and subclasses.

It was the adventure paths Paizo sold that kept me in it. Its the lack of adventure paths in 5E that keeps me out of it.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Right. That's why I use 5.5e. Not the same name, and virtually no confusion. People understand that 5.5 is halfway from 5 to 6.

A real question.

Has anyone ever be confused by Windows Editions?

I startet with win 3.11
Then win 95
Then win 98
Then win 98SE
Then win xp
Then win 7
Win Vista
Then win 8
Then win 10
Then win 11

In between there was
Win NT
And win 2000
A sidegrade for network administrations

Win 3.11 was a graphic DOS shell
Win 95 was new optically, but still a DOS shell
Win 98 was still a DOS shell
Win 98 SE was not a DOS shell anymore (IIRC - nope did not remember correctly... ), but was the new operating system.
Edit: Win ME (last DOS based edition)
Win XP was good.
Win vista was less good.
Win 7 was good.
Win 8 was... less good? Somewhere was a switch to 64 bit.
Win 10 was good.
Win 11 is ok.

Oh I forgot the difference between home and professional editions...

Ok. I am a bit confused... But at the time, most users just upgraded to the current edition. Sometimes identified by number, sometimes by a year and sometimes by a weird name. Just what was fancy at the time.

 

[payn]

A real question.

Has anyone ever be confused by Windows Editions?

I startet with win 3.11
Then win 95
Then win 98
Then win 98SE
Then win xp
Then win 7
Win Vista
Then win 8
Then win 10
Then win 11

In between there was
Win NT
And win 2000
A sidegrade for network administrations

Win 3.11 was a graphic DOS shell
Win 95 was new optically, but still a DOS shell
Win 98 was still a DOS shell
Win 98 SE was not a DOS shell anymore (IIRC), but was the new operating system.
Win XP was good.
Win vista was less good.
Win 7 was good.
Win 8 was... less good? Somewhere was a switch to 64 bit.
Win 10 was good.
Win 11 is ok.

Oh I forgot the difference between home and professional editions...

Ok. I am a bit confused... But at the time, most users just upgraded to the current edition. Sometimes identified by number, sometimes by a year and sometimes by a weird name. Just what was fancy at the time.

No WIN ME???

 

[FitzTheRuke]

The difference is that I'm not claiming that they will use it or are using it. Nor am I claiming some obscure industry standard that almost no one knows about as the reason why they should be using it. I'm only saying that this is how I will be referring to it.

Paramandur's not doing that either. He's only using it to explain one of MANY reasons why WotC might wnat to "get off the edition bandwagon" and only because some people (yourself included) seem very, very resistant to allow WotC to do it.

I'm not convinced of that. Halfway between 5e and 6e is 5.5e. I think most people have enough basic math understanding to understand they halfway point between two numbers.

That only works if you insist that 6th Edition is coming down the pipe. Which it is not. WotC has been exceedingly clear that they want OFF the Edition bandwagon. They think we'd be better off with "D&D 2024" and some time down the road "D&D 203X" and so on. And I agree with them, because they are right.

The edition numbers that you hold so tightly to are a meaningless mess in any way other than that TSR and then WotC used those numbers as branding. If you think that it's okay for them to have done so, arbitrarily and for their own various "at the time it made sense" reasoning, then I have no idea why you wouldn't allow WotC to do the same now.

Trust me that they've actually put AT LEAST as much thought into it and how it relates to and effects their market than, say, Gary did when he named Advanced D&D (mostly to screw Arneson out of royalties).

 

[UngeheuerLich]

No WIN ME???

Damn. I think it was as successful as vista IIRC...
Lets better forget it.

 

[KYRON45]

I'm an old man; i haven't been in a game shop in about 25 years. How many editions of the same game are on the shelf at the same time?
At this point in the circle of edition life....don't you have to go out of your way to find something that isn't the current edition?

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I'm an old man; i haven't been in a game shop in about 25 years. How many editions of the same game are on the shelf at the same time?
At this point in the circle of edition life....don't you have to go out of your way to find something that isn't the current edition?

A bit. I once (only once, mind) had to convince a father that the 4e PHB1 that he'd grabbed off our blowout shelf, in spite of being a "good deal" was NOT going to help his kid play D&D (5e) with his friends and that he NEEDED to get the "more expensive" one.

Mostly, though - people come in and say "Where's your D&D" and we point them to the big shelf of 5e books, and if we need to (which we usually DO) we explain what books are what. I mean, the giant shelf of various titles (mostly Adventures) is pretty daunting for the "normies", forget Editions. Often, that sort of person will buy a Starter or Essentials set, otherwise a PHB. It's not terribly complicated, and they usually get it after a bit of explaining.

This is a very regular occurrence. I think us "nerds" overestimate how much "research" your average person will do...

OTOH, there's certainly plenty of people that will look stuff up on the internet, of course. Sometimes that makes them know what they're talking about. Other times, not.

 

[Kurotowa]

OTOH, there's certainly plenty of people that will look stuff up on the internet, of course. Sometimes that makes them know what they're talking about. Other times, not.

Ugh, tell me about it. I browse the D&D reddit some, and there's a steady stream of "My player tried to use an optimized multiclass build they got online, and are unhappy because it doesn't actually come online until 12th level and they're only 5th, what do I do?" or "My player asked if they could use [Monstrously overpowered homebrew class from D&DWiki], should I let them?"

A little knowledge is sometimes more dangerous than no knowledge, because it gives false confidence and lets you get under the hood to start messing with things you really shouldn't. Also the Internet is full of junk data and misinformation, which doesn't help when you're too new to filter it out.

 

[Maxperson]

A real question.

Has anyone ever be confused by Windows Editions?

I startet with win 3.11
Then win 95
Then win 98
Then win 98SE
Then win xp
Then win 7
Win Vista
Then win 8
Then win 10
Then win 11

In between there was
Win NT
And win 2000
A sidegrade for network administrations

Win 3.11 was a graphic DOS shell
Win 95 was new optically, but still a DOS shell
Win 98 was still a DOS shell
Win 98 SE was not a DOS shell anymore (IIRC - nope did not remember correctly... ), but was the new operating system.
Edit: Win ME (last DOS based edition)
Win XP was good.
Win vista was less good.
Win 7 was good.
Win 8 was... less good? Somewhere was a switch to 64 bit.
Win 10 was good.
Win 11 is ok.

Oh I forgot the difference between home and professional editions...

Ok. I am a bit confused... But at the time, most users just upgraded to the current edition. Sometimes identified by number, sometimes by a year and sometimes by a weird name. Just what was fancy at the time.

Confusion? Probably some. For me personally I wasn't confused by the naming so much as what the differences were between home, professional, etc.