D&D (2024) Let's call it 5.24

[Baumi]

5.5 or Revised has the problem that you have a naming problem when they decide in a few years to make another 5E version.

 

[Vaalingrade]

5.5 or Revised has the problem that you have a naming problem when they decide in a few years to make another 5E version.

They'll probably increment with [Classic Character]'s [Noun] of [Collective Noun] books that are backdoor errata for the next decade again.

 

[mellored]

Large majority is voting no.

Given how many different names are being suggested. Getting 1/3 might be in the lead.

Second place seems to be 5.5.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Given how many different names are being suggested. Getting 1/3 might be in the lead.

Second place seems to be 5.5.

Of course, this assumes that 100% of the people who voted "yes" here do not have a preferred alternative, but find "5.24" acceptable.

Gotta admit though, it takes some glandular gumption to call 1/3 a commanding lead.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

They'll probably increment with [Classic Character]'s [Noun] of [Collective Noun] books that are backdoor errata for the next decade again.

They might even literally call it (for example) "Xanathar's Guide to Everything (Revised)" or the like.

 

[Zardnaar]

Of course, this assumes that 100% of the people who voted "yes" here do not have a preferred alternative, but find "5.24" acceptable.

Gotta admit though, it takes some glandular gumption to call 1/3 a commanding lead.

Well it's also because it's yay or nay on 5.24.

Could be interesting if you did a 5.25 or 5.5 thread.

 

[Li Shenron]

It's 5.5e. It's still 5e, as much as 5.0 is/was 5e. Just like how 3.5e was as much 3e as 3.0 was. It's a bigger change than, say, Essentials, which actually was 100% just an alternate slate of classes (with specific rules for how that new slate could be blended with the old slate). It's inarguably smaller than past full-edition changes, with the one arguable exception of 1e->2e. Certainly, it's a smaller gap than 2e->3e, 3e->4e, or 4e->5e.

Various core mechanics have changed. A number of things that used to be class features have become spells. A number of spells have been reworked. Advantage, which is a pretty deep core mechanic, has been expanded. Etc. It's not absolutely perfectly the same game. But it's also not so radically different that it isn't mutually intelligible, outside the specific bits that require conversion.

It's 5.5e.

Good summary.

I haven't kept up with the news as I am not really interested in switching to 5.5e, but at the very least it is a revision similar to 3.5e.

They can claim 'compatibility' all they want, but I am very confident that the vast majority of those who will play 5.5e will keep it separate and not allow 5e material at the same table.

I wouldn't call it 6e as the core rules are mostly the same (not sure but for example they haven't really touched action economy, combat rules, spellcasting?), but there are enough changed to create a rift between players of either. You won't just walk into a 5.5e game with a 5e character or viceversa and expect not to be at least scrutinised by the DM, and most probably end up being told to adapt. Again, it doesn't matter what WotC claims or what technically should work, just wait and see what will happen... in fact it has already happened with groups specifying whether they play pre-tasha or post-tasha games.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

5.5 or Revised has the problem that you have a naming problem when they decide in a few years to make another 5E version.

Go to the "R" - shop and call it RR5E?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Good summary.

I haven't kept up with the news as I am not really interested in switching to 5.5e, but at the very least it is a revision similar to 3.5e.

They can claim 'compatibility' all they want, but I am very confident that the vast majority of those who will play 5.5e will keep it separate and not allow 5e material at the same table.

I wouldn't call it 6e as the core rules are mostly the same (not sure but for example they haven't really touched action economy, combat rules, spellcasting?), but there are enough changed to create a rift between players of either. You won't just walk into a 5.5e game with a 5e character or viceversa and expect not to be at least scrutinised by the DM, and most probably end up being told to adapt. Again, it doesn't matter what WotC claims or what technically should work, just wait and see what will happen... in fact it has already happened with groups specifying whether they play pre-tasha or post-tasha games.

So it is as much of a change as tasha's guide?
Seems not worth the 5.5 tag then.

But hey. Call it however you like. But don't state it as fact. In my opinion, if we use 3.5 as a measurment, it is less of a problem to just still use the old character (for a while) with virtually no modifications. Out of the head, only grappler builds won't work amymore, but for a while you can let them do it the way they used to.

I did use 3.0 and 3.5 for quite a while together. I actually did not buy 3.5 books for quite a while, and just used the SRD 3.5. We still used the forgotten realms campaign setting and splat books. But there were quite some points we had to modify, because skill were changed, spells were changed and how small characters worked too.

I guess, using 5.0 material for a while would work way easier, until all former options are replaced by newer ones.

Actually we are doing this for quite some years. Tasha's. MMotM. And even Xanathar's tool proficiencies.

It is just nice that we now get a new round of core bools that consolidate those evolutions and go even a bit further.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

So it is as much of a change as tasha's guide?
Seems not worth the 5.5 tag then.

But hey. Call it however you like. But don't state it as fact. In my opinion, if we use 3.5 as a measurment, it is less of a problem to just still use the old character (for a while) with virtually no modifications. Out of the head, only grappler builds won't work amymore, but for a while you can let them do it the way they used to.

I did use 3.0 and 3.5 for quite a while together. I actually did not buy 3.5 books for quite a while, and just used the SRD 3.5. We still used the forgotten realms campaign setting and splat books. But there were quite some points we had to modify, because skill were changed, spells were changed and how small characters worked too.

I guess, using 5.0 material for a while would work way easier, until all former options are replaced by newer ones.

Actually we are doing this for quite some years. Tasha's. MMotM. And even Xanathar's tool proficiencies.

It is just nice that we now get a new round of core bools that consolidate those evolutions and go even a bit further.

Given a number of people, some of them on this very forum, were already calling Tasha's "5.5e," your "it is ABSOLUTELY NOT 5.5e now" line is not as strong as you might like.

The changes in TCoE were controversial. Not enough to split the fanbase good and proper, but controversial nonetheless. Something that goes even further...well, it might not be literally identical to the amount of change with 3.5e, but these are conventions, not technical specifications. "5.5e" is simple, straightforward. It taps into terminology already in use, and quickly and cleanly communicates "it's pretty much the same game, but some stuff under the hood is different." Further, as you say, it communicates that you can use a lot of stuff from X.0 in X.5, it just might require adaptation or tweaking....which as you say was true of 3.0->3.5 and will be true of "2014"->"2024."