D&D (2024) So IS it a new edition?

[Kaiyanwang]

Granted as of 2014.

Absolutely not, unless one has a cursory, at best, knowledge of 3ed. 5e not being closer to 4e doesn't imply 5e is close in any meaningful way to 3e. Not more than to B/X, BECMI and AD&D at least.

 

[Senior_WotC_Janitor]

"New edition" in this context is not well-defined.

It is an arbitrary distinction that doesn't change the content, or how it plays.

This is correct.

 

[R_J_K75]

They've said that the power levels are remaining the same. That means the changes are mostly cosmetic. Instead of a monster casting fire all twice, it has scorching blast with the stats of a fireball, but isn't a spell. That avoids counterspell killing encounters.

The changes have to be really minor or CR will be affected.

Maybe it's not necessary then unless some terminology has changed, which I have no clue if it has or not

 

[Minigiant]

Again video game wise, it's not even an expansion pack.

It's a tiny DLC with a balance patch.

If you told a "normal" gamer this was 6e, they'd laugh.

 

[Yaarel]

Or having a useful label that isn't a clumsy mouthful like saying the entire year every time.

Normally, players dont need to distinguish.

The only time a distinction is necessary is when using both Players Handbooks, 2014 and 2024, at the same time, which probably will be seldom.

Even when using the 2024 Players Handbook with specific content from the 2014 Players Handbook, such as the Transmuter Wizard subclass, it still wont be necessary to distinguish because there is no 2024 update to compare to.

If an indy publishes "5e" content: that it is compatible with 2024 core rules, pretty much only needs to be mentioned once.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Absolutely not, unless one has a cursory, at best, knowledge of 3ed.

Playing it for a decade.

Dming it for the same.

Watching its' decaying corpse drag 4e under the earth, screaming and wailing for help, then emerging wearing 4e's flayed skin along with some of 2e's jewelry...

I've got some knowledge.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Normally, players dont need to distinguish.

Pretty sure they do seeing how character creation changed.

 

[Yaarel]

Pretty sure they do seeing how character creation changed.

But the variant character creation rules were already true when the various settings and Tashas came out. And again, it only needed to be mentioned once during session zero.

Even creating the "default" Human or the "variant" Human within the 2014 Players Handbook itself required clarification during session zero.

 

[Shardstone]

The term "Revised Edition" exists everywhere BUT in TTRPGS apparently.

 

[Vaalingrade]

But the variant character creation rules were already true when the various settings and Tashas came out. And again, it only needed to be mentioned once during session zero.

And whenever they discuss their characters and game with other people.

Let's not pretend people don't cite whether they were playing 3e or 3.5 and won't have to do the same today.

The only reason this is even a discussion is because WotC told us not to use the edition word.