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

[Dire Bare]

Is D&D 2024 a new edition?

Nope.

Not in the sense we have historically used the term in the D&D hobby.

But a better question, IMO, is . . . are the new rules backwards compatible as WotC claims, regardless of what we call the new rules? Yes, they are.

 

[Dire Bare]

Yeah. It's 5.5e. It's a new edition.

There have been significant enough changes to the main structural elements of the game, namely classes and heritages but also spells and feats, that I consider it a new edition.

It's not as drastic as the 3e/4e or 4e/5e jumps, but very little -can- be. The change to 4e was SO dramatic in every structural element as to essentially become a new game even if they maintained the "d20 System" basis.

But compare 5.5e to 1e and 2e AD&D and more importantly to the 2e and 2e Revised rules in TSR 2159.

This is how Steve Winter described the Revised 2e changes. Small and subtle changes that you'd need a tremendous memory and to read the books very carefully to find.

5.5e's changes are not small, or subtle. They are writ large and explicitly advertised on Youtube channels discussed by the designers to explain why they're there. Not just minor or even moderate changes to specific class features, either. Entirely -new- features have been added to classes, like the Cunning Strike of the 5.5e Rogue.

If you can do an 8 minute long video about the changes you've made and the "New Twists" to a -single- class, that's a new edition.

What I remember most from Revised AD&D 2E is the terrible artwork, layout, and trade dress. I still have nightmares! Ugliest version of D&D!

 

[CleverNickName]

What I remember most from Revised AD&D 2E is the terrible artwork, layout, and trade dress. I still have nightmares! Ugliest version of D&D!

That was my reaction to the Rules Cyclopedia.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I am admittedly ignorant on sales numbers, thus my particular choice of words. But you may have some numbers you could share given that your in the business.

Yeah, I could. Monsters of the Multiverse sold fine. I have sold 30 of them so far. I sold 48 Volo's, but it has a few more years on it. Seems reasonable to me. We're not a huge store.

 

[Dire Bare]

That was my reaction to the Rules Cyclopedia.

The Rules Cyclopedia is the SECOND ugliest version of D&D!!

But I still love that ugly, messy collection of rules for what we (my group) used to call "Basic" D&D (BECMI).

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Is D&D 2024 a new edition?

Nope.

Not in the sense we have historically used the term in the D&D hobby.

But a better question, IMO, is . . . are the new rules backwards compatible as WotC claims, regardless of what we call the new rules? Yes, they are.

They are. Another question I think is more interesting is:

Why is it that people want so badly to name it themselves rather than use what it's been named by those who made it?

 

[Dire Bare]

They are. Another question I think is more interesting is:

Why is it that people want so badly to name it themselves rather than use what it's been named by those who made it?

Well, because we're nerds. That's about the beginning and end of it really.

 

[JEB]

Why is it that people want so badly to name it themselves rather than use what it's been named by those who made it?

Wait, there's an official name for the new version of 5e? What is it?

 

[Maxperson]

What I remember most from Revised AD&D 2E is the terrible artwork, layout, and trade dress. I still have nightmares! Ugliest version of D&D!

2e is hands down my favorite edition for lore and settings, but you are absolutely correct that it was the ugliest.

 

[JEB]

2e is hands down my favorite edition for lore and settings, but you are absolutely correct that it was the ugliest.

Eh, YMMV. I prefer the look of the revised 2e rulebooks to the original 2e rulebooks. (Granted, they were also my introduction to playing the game.)