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

[Corinnguard]

That's not quite true. FOURTH edition (not the one we got - one that was never made) was planned the day they dropped 3e, but it was planned for a few years further down the line. They rushed to finish it, and didn't, and called it 3.5 partly because of the software parlance of the day, and partly because it was roughly halfway to where they wanted to go. Of course, all that might be apocryphal, but that's how I heard it.

This makes me wonder about Pathfinder 1st edition. I have previously joked about it going by the nickname of 3.75e D&D. Was Paizo able to carry 3.5 over the 'finish' line and make Pathfinder into an unofficial 4e for D&D fans?

 

[FitzTheRuke]

This makes me wonder about Pathfinder 1st edition. I have previously joked about it going by the nickname of 3.75e D&D. Was Paizo able to carry 3.5 over the 'finish' line and make Pathfinder into an unofficial 4e for D&D fans?

If WotC had stuck to their business plan regarding 3e and made that version of 4e a few years later, I suspect that it would have looked quite a bit like PF1.

 

[Vaalingrade]

If WotC had stuck to their business plan regarding 3e and made that version of 4e a few years later, I suspect that it would have looked quite a bit like PF1.

Even though I liked PF1, thank goodness for small favors.

 

[jasper]

100+ changes to spells
Change to exhaustion
new spell spread thingy.
how many subclasses overwritten,.
How many classes now wait to 3rd to get their stuff.
As Retreater said this is first edition to second edition change.
When I being nice I will call it 5.5E when I am upset 6e.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Even though I liked PF1, thank goodness for small favors.

I want to say, "I couldn't agree more" but upon reflection, I kind of would like to have seen how that turned out.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I want to say, "I couldn't agree more" but upon reflection, I kind of would like to have seen how that turned out.

I feel like 3e benefited by getting treated in the Paizo style (Paizo does gonzo fantasy in a way WotC isn't allowed to with the D&D baggage attached) and we are better off with what precious little we got of 4e instead of 3e extended which frankly I imagine would have been an underbaked 5e without the three extraneous saving throws and without teiflings or warlocks or a coherent attempt at a monk class.

 

[Minigiant]

100+ changes to spells
Change to exhaustion
new spell spread thingy.
how many subclasses overwritten,.
How many classes now wait to 3rd to get their stuff.
As Retreater said this is first edition to second edition change.
When I being nice I will call it 5.5E when I am upset 6e.

Pfft

1e to 2e was a bigger change.

1e to 2e actually had game math change.

2014 to 2024 was 90% balancing and clarification while actively not changing the math.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

That's not quite true. FOURTH edition (not the one we got - one that was never made) was planned the day they dropped 3e, but it was planned for a few years further down the line. They rushed to finish it, and didn't, and called it 3.5 partly because of the software parlance of the day, and partly because it was roughly halfway to where they wanted to go. Of course, all that might be apocryphal, but that's how I heard it.

Sounds to me like you've gotten two true things conflated together into something untrue.

AIUI, they did not originally intend to make 4e so soon after making 3e. Instead, they intended to go full steam ahead for 3e, but it ended up having...well, a lot of holes. So they patched up a few of the obvious ones (while leaving most of the actually serious ones), and called it 3.5e.

Now, once they had published 3.5e, they did in fact want to immediately begin ground work on a new edition. Internally, it was referred to as "Orcus," and you're correct that this new edition failed to cross the finish line properly. Instead, they published it...as the Book of Nine Swords. That's why those classes all have such a coherent, singular focus. They were the first draft of the team's efforts to fix the problems with non-casters in 3.5e. It just wasn't working out the way they wanted, so they turned it into a 3.5e product and went back to the drawing board, taking lessons learned from "Orcus" and applying them to the new project, "Flywheel," which became the seed of what we call "4th Edition" today.

You can read about this stuff here. It's somewhat interesting.

4th edition was also rushed out and had so much errata and rules changes on the online portion.

It was rushed out, but that has little to nothing to do with how much errata it received.

 

[Minigiant]

Sounds to me like you've gotten two true things conflated together into something untrue.

AIUI, they did not originally intend to make 4e so soon after making 3e. Instead, they intended to go full steam ahead for 3e, but it ended up having...well, a lot of holes. So they patched up a few of the obvious ones (while leaving most of the actually serious ones), and called it 3.5e.

Now, once they had published 3.5e, they did in fact want to immediately begin ground work on a new edition. Internally, it was referred to as "Orcus," and you're correct that this new edition failed to cross the finish line properly. Instead, they published it...as the Book of Nine Swords. That's why those classes all have such a coherent, singular focus. They were the first draft of the team's efforts to fix the problems with non-casters in 3.5e. It just wasn't working out the way they wanted, so they turned it into a 3.5e product and went back to the drawing board, taking lessons learned from "Orcus" and applying them to the new project, "Flywheel," which became the seed of what we call "4th Edition" today.

You can read about this stuff here. It's somewhat interesting.


It was rushed out, but that has little to nothing to do with how much errata it received.

Late Stage 3.5e was more it's own edition than 4e Essentials and 2024 5e.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Late Stage 3.5e was more it's own edition than 4e Essentials and 2024 5e.

Honestly, I kind of agree. The proliferation of new resource systems and experimental class structures just...feels like that.

The Factotum is a Bard truly specialized in flexibility, for example, while Binder-type stuff is clearly the Warlock coming into its own. The Tome of Battle classes are reworks of three major martial-ish classes (Fighter = Warblade, Paladin = Crusader, Monk = Swordsage), and if the Rogue were moved in a clearly magical direction, Shadowcaster wouldn't be the worst fit for it. Truenamer, for all its horrible horrible jank, seems like an attempt to reinvent arcane casting. Etc.

When I use terms like "5.5e," I really do mean it--I see 5.5e as half a step toward a new edition. It isn't really a new edition. But it also isn't really the same edition, either. It's in the awkward no-man's-land where it's almost the same, but not the same. The skeleton is (mostly) the same, but the flesh is new.