D&D 5E (2024) D&D 2024 Is Now OFFICIALLY Called "5.5e"

Corinnguard · 2026-03-04T12:24:54+0000

Weiley31 said:
"I cast FIREBALLER!!"

"Balls of Fire!"

Joe Pilkus · 2026-03-04T12:29:01+0000

That was revealed by Stephen Glicker at Roll for Combat more than a year ago. He's a publisher and in one of WOTC's documents it stated the version as 5.5

Li Shenron · 2026-03-04T12:50:10+0000

AlViking said:
So then it seems like your definition of compatible would be "no changes whatsoever". That's not what the word means and I'm not sure what changes if any they could have made that would have worked with your definition.

...

What kind of changes, if any, could have been done to keep it compatible for you?

New versions of races, classes, feats, spells or background that are more or less equally good as the original ones would have been totally OK. Of course "equally good" is always subject to debate, but if one of those got a straight increase or addition at no cost, then it's clearly not equally good. If something got both a boost and a nerf, then I am probably ok with it, because I can at least imagine some situations when choosing either version is reasonable.

Rules changes also don't always break compatibility, it depends on the case... For example the new rule about regaining all spent HD on a long rest instead of half doesn't break anything (at least to my knowledge, there was no character option which relied on that rule). Another example is the new rules for surprise and initiative: you can now have advantage/disadvantage on initiative rolls, and presumably there are character abilities in 5.5 which use this new rule... I haven't thought about all the implications and possibilities, but I think this is a rule that can be easily added to a 5.0 game, and perhaps also removed from a 5.5 game instead, so it doesn't break compatibility for me (there are probably character abilities in 5.5 which grant advantage on initiative, but my gut feeling tells me these could still stay even if using 5.0 surprise rules).

And finally, pretty much all monsters changes do not break compatibility for me, because these are just DM's material. Goblins are Fey now, ok... change for the sake of change if you ask me, but I don't think this creates issues and if it does it's very much up to the DM to decide whether they are Feys or not (or maybe both... some Goblin tribes might be and others not!), after all I could have also decided that all Goblins in our fantasy world were Demons... would that create issues with people using a specific version of the PHB at the table? I don't think so.

DEFCON 1 · 2026-03-04T13:08:55+0000

'Compatible' is not a synonym of 'balanced'.

mamba · 2026-03-04T13:19:14+0000

Li Shenron said:
New versions of races, classes, feats, spells or background that are more or less equally good as the original ones would have been totally OK. Of course "equally good" is always subject to debate, but if one of those got a straight increase or addition at no cost, then it's clearly not equally good. If something got both a boost and a nerf, then I am probably ok with it, because I can at least imagine some situations when choosing either version is reasonable.

so basically they would not be able to address any existing balance issues…

Toe Knee Nose · 2026-03-04T13:20:30+0000

Welp, that conversation didn't quite go as intended. :erm:

Sheesh.

AlViking · 2026-03-04T13:46:38+0000

Li Shenron said:
New versions of races, classes, feats, spells or background that are more or less equally good as the original ones would have been totally OK. Of course "equally good" is always subject to debate, but if one of those got a straight increase or addition at no cost, then it's clearly not equally good. If something got both a boost and a nerf, then I am probably ok with it, because I can at least imagine some situations when choosing either version is reasonable.

The new versions are roughly equal, just rebalanced a bit and it doesn't make sense to look at it from the view of a single class or spell.. My paladin took a bit of a nerf, my wife's monk got a bit of an upgrade. But that kind of balancing act was one of the goals - some gain a bit others lose a bit.

Li Shenron said:
Rules changes also don't always break compatibility, it depends on the case... For example the new rule about regaining all spent HD on a long rest instead of half doesn't break anything (at least to my knowledge, there was no character option which relied on that rule). Another example is the new rules for surprise and initiative: you can now have advantage/disadvantage on initiative rolls, and presumably there are character abilities in 5.5 which use this new rule... I haven't thought about all the implications and possibilities, but I think this is a rule that can be easily added to a 5.0 game, and perhaps also removed from a 5.5 game instead, so it doesn't break compatibility for me (there are probably character abilities in 5.5 which grant advantage on initiative, but my gut feeling tells me these could still stay even if using 5.0 surprise rules).

There are some things, like the stealth rules where I use my interpretation of the old version. For that matter I still use a delay reaction from 3e in addition to ready. Unlike a ready action that can interrupt someone else's turn for a single action, the delay action allows you to go after someone else's turn but you get your full turn. I assume most games have a few minor house rules here and there, I know ours always have.

I agree that the surprise rules are different and it's up to the group to decide which version to use. But once you've made that decision everything falls in place. Compatibility doesn't mean everything works exactly the same.

Li Shenron said:
And finally, pretty much all monsters changes do not break compatibility for me, because these are just DM's material. Goblins are Fey now, ok... change for the sake of change if you ask me, but I don't think this creates issues and if it does it's very much up to the DM to decide whether they are Feys or not (or maybe both... some Goblin tribes might be and others not!), after all I could have also decided that all Goblins in our fantasy world were Demons... would that create issues with people using a specific version of the PHB at the table? I don't think so.

So I guess I still don't see how compatibility is broken. Most classes have had minor adjustments, some spells have been tweaked.

The change from race to species and the modification to backgrounds is the only real compatibility issue for me. I don't care for the changes to species because I prefer greater distinction between species and don't want everyone to be just humans with prosthetics. Of course that was pretty much broken with Tasha's and 5.5 just cleans things up a bit. Background features were always problematic for me because it made too many assumptions about how the campaign world worked. In my game there's no reason for a criminal to have a contact in any city they go to because world-wide criminal organizations like the Zhentarim don't exist and different locations can be halfway around the globe or even different worlds. So I'm glad they made the changes even if we do always use custom backgrounds.

Desdichado · 2026-03-04T15:41:52+0000

RhaezDaevan said:
I keeping hearing whispers of 5.5e not doing well financially and 6e already getting started, but haven't seen proof of either claim.

Anyone know what the source is? Completely made up, or more an exaggeration?

Sales numbers have been parsed and divined from multiple sources. Others claim that there are good reasons why that data, while obviously correct in black and white, empirical and unable to be challenged, don't actually represent an apple to apples comparison vs previous editions and their sales numbers. You have to decide for yourself what to believe. I don't think it pays to be very dogmatic on either side.

6e rumors come from people who claim to have contacts within WotC D&D design team who have told them that it's under development due to poor reception of 5.5. Knowing who some of the rumormongers are, they probably do have such contacts. But ultimately whether the rumors are more than just scurilous gossip or not, again, you'll have to decide did yourself. Again, I don't think it's wise to be too dogmatic on either side of that question either.

Stormonu · 2026-03-04T16:31:56+0000

I've taken to referring to it as 5e14 and 5e24, as I'm somewhat expecting we'll see a 5e29/30 (and at that time 5e14 content will be fully retired from Beyond).

I'm still using 5e14, BTW, with no plans to change - but I'm still watching for 5e24 books that catch my eye (like the recent Eberron book and the upcoming Ravenloft book).

Frozen_Heart · 2026-03-04T18:01:36+0000

Personally I'm pretty happy about this change. 5.5e both matches what the game actually is better, while also being way easier to say and type than 'DnD 2024'.