D&D General 5.5E--new edition or not?

[Tigris]

I think it's just further evidence that the word is meaningless when it comes to game systems. WotC has effectively destroyed the word. It has a definition for books, but not for game systems. We need new terminology.

Hm no we dont?

In boardgameing its relatively clear. We just need to stop treating RPGs as books, and instead as games. The book is just a medium (among others like digital implementations) to give the people the rules to the game.


A new edition of a boardgame is not compatible with the previous edition or any of its "addons" etc. thats why its a new edition and not just a new print.


Of course how much changed mechanically can still varry, because there its hard to define, but having the compatibility as the main distinguishing factor is easy and useful (you know if you can combine it or need to make/buy new things).

 

[Dire Bare]

I think it's just further evidence that the word is meaningless when it comes to game systems. WotC has effectively destroyed the word. It has a definition for books, but not for game systems. We need new terminology.

Not completely meaningless, IMO, but certainly the term doesn't have concrete meaning.

But in any case, TSR got things started on the word long before WotC took over with AD&D 2E. IMO!

 

[Morrus]

Hm no we dont?

In boardgameing its relatively clear. We just need to stop treating RPGs as books, and instead as games.

That's literally what I said. Maybe you should go back to telling me that nobody likes football.

 

[Belen]

That quote was in response to a post saying they would only use 5.5 branded material and that I was doubting there would be enough material to play for a month of D&D 5.5 (tm).
If we breakdown what's actually available. Dragon Delves, a collection of one-shots. The campaign setting books (which you're going to pick one of those right, not string together Forgotten EberronLoft) - those have like 20 pages of half-baked adventure outlines each. The starter set - yeah, that's like a solo play Choose Your Own Adventure thing.
It's not just me. Numerous Dungeon Tubers have complained at the anemic release calendar for 5.5.
I could finish a campaign like Rime of the Frostmaiden or Curse of Strahd in 3-4 months.
I'm sure that WotC basically having to restructure the whole D&D team and losing Crawford and Perkins means they don't have much to work with.
This has been the most disappointing edition release I've seen since getting in the hobby.

The 5e cadence has always been bad. It has been great for 3pp though.

 

[Tigris]

That's literally what I said. Maybe you should go back to telling me that nobody likes football.

Its definitly not how I understood it. Maybe I missed something but my No comes from:

I think it's just further evidence that the word is meaningless when it comes to game systems.

Which I not agree since it is used for game systems like boardgames.

It has a definition for books, but not for game systems. We need new terminology.

Which I dont agree since we can use the existing terminology "new edition" and just use it like other non-rpg game systems.



Maybe as a non native my english is just too bad, but I dont see how this is the same as "we can use the existing termonology and just treat role playing games as games".


But I also dont understand why one would treat role playing games as books in the first place, just because the rules of them are often sold as books. Especially since many people playing an RPG never read the book of it.

Sports rules can also come in book form but people would not use book terminology to describe sports.

 

[Morrus]

Which I not agree since it is used for game systems like boardgames.

This is a tabletop roleplaying games website. I am talking about tabletop roleplaying games.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

That quote was in response to a post saying they would only use 5.5 branded material and that I was doubting there would be enough material to play for a month of D&D 5.5 (tm).
If we breakdown what's actually available. Dragon Delves, a collection of one-shots. The campaign setting books (which you're going to pick one of those right, not string together Forgotten EberronLoft) - those have like 20 pages of half-baked adventure outlines each. The starter set - yeah, that's like a solo play Choose Your Own Adventure thing.
It's not just me. Numerous Dungeon Tubers have complained at the anemic release calendar for 5.5.
I could finish a campaign like Rime of the Frostmaiden or Curse of Strahd in 3-4 months.
I'm sure that WotC basically having to restructure the whole D&D team and losing Crawford and Perkins means they don't have much to work with.
This has been the most disappointing edition release I've seen since getting in the hobby.

Right, but I run regular in-store play, and those "20 half-baked adventures" will take a full 3-hour session each. And maybe YOU could finish Rime of the Frostmaiden or Curse of Strahd in 3-4 months, but IME it usually takes about a year of once-a-week (3 hour) sessions to do one of those 5e APs, even playing on what I would call "fast-forward" (cut-to-the-action).

It's not just me. Youtubers aside, that's how often most people get to play, tops.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

The 5e cadence has always been bad. It has been great for 3pp though.

It's been great for 5e, too. It's not for nothing that it's outsold every other edition. Yeah, there's a lot of other factors as well, but the publishing schedule was 100% one of the reasons it's done as well as it has.

 

[bsss]

Sure!

I don't mean to say, hey folks, Monte figured it out and the debate is settled! In fact, I bet both "sides" could use that blurb in support of their arguments . . .

I just found it interesting.

I wonder how Cypher fans argue about the various iterations of that particular game.

Well, it helps that Cypher is extremely modular and the core book and community are heavy on "do what works for your game"/DIY mentality. People have been mostly concerned about the new wounds system in 2E, in my circles, but it's entirely in the ethos of the game to just ignore that and stick with the old damage system, if you don't like it. I don't think I've seen a significant argument about editions, mostly just opinions on the spectrum of "I love this new stuff" to "I'm sticking with the old stuff". And it helps that a lot of GM material isn't affected by the new edition.

Original Cypher System vs. revised is barely a contention point, because it was largely just a cleanup of the system with more content and info, rather than a significant delta.

MCG actually tried to call 2E another revision for a while, perhaps interestingly to this conversation, but early on they either realized the scope of their changes, or increased that scope, and admitted it's a new edition. And like I said earlier, I think they have managed communications on it very well since then. But, CS is considerably lighter than D&D 5e, too, so probably an easier scope to communicate around.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Everyone remember this thread when 5.5 "anniversary edition"/remakes/upgrades of 5E adventures start happening. It's not about what people argue online, it's about sales. Always has been, as the astronaut with the gun likes to say.