D&D (2024) Based upon what we currently know, what degree of "edition update" is 5.5?

[Umbran]

So what your saying is....this thread has no purpose whatsoever, as there is no way to apply a consistent defintion. Which....I could agree with.

Mod Note:

Consider the idea that if you have nothing more constructive to add to a discussion than "this discussion has no value" them maybe you should just not engage with that discussion at all.

Really, consider that notion for a while. Because not considering it earned you red text and a boot from the thread.

 

[Parmandur]

So what your saying is....this thread has no purpose whatsoever, as there is no way to apply a consistent defintion. Which....I could agree with.

No, the discussion is worth having, bit the framing is problematic.

 

[Parmandur]

it may not be consistent but if we can't agree on what words mean and we are going to argue about what 'counts' then we will never get to a point.

Certainly we can have a conversation about thst: but it has to start with the acknowledgement that WotC and TSR used the word "edition" inconsistently.

 

[Reynard]

It's going to be such a fun 18 months of gnashing teeth and expanding ignore lists. I can't wait.

 

[glass]

Except for the introduction to the 3.5 PHB which explicitly states that it is not a new edition?

I do not know who wrote that sidebar, but I can only assume they had not read the rest of the book when they did so. Even aside from the "new edition" question, it severely understates the extent and scope of the "revisions". And even if that was not the case, actions speak louder than words. WotC certainly treated it as a new edition, releasing a new line of splat books that covered the same ground as the 3.0 versions.

Alternately, lots of people considered them to be the same edition until it became convenient for edition warriors to separate them, so they could claim 4e was the longest-lived WotC edition rather than the shortest.

Not "alternatively", fictionally.

The accusation of edition warring goes both ways, and neither side's hands are clean.

Of course it does. Projection and muddying the waters are standard practice for edition warriors. Does not mean that all such accusations have equal (or any) foundation. And it is hilarious that you are trying to pull this on on me, when most of my gaming over the last 22 years and now is the 3e family rather than 4e (albeit generally PF1 these days). I spend more time defending 4e from misinformation, not because it is my particular favourite, but because it needs it more.

I think it may end up similar to the 4e to Essentials change. Some not-insignificant structural changes, but still fully compatible with the rules it’s updating.

Essentials. Was. Not. A. Change.

 

[Charlaquin]

Essentials. Was. Not. A. Change.

Well then it stands to reason that I think 1D&D will be equally not a change.

 

[Parmandur]

Well then it stands to reason that I think 1D&D will be equally not a change.

Yeah, at the very least it is evidence that WotC knows how to do a rules revision and representation that remains compatible.

 

[delericho]

yeah... I bet that the new one in 2024 will have similar verbiage

I have no doubt it will, if they can at all justify it. Heck, even if they can't justify it they'll probably stick it in anyway.

(BTW 2e out lived combined 3/3.5 you need to add pathfinder to get to it)

Nitpick: I did specify WotC edition.

Yes there was edition waring on both sides... but people claiming 4e was the shortest (BTW 2e out lived combined 3/3.5 you need to add pathfinder to get to it) were the ones fireing the shots back during the next playtest.

Sure. And they were doing in response to some, no doubt unforgivable, action by the other side, and they only did that in response to something terrible by the first, and... and... and... Ultimately, it all comes back to a batched edition announcement and a significant minority of the community who lost their collective minds.

And it was all folly. The major consequences of the Edition Wars was to permanently scar discussion here and elsewhere, to force WotC to abandon good ideas simply because those good ideas came from 4e... and it almost led to the cancellation of the game entirely.

And with that I'll apologise and bow out of the thread.

 

[glass]

Well then it stands to reason that I think 1D&D will be equally not a change.

Why does "not a change" require a public playtest? (It doesn't.)

 

[Yaarel]

I am guessing full-on 5.5.

We havent seen the classes yet.