D&D 5E D&D 5.5e; Your wish for 5.5e update.

[Horwath]

Why are you starting with 3e? There was 25 years of D&D prior to that, so if you're going to look at edition trends, you really need to look at every edition. And when you do that, there's nothing that would reliably predict a new edition in the next year or two.

from 1999. D&D is under Hasbro and they didn't buy WotC just for flavor, but for profit.

Also from former editions the time scale between edition is reducing.

AD&D(1st ed) 1977
AD&D(2nd ed) 1989 - 12y
AD&D(2nd ed revised or 2.5e) 1995 - 6y
3.0E 2000 - 5y

trend is to reduce the time between editions.

 

[Parmandur]

I'm not saying that 5e is doing bad. It's quite good actually. But look at the trends:

3rd ed year 2000.

3.5e y 2003.

4E y 2008.

4E essentials(essentially 4.5E) y 2010.

5th ed y 2014.

"Past results are not necessarily indicative of future performance" is a good life motto; they are talking about a ten year plan for 4E; expect 6E for the 50th anniversary, and the slow burn to continue.

Sent from my BLU LIFE XL using EN World mobile app

 

[Tony Vargas]

I'm not saying that 5e is doing bad. It's quite good actually. But look at the trends:

3rd ed year 2000.

3.5e y 2003.

4E y 2008.

4E essentials(essentially 4.5E) y 2010.

5th ed y 2014.

Why are you starting with 3e? There was 25 years of D&D prior to that, so if you're going to look at edition trends, you really need to look at every edition.

Well:

OD&D: 1974

Greyhawk Supplement I changes the combat & exp systems: 1975

1e: 1977-'79

Unearthed Arcana changes the game (in a modest but momentous-at-the-time way): 1985

2e: 1989

Player's Option series/black-cover revisions: 1995


Not that I don't disagree that they're wrong* about 5e doing a half ed anytime soon (I'd say it's just plain not going to happen, at all).











*really not sure about my use of multiple negatives, there, just go with the parenthetical.

 

[Nebulous]

I would LOVE to see on DMG someone's well put together book of houserules. I mean like, tons of options, even for the same mechanics, just a big book of options that people can pick and choose from to modify their games.

Is there anything like that, or anything else had that thought?

 

[Oofta]

I would LOVE to see on DMG someone's well put together book of houserules. I mean like, tons of options, even for the same mechanics, just a big book of options that people can pick and choose from to modify their games.

Is there anything like that, or anything else had that thought?

Check out http://DmsGuild.com. A lot of stuff is free or pay what you want.

 

[Mercule]

*really not sure about my use of multiple negatives, there, just go with the parenthetical.

I find the incorrect choice of "their" instead of "they're" to be more off-putting.

 

[Sacrosanct]

from 1999. D&D is under Hasbro and they didn't buy WotC just for flavor, but for profit.

Also from former editions the time scale between edition is reducing.

AD&D(1st ed) 1977
AD&D(2nd ed) 1989 - 12y
AD&D(2nd ed revised or 2.5e) 1995 - 6y
3.0E 2000 - 5y

trend is to reduce the time between editions.

2e was never revised to 2.5 in 1995. All they did was put out additional players options books, but they did not revise the game. Everything put out up until the end of 2e was around 2e's core rules originally put out in 1989. Not of that players option stuff was used outside of the actual PO books themselves. So it wasn't a system revision like 3.5 where everything after 3.5 was 3.5 compliant. It was "here are some more options" and never really heard from again. Gates of Firestorm peak I think was the only product built to support those PO books. Night Below certainly wasn't, which would be odd for them to release that if they released "2.5" the same time.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I find the incorrect choice of "their" instead of "they're" to be more off-putting.

If only it were a choice. ;(

"Past results are not necessarily indicative of future performance" is a good life motto; they are talking about a ten year plan for 4E;

I know it's a typo, but they actually /were/ talking that in 2008. (Might've been 8-10 or something). Anyway, it went 2, followed by 2 years of Essentials. So 'past performance' /and/ 'talk is cheap.' Plenty of grains of salt to go around.

Also from former editions the time scale between edition is reducing.

0D&D 1974

AD&D(1st ed) 1977

The MM was '77, PH '78, the DMG, '79.

AD&D(2nd ed) 1989 - 12y
AD&D(2nd ed revised or 2.5e) 1995 - 6y
3.0E 2000 - 5y

3.5 2002 - 2y
4e 2008 6y
Essentials 2010 2y
Next 2012 2y
5e 2014 2y
it's 2017.

Looks like they bottomed out? ;P

 

[the Jester]

4E essentials(essentially 4.5E)

This characterization is simply, and completely, wrong. Essentials was 100%, absolutely, completely compatible with PH1 4e. Yes, it used some new mechanics, but not a single thing required actual revision.

 

[Azzy]

I wish that such a thing won't happen.