D&D General Does D&D (and RPGs in general) Need Edition Resets?

[mamba]

Just saying that incremental D&D has no chance until D&D goes full digital and can do errata digitally.

even then they probably won't do much more than they do now, they will still want to sell you updated books, not just a subscription

 

[Minigiant]

even then they probably won't do much more than they do now, they will still want to sell you updated books, not just a subscription

Nah.

They'd do more tweaks as people don't read patch notes, they can get away with changing stuff.

The reason why they didn't do many tweaks is not to invalidate sales of the 2014 and 2015 physical books that sold like hotcakes.

But if 6e is fully one D&D beyond, they can switch a d8 to a d12 or change wording directly on your digital copy.

They could fix wildshape by editing all the beasts on DNDB.

An incrementally updated RPG would only work if the fanbase is small and tolerant or the publisher can edit your books directly.

 

[payn]

And it is very telling, for example, that in a decade run, 5e never got more classes beyond Artificer despite IIRC 3-4 attempts at psionic rules. It never got Dark Sun, or a host of other similar things. Rules for playing something like dragons (Council of Wyrms) never appeared. Etc.

For all the talk that iterative change makes a big difference, in many ways, it really hasn't with 5e.

Just wait. Its how incremental works.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Just wait. Its how incremental works.

How many decades?

 

[payn]

How many decades?

As many as it takes.

 

[W'rkncacnter]

As many as it takes.

i mean, i'd like to be alive to see a major problem get fixed, personally.

 

[payn]

i mean, i'd like to be alive to see a major problem get fixed, personally.

Major? At any rate it’s not in Santa’s sack this year.

 

[Blue Orange]

Just wait. Its how incremental works.

Agreed.

Going strictly off the PHB as otherwise 'core' gets too hard to define:
1e: Cleric, Druid, Fighter, Paladin, Ranger, Magic-User, Illusionist, Thief, Assassin, Monk, Bard.
2e: Cleric, Druid, Fighter, Paladin, Ranger, Wizard (includes Illusionist as a specialty), Rogue, Bard.
3e: Cleric, Druid, Fighter, Barbarian, Paladin, Ranger, Wizard, Sorcerer, Rogue, Monk, Bard.
4e: Cleric, Fighter, Warlord, Ranger, Paladin, Rogue, Wizard, Warlock.
5e: Cleric, Druid, Fighter, Barbarian, Paladin, Ranger, Wizard, Sorcerer, Warlock, Rogue, Monk, Bard.

Of the 12 classes in the 5e PHB, 9 were in the 1e PHB 36 years earlier. And note that 'missing' classes often showed up in supplements.

 

[mamba]

Of the 12 classes in the 5e PHB, 9 were in the 1e PHB 36 years earlier.

that does not make 1e to 5e a sequence of incremental changes

 

[Lanefan]

Agreed.

Going strictly off the PHB as otherwise 'core' gets too hard to define:
1e: Cleric, Druid, Fighter, Paladin, Ranger, Magic-User, Illusionist, Thief, Assassin, Monk, Bard.
2e: Cleric, Druid, Fighter, Paladin, Ranger, Wizard (includes Illusionist as a specialty), Rogue, Bard.
3e: Cleric, Druid, Fighter, Barbarian, Paladin, Ranger, Wizard, Sorcerer, Rogue, Monk, Bard.
4e: Cleric, Fighter, Warlord, Ranger, Paladin, Rogue, Wizard, Warlock.
5e: Cleric, Druid, Fighter, Barbarian, Paladin, Ranger, Wizard, Sorcerer, Warlock, Rogue, Monk, Bard.

Of the 12 classes in the 5e PHB, 9 were in the 1e PHB 36 years earlier. And note that 'missing' classes often showed up in supplements.

Just goes to show they mostly got it right on the first try.