How Many Editions of D&D Has There Really Been?


log in or register to remove this ad

...Seventh Edition it is.

Or, as I suggested with my product numbering scheme, 7000-series Dungeons & Dragons...


I don't know if I'd consider "revisions" as "editions" and I've always thought of the three BD&Ds (77, 79, and 83) as revisions/expansions of (O)D&D, with 1E being a new edition (2E as a revision of 1E, which sort of fixes the numbering problem of 1E being second in actuality), 3E as it's own edition (3.5 and even PF as revisions), and 4E as it's own edition (and Essentials as a revision). So, by that reckoning, there's been four editions so far. Once you start breaking out the revisions and calling them editions you really need to think there are ten or even eleven or twelve for those who would in 2E with the Combat options as a separate edition and those who would consider the Rules Cyclopedia as a separate edition. The idea that there are only seven or eight becomes a matter of personal selection of which revisions are editions in their own right and there's no real consensus for such breakdowns. How do you feel that there have been seven and what is the reasoning for that number and what you have excluded not couting?
 

How far back do you want to go? Chainmail had multiple editions. Arneson's dungeon crawl rules turned into Gygax's (two?) drafts of The Fantasy Game, which was then retitled Dungeons & Dragons prior to publication B-)

I guess if you want to call the 1974 brown box "1st," then you need to consider that AD&D which premiered 1977-1979, itself a derivative of 1974 D&D informed by Supplements I-V 1975-1976, is now called "1st" ...

Wait! Don't run away! It gets more complicated! :D
 

I covered this lightly in the first EN World Presents video.

1974 - OD&D
1977 - Basic Set
1979 - AD&D
Etc....

Prior to OD&D was the Chainmail supplement. That and Outdoor Survival (1972) by Avalon Hill significantly influenced the creation of D&D.
 

How do you feel that there have been seven and what is the reasoning for that number and what you have excluded not couting?

The judgement of the fellow who made that nice diagram you linked seemed to coincide with the breakdown I posted before (though his understanding of the Basic Edition was better than mine). I decided (rather unscientifically) from that that we must be on to something, which was seven editions.

One for OD&D, plus six for major rules changes, minus one because two changes lead to 3e, plus one for the next edition, equals seven.
 

I suppose that the definitive way to prove or disprove your own formulation would be to ask the people who named 3e whether the " 2 " was AD&D 2nd. or just AD&D.
 

The judgement of the fellow who made that nice diagram you linked seemed to coincide with the breakdown I posted before (though his understanding of the Basic Edition was better than mine). I decided (rather unscientifically) from that that we must be on to something, which was seven editions.

One for OD&D, plus six for major rules changes, minus one because two changes lead to 3e, plus one for the next edition, equals seven.


Interesting. No major rules changes during the Basics but you would agree that (O)D&D to Basic was major? And what if 5E is not a major rules change but rather just a blending of all that came before as they seem to be suggesting it will?


I suppose that the definitive way to prove or disprove your own formulation would be to ask the people who named 3e whether the " 2 " was AD&D 2nd. or just AD&D.


How would that affect your "seven" editions formulation? :D I'm not sure asking the designers of any given edition/revision would yield consensus either.
 
Last edited:

How would that affect your "seven" editions formulation? :D I'm not sure asking the designers of any given edition/revision would yield consensus either.

Well, at the very least it would show that five was probably incorrect. Then it would mostly hinge on forming a consensus on whether Basic was a different edition...
 



Remove ads

Top