D&D (2024) Is the 5E player base going to split?

[Parmandur]

I agree, in play most people won't care. The real question is, who is going to throw another $200 at a set of core books that, according to many on this board, offer very little actual change in the game? I'm not sure i would do that even if I liked the changes.

If it has new art, a lot of people will buy.

 

[Micah Sweet]

If it has new art, a lot of people will buy.

That is so weird to me.

 

[Parmandur]

Bereft as I am of a working crystal ball I cannot lay much on my own predictions here, right? Okay.

My guess is that it won't be so much a split as a lag in people adopting the new books. As folks set in their ways often do, we'll grouse and insist the 5e books are largely fine as they are and didn't need all these changes, but as more and more people take up the new system, most of us crusty old curmudgeons will come around to the new books and settle in to using them. There will, of course, be a few who insist on sticking with the prior system (that always happens, too), but I expect by and large it won't be a big deal.

It isn't fifth edition that so many people have fallen in love with over the past four or five years; it's D&D.

Yeah, there will be a spectrum of responses, but a dramatic split is not necessary.

 

[HammerMan]

There will be a split. How big it will be will depend on how much they change.

 

[Parmandur]

That is so weird to me.

I just bought Monsters ofnthe Multiverse despite owning both previous books, and the art is a major factor. Art is a major Contributor to all my RPG book purchases. Notably, Acquisitions Incorporated and Rick & Morty are the only 5E products I skipped, and art is probably the main reason there.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I just bought Monsters ofnthe Multiverse despite owning both previous books, and the art is a major factor. Art is a major Contributor to all my RPG book purchases. Notably, Acquisitions Incorporated and Rick & Morty are the only 5E products I skipped, and art is probably the main reason there.

Huh. I like art, but it really doesn't factor into my purchasing choices beyond wanting to know what something actually looks like. Even that is unnecessary if I already know.

 

[Mercurius]

If they incorporate material from previous books, they are essentially re-printing that material. This is not necessarily great for those who own the previous books.

I don't see how it is a problem for those folks. In fact, it is good for them in that it (theoretically) has the updated and complete rules in one book, rather than across multiple supplements, and also benefits those who don't want to buy extra supplements.

Xanathar's expanded on player's options, as did Tasha's, but also had more significant rules additions and adjustments. The 50th PHB would essentially be, "this incorporates the last ten years of 5E development - at least the essentials." That seems like a perfectly reasonable thing to do after ten years. Again, we're not talking three years here. Ten is a long time, especially for D&D.

I mean, should it not do that? No approach is perfect, but incorporating any significant or meaningful changes in the new core rulebooks seems like the best approach to take.

 

[dave2008]

Idle curiosity about how folks feel. I don't really have a dog in the race and haven't been paying super close attention to things, but it appears that we are in the early stages of a "renovation" of the 5E rules, and we know we have revised core books coming.

So what I am curious about is how folks feel. Do you think that "5.5" is going to split the 5E player base such that there are 2 camps of 5E players -- 5.0 and 5.5? I know that some people felt that way about 4E essentials, and some folks stuck with 3.0 rather than go to 3.5.

What do you think?

Also, be nice.

EDITED for grammar.

No, I don't think it will cause a split

 

[JAMUMU]

If it's handled well enough any split should be minor, but there will always be splitters. Just ask the People's Front of Judea.

When 3.5 came out all the DMs and players I knew upgraded to it. I didn't, and continued to run 3rd ed for ages, but I was definitely an outlier.

 

[dave2008]

Huh. I like art, but it really doesn't factor into my purchasing choices beyond wanting to know what something actually looks like. Even that is unnecessary if I already know.

I'm with @Parmandur on this one. Art plays a big part in my purchases as well. As an amateur artist myself, I don't want a book with art that I could easily do myself.