Iteration.

[DEFCON 1]

It might also mean they haven't come up with a name and wish to see where the design is going before fully branding it. In any event, it's 5E to me both because it makes sense and because it's faster to type than Iteration.

I think it's mainly this. 'Iteration' and 'D&D Next' are stopgap names until they finally decide on what they want to call it.

If they started referring to it as a fifth edition or 5E from the very beginning, everyone would basically hitch themselves up to that name permanently and they'd never be able to eventually call it something else even if they wanted to. At least now... while some people will call it 5E regardless of what the eventual name is... many other folks will be able to let the 'iteration' and 'D&DN' names go and latch onto whatever the final decision is on the name.

That being said... I do think that there is a bit of marketing in there as well... in that saying '5E' implies that it's a new version of the game, whereas they're trying to get across the idea that it's actually an adaptation/evolution of all the previous games. Yeah, that might be purely a semantic argument... but that's marketing for you.

I still intend on getting into my 'pre-owned vehicle' come release day and drive to the store to take a look at it.

 

[rjfTrebor]

well they've said they want to "end the edition wars" so maybe they think that a non-edition specific name will help with that.

 

[Dausuul]

4E made "edition" synonymous with "massive and disruptive change." By contrast, Wizards is pushing hard on the idea that D&DN is for everybody, no matter what edition you like. I think "iteration" is meant to suggest that you're keeping the important things about your preferred edition, whatever they may be; you're just carrying them forward into a new iteration of that edition. It's part of a general effort to make players of older editions feel welcome in 5E.

Of course, if you ask me, the single best thing Wizards could do to make players of older editions feel welcome is to take Monte Cook off writing Legends & Lore. Failing that, get him a good editor. Monte may be a great game designer, but when it comes to spreading warm fuzzies and inter-edition harmony, he's like a dentist's drill on a blackboard made of cranky crying babies.

 

[Yora]

If they started referring to it as a fifth edition or 5E from the very beginning, everyone would basically hitch themselves up to that name permanently and they'd never be able to eventually call it something else even if they wanted to. At least now... while some people will call it 5E regardless of what the eventual name is...

I think that actually happened about one year before it was announced. Even if they call it something else, people will say "D&D" and get the reply "Which edition?", and I can't see people answering that with 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and Next.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Also, don't forget that with the public playtest they will be 'iterating' towards the final release of the new edition

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Well, if we are lucky, they are using "iteration" in the proper sense of the word, since that is entirely appropriate to a long, open playtest, where feedback from the playtest makes a real differences. In that sense, "iteration" is here largely the same as "minor, prototype edition".

The have a 5E iteration. (You have to start somewhere.) They work on it. They test it. At various points, they add more outside testers. They get feedback. They make another 5E iteration. More testing, more work. Repeat many times. That is the core of an iterative process--do it again and again until you get it right (or run out of time or budget or both ).

When do you get an actual "edition", then? When one of your "candidate iterations" is good enough to release as such.

"Iteration" implies feedback is meaningful and valued, because an "iteration" is not set in stone. Let us hope that is true.

 

[harpy]

I'm curious if there is evidence in the marketing field that "5th" of any particular product is somehow undesirable within the marketplace, and thus they are trying to avoid it for that reason.

I can also see the whole "unify" concept at work. If someone is playing 0e and hears that there is a 5e, they'll more than likely think that it is five steps removed from what they enjoy. But if it's being framed as some kind of universal edition then it's possibly only one (or none) step removed.

 

[Kynn]

Yes, 4th Edition will have a longer lifetime than 3 years, but they started developing 5th Edition just 3 years after the release of 4th.

That doesn't really mean much of anything; they began developing 3.5 immediately after the release of 3.0, and they likewise began developing 4e quite early into 3.5's lifetime.

 

[Glade Riven]

Numbering an edition doesn't become "cool" again in marketeese until #7 or 8. Marketing peeps seem to like to avoid 5, but especially avoid 6. 10 is a sweet spot, because you can use the roman numeral X and X is always cool. 9 works because it anticipates 10. Why do you think Apple still uses "OS X" even though the current version of the OS is almost completely different than the original?

 

[Mark CMG]

X is always cool.

Depends how long you were married.