D&D (2024) Jeremy Crawford: “We are releasing new editions of the books”

[Azzy]

The issue I have with their definition is, they are not differentiating it from 5.0, which means it will all be jumbled together for buyers and sellers of 3pp, which since there are measurable differences, will be confusing.

But, however, they are. In the article linked in the first post of this thread, it says that WotC are using the date to differentiate them. i.e.—PHB (2014) vis-a-vis PHB (2024). This is what I mean about it being amusing.

 

[Azzy]

I mean a new set of rules that changed like 1e/2e and 3e/3.5

Well, if we choose which definition to use, we can call it anything we like.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I get that, but for most products it simply does not matter as far as I can tell. That is why I added those categories (monsters, adventures, subclasses, …)

What would you want to avoid buying, a 2024 subclass? Anything else?

For example, will future 3pp be based on the subclass/monster/class/spell/game rule design from 2014 or 2024? WotC makes no difference between them, so who knows? If Level Up decides to change their design to more closely align to 2024 5e, I would probably not be happy about it. There was an announcement from Mage Hand Press (one of my favored 3pps) recently that they have reviewed the playtest documents and would prefer not to follow WotC down that path of design, and I support that decision. This is the sort of thing I'm talking about.

 

[Micah Sweet]

But, however, they are. In the article linked in the first post of this thread, it says that WotC are using the date to differentiate them. i.e.—PHB (2014) vis-a-vis PHB (2024). This is what I mean about it being amusing.

It is a finer distinction than they have ever made before, as both books have the same name, almost all the same nomenclature for terms, use the same basic game structure, but differ on a lot of key details.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I never understood why people hated on THAC0 so much anyway.

It's as perplexing as the people who still get bent out of shape over Drizzt. After several decades we all should really just let this stuff go.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It's as perplexing as the people who still get bent out of shape over Drizzt. After several decades we all should really just let this stuff go.

Agreed. I read "The Crystal Shard" and that's it.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

For real fun, you needed to determine what 5/2 attacks per round meant. That made Thac0 sound like Sesame Street math...

2 and a half... not that difficult actually.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

The issue I have with their definition is, they are not differentiating it from 5.0, which means it will all be jumbled together for buyers and sellers of 3pp, which since there are measurable differences, will be confusing.

They are differentiating it. The Players Handbook (2024) will be different than Players Handbook (2014), and both will be usable to play 5E, pretty much like the 4E PH and Essentials books could be used to play 4E.

If the greater Community accepts and adopts this, it will be a blip on the radar. But if certain factions of the Community want to cause chaos and obfuscation (for whatever reason they choose, and those reasons may be valid), then yeah, they're going to mix some of that in there. That has been the case with EVERY edition. Ever. Haters gonna hate.

I am still going to pay attention to valid critiques, and try to avoid engaging in bad faith arguments (though I sometimes fail).

 

[mamba]

For example, will future 3pp be based on the subclass/monster/class/spell/game rule design from 2014 or 2024? WotC makes no difference between them, so who knows? If Level Up decides to change their design to more closely align to 2024 5e, I would probably not be happy about it. There was an announcement from Mage Hand Press (one of my favored 3pps) recently that they have reviewed the playtest documents and would prefer not to follow WotC down that path of design, and I support that decision. This is the sort of thing I'm talking about.

so we are really getting into every single detail, like does the monster stat block list spells or follow the MotM format? Does the book say race or species, etc?

Well, WotC did not create a new version when that book or Tasha’s dropped either, so don’t you already have that issue today, just to a lesser degree?

But yes, at that level of detail no one will tell you, even an actual separation would not (MotM is 5e)

 

[Micah Sweet]

so we are really getting into every single detail, like does the monster stat block list spells or follow the MotM format?

Well, WotC did not create a new version when that book or Tasha’s dropped either, so don’t you already have that issue today, just to a lesser degree?

But yes, at that level of detail no one will tell you, even an actual separation would not (MotM is 5e)

If it was officially 5.5e it would tell me.