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

[SkidAce]

So, no, there's no monkey and there's no wrench. It's just the same old song and dance from people who've already decided that they want nothing to do with WOtC and just want to grind that axe just a little bit more and piddle in the pool so that no one else can possibly enjoy something that they don't like.

I am going to continue playing D&D, maintain my relationship with WotC, yet I feel this is at least the same amount of change as 3.0 to 3.5 (possibly more, I'm not combing the rules).

So you can be a non-hater, and still think this is an edition change per se...

 

[mamba]

Because adventure paths do not an edition make?

but the effort required to adjust it to an edition is a good indicator of whether it was written for the same edition or a different one

 

[mamba]

And WotC's decision here is also financially motivated. That's how these things go.

of course it is. The whole idea of remaining backwards compatible is financially motivated. Focusing on compatibility that much and then not calling it 5e makes no sense however. The whole point of this exercise is to be able to keep on calling it 5e.

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

Are you sure. Some people freak out because pact cantrips are called warlock cantrips and they can't figure out that 2014 warlocks can't chose them.

there is no reason a warlock can't pick something labeled a warlock cantrip unless you are using the new class (and even then that is confusing)

Speaking of that. Some people are totally confused, because they can't tell the difference between 2014 and 2024 handbook if there is no 6e lable on the latter.

yes but since the sheet says it's a different edition you understand it's not the exact same

The same people are also totally lost when a 2014 subclass gets their ability on a different level.

yeah cause in some cases it is a major change

I thought anyone with half a brain can figure that out too, but I was proven wrong.

I guess you like insulting people

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I thought anyone with half a brain can figure that out too, but I was proven wrong.

Mod Note:

It’s fine to point out that people can get confused if labeling isn’t crystal clear. It’s NOT fine to toss around burns like this in the process. Please be more respectful of your fellow gamers going forward.

 

[Azzy]

nope 1 definition... when you break with one set of PHB/DMG/MM and update to new ones

No, it's literally two different definitions—OD&D -> Holmes, OD&D -> 1e, 1e -> 2e, 3e -> 3.5e, 4e -> Essentials, Holmes B/X, and B/X -> BECMI are all revisions to the previous editions not entirely new systems. Whereas 2e -> 3e, 3e -> 4e, and 4e -> 5e are all entirely different systems.

 

[Clint_L]

I guess this is where I'm utterly confused on the discourse. Why does if it is a new edition or not matter for if you buy the books?

I didn't buy Tasha's because it was a new edition of the game. I bought it because I wanted the rules in it, I liked the rules I saw previews of. I've bought Matt Colville's rules because I like them (even if I need to change them fairly consistently) not because they are official DnD 5e products.

So... why does the decision for buying the 2024 books rest on whether or not they are a new edition? Shouldn't it rest on whether or not you like the rule changes being presented and the direction they are going?

Liking the rules is important, but a lotta folks are heavily invested, in terms of time and money, in 5e. So releasing a new edition would be fraught with peril, because people will feel like now they have to make a choice, as with previous edition changes. And if you are on DDB, like millions of us, it becomes even more problematic. Sticking with 5e makes all the sense in the world.

So to answer your question: if it's 6e, there's a high likelihood that I don't buy it. It would take a lot for me to walk away from my 5e investment, and 5e works well enough that I wouldn't switch even if I liked the new version a bit more - it would have to be head and shoulders better.

Look how many folks on this forum are still playing AD&D.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Then why a new PHB with all the classes races feats and some spells and conditions overhauled?

Because it’s a revision?

Like, in the sense of the word used by everyone but D&D, it’s a new edition. But it’s a new edition of 5e D&D.

Like the stuff they’ve put out for playtest isn’t even particularly troublesome wrt compatibility, and they haven’t even done an “edit for compatibility” pass yet, but y’all keep insisting in every thread, ad nauseum, that it’s not the same game.

Eventually it starts to come across as simply a very strong negative confirmation bias.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Why is a company doing something for financially motivated reasons so offensive to you? Why is it such a bad idea that a company chooses to do something to make money? That is literally the reason businesses exist in the first place. If they don't make money, the go out of business and all of their employees loose there jobs.

You don't have to make the maximum amount of money you can get the public to pay you to stay in business.

 

[codo]

You don't have to make the maximum amount of money you can get the public to pay you to stay in business.

Ok. Nobody said they did. What sinister things do you think WotC is trying to do to make money? All I see is WotC revising their popular game in a way that they think will please the largest majority of their audience, and that they think will bring in the most new players. What exactly are they doing wrong here?