D&D (2024) Let's call it 5.24

[Li Shenron]

So it is as much of a change as tasha's guide?
Seems not worth the 5.5 tag then.

I am not sure, as I said I haven't followed up closely the recent test packs and reveals. I kind of think the changes from Tasha are bigger than the changes between Tasha and 5e, and some people even called Tasha already a 5.x.

I did use 3.0 and 3.5 for quite a while together. I actually did not buy 3.5 books for quite a while, and just used the SRD 3.5. We still used the forgotten realms campaign setting and splat books. But there were quite some points we had to modify, because skill were changed, spells were changed and how small characters worked too.

Well you are saying it yourself that you had quite a bit to change! If you have to change stuff, I wouldn't call it compatibility, otherwise I could say all editions are compatible to some degree, since for example we run old editions adventures all the time.

What I personally remember though, is quite a lot of hostility against using 3.0 material in 3.5 in these very forums, for example if you wanted to play PbP games they would normally just require to stick with official 3.5 material. Maybe this time will be different but I doubt.

I guess, using 5.0 material for a while would work way easier, until all former options are replaced by newer ones.

Probably easier than 3.0/3.5.

 

[Zardnaar]

3.0 had some crazy broken stuff in it. Even if it was easily adaptable to 3.5.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

3.0 had some crazy broken stuff in it. Even if it was easily adaptable to 3.5.

The way some folks went on about silvery barbs and Twilight Cleric, you'd think 5.0 was just as bad if not worse....

 

[mellored]

Of course, this assumes that 100% of the people who voted "yes" here do not have a preferred alternative, but find "5.24" acceptable.

Gotta admit though, it takes some glandular gumption to call 1/3 a commanding lead.

I never said "commanding" lead. I said "might" be in the lead.

When you have 8 candidates, the average is 12.5%. So getting 36.2% is twice that.

To make a rough guesses for the rest
20% for 5.5
15% for just D&D.
10% for Revised
10% for 5.2
And then a small slice for the rest.

But if someone wants to collect all the suggestions and prove me wrong, by all means.

Also, I expect some people changed their minds.

 

[Zardnaar]

The way some folks went on about silvery barbs and Twilight Cleric, you'd think 5.0 was just as bad if not worse....

They're both bad, silvery barbs for other reasons.

They're worse in some ways as 3.0 broken stuff a lot if it is theoretical eg level 10-15 involving prestige classes. 3.0 haste was about as bad as it got most of the time.

 

[mellored]

The way some folks went on about silvery barbs and Twilight Cleric, you'd think 5.0 was just as bad if not worse....

5e Moon druid might be the worst level 2 character of any edition.

I doubt that holds true for higher levels though.

 

[Zardnaar]

5e Moon druid might be the worst level 2 character of any edition.

I doubt that holds true for higher levels though.

Twilight Cleric can give that a good run for its money. 5E broken stuff switched online earlier more self contained.

Most 3E broken stuff is more theoretical/high level stuff involving multiple books that players probably don't own.

Bard was one of the more broken low level builds I saw in actual play. The rest were level 9-15 eg cleric archer or shadow adept.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I am not sure, as I said I haven't followed up closely the recent test packs and reveals. I kind of think the changes from Tasha are bigger than the changes between Tasha and 5e, and some people even called Tasha already a 5.x.

5.1...

So 5.24 does not seem out of order.

Well you are saying it yourself that you had quite a bit to change! If you have to change stuff, I wouldn't call it compatibility, otherwise I could say all editions are compatible to some degree, since for example we run old editions adventures all the time.

That is a bit of a hyperbole...

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Given a number of people, some of them on this very forum, were already calling Tasha's "5.5e," your "it is ABSOLUTELY NOT 5.5e now" line is not as strong as you might like.

I don't say it is absolutely no 5.5e.
I say it is not absolutely 5.5e.

A fine difference. I just object people who don't let other opinions count as equally valid.

The changes in TCoE were controversial. Not enough to split the fanbase good and proper, but controversial nonetheless. Something that goes even further...well, it might not be literally identical to the amount of change with 3.5e, but these are conventions, not technical specifications. "5.5e" is simple, straightforward. It taps into terminology already in use, and quickly and cleanly communicates "it's pretty much the same game, but some stuff under the hood is different." Further, as you say, it communicates that you can use a lot of stuff from X.0 in X.5, it just might require adaptation or tweaking....which as you say was true of 3.0->3.5 and will be true of "2014"->"2024."

I have no problem with your reasoning for calling it 5.5e.

 

[Zardnaar]

Main reason to call it 5.5 is people here at least will know what you're referring to.

It's a revision hell you could call it glorified errata with new art and it's almost accurate enough