D&D 5E [Merged] D&D Next/5E Release Schedule Threads

[Dausuul]

Heh. This is how I interpret that:

"Your starter set will come with a product code that will allow you to access chargen rules online."

Which, again, works for me. Some may complain, but I think that's a good way to provide value while keeping the cost of the physical product down.

Ha! I hadn't even thought of that, but it's the obvious move. I concur, that seems highly likely.

And the new logo is freaking sweet. Best ampersand yet. (I imagine any non-gamer would find it hilarious how much of the discussion in this thread is about an ampersand...)

 

[delericho]

Heh. This is how I interpret that:

"Your starter set will come with a product code that will allow you to access chargen rules online."

Why would they bother with a product code? That means setting up an infrastructure to handle those codes, a procedure for printing lots of unique codes ('cos otherwise the code goes online and everyone gets it) and a whole lot of hassle all around. Surely it's better just to put the material online as a free "web enhancement". Or, if they really can't bear to make it freely available, stick it in DDI, perhaps as the first article in the revived Dragon.

(There is one scenario I can see where they might go that route - if they decide to allow people who buy the physical books to also get free PDF versions, that would also necessitate doing something with codes, and probably tying it into the D&D classics webstore. If they're doing that anyway then perhaps a code in the Starter Set makes sense. Though even then, it seems like a lot of hassle for very little gain.)

 

[Gamgee]

Both the 3.5 books were 320p IIRC?

Also the 2e Monstrous Manual is nearly 400 pages.

Pretty much, no idea where he got this.

 

[fjw70]

Hey, I am not saying they should release unfinished products, but I do find it weird that the releases are staggered. It would have been kind of logical to wait until they have finished all the books before releasing any. For instance if they discover that the math doesn't add up completely when they are doing the MM, but they can't fix the PHB because it's already been released.

I think the design and development was all done before anything was finalized but it sounds like the layout and editing wasn't all done together. So I don't thing this will be an issue.

My guess is they wanted at least the PH by Gencon and releasing all three together would make it a November release. Those that want all three at the same time can just wait until November to pick them up.

 

[KirayaTiDrekan]

Pure speculation, but perhaps we might see a core rulebook gift set in December in time for winter holidays. Just a thought.

 

[Thaumaturge]

My guess is they wanted at least the PH by Gencon and releasing all three together would make it a November release. Those that want all three at the same time can just wait until November to pick them up.

I concur.

Thaumaturge.

 

[Dausuul]

So discounting OD&D,a s the first of anything can't have an edition number:

1E's edition was "Advanced"
BECM and I all had edition names
2E didn't
3E didn't
3.5 had the edition number
4E didn't
Essentials did, but I'll agree that's not worth counting

So I make that 3 with editions, 3 without.

"Basic Set," "Expert Set," "Companion Set," and "Master Set" were product names, not edition names. Counting BECMI would be like counting 3E because it had both a Player's Handbook and a Dungeon Master's Guide. The boxed sets were all part of the same edition, which was named simply "Dungeons and Dragons" with no qualifiers.

On the other hand, 2E does count. They dropped it when they changed the cover art, but the first printing of 2E--the yellow and brown one with the characters on horseback--has "2nd Edition" in red under the white "Advanced Dungeons & Dragons" logo. So, if we accept 1E because of "Advanced" in the title (which I think makes sense), your count is correct.

 

[jodyjohnson]

Yeah the new ampersand kick burn ass!

I prefer that phrase be reserved for Taco Bell.

 

[Thaumaturge]

And the new logo is freaking sweet. Best ampersand yet. (I imagine any non-gamer would find it hilarious how much of the discussion in this thread is about an ampersand...)

I texted the logo to my (gamer) wife. Her response?

"Ampersand".

Non-gamers likely find the discussion ridiculous, but that thing is speaking to the gamers.

Thaumaturge.

 

[DMZ2112]

Oh, what? WHAT?! Sold.

I'd call it a third.

• OD&D (won't count it, since it was the original)
• 1E
• 2E * (though the '95 reprints don't mention an edition either)
• BECMI/Rules Cyclopedia
• 3.0
• 3.5 *
• 4.0 (One could argue the Essentials, but I wont)

The only edition that ever referred to itself on a cover with the terminology "Xth Edition" was the first iteration of AD&D2 (e.g., the first time it was relevant). The D&D3.5 books had v3.5 on their covers to differentiate them from the virtually identical D&D3 books, but none of them referred to themselves as "D&D v3.5" -- rather, the game was D&D, and the version number was appended to the titles of the books. So "Players Handbook v3.5," "Dungeon Master Guide v3.5," etc.

Spiffy covers that really harken back to the full cover art of AD&D. Also, it appears that D&D might be having its FedEx moment, seeing as "D&D" appears at the top, and "Dungeons & Dragons" is a tiny little add on near the bottom (my Dad works for FedEx, and started there when it was still officially Federal Express).

FedEx! That was the example I was trying to remember last week. I was trying so hard to explain what I meant about "calling D&D D&D." Damn. Thanks, Kaodi.

The green dragon from the Starter Set also looks like Komarck.

Most of them look like Komarck, but that might be my enthusiasm talking.

Heh. This is how I interpret that:
"Your starter set will come with a product code that will allow you to access chargen rules online."
Which, again, works for me. Some may complain, but I think that's a good way to provide value while keeping the cost of the physical product down.

Man, where do you get that from? How is that a more logical conclusion from [MENTION=697]mearls[/MENTION] ' tweet than simply assuming the character generation information will just be in the box?