D&D (2024) So IS it a new edition?

[Remathilis]

It's also apples and oranges in my opinion. The changes to 5e are more drastic, but not interlinked like 3e was. That doesn't make them less than the 3.5e changes. It just makes them different.

3e didn't change classes, subclasses(prestige), feats and spells to anywhere close to the extent 5.5e has.

The 3.5 ranger and bard have entered the chat

 

[pawsplay]

Many games, especially MMOs, release updates that make pretty significant changes. Baldur's Gate 3 does not have a different game even though they released multiple changes, some of which were pretty major. Whether or not the PHB 2024 is a new version or just a patch update is a matter of opinion, which is pretty evenly split on opinion. But that's not what you asked - various products make changes large and small without labeling it a different version.

Every one of those patches is a different "version," it will tell what version number right on the screen.

 

[pawsplay]

My character in WoW plays very different in 2024 than he did in 2014. Still the same edition of the game.

You can't play your current character in the old version.

 

[pawsplay]

It's the Ship of Thesus all over again. If you alter or replace any of the rules in an RPG book, is it still the same book. Some will say that it is while others will say that it is something new. In a way, they are both right.

It's not really the Ship of Theseus. If anything it's the Sorites Paradox. But my point was that "edition" has a commonly accepted meaning in the book trade, and a related meaning in the board game trade. The RPG industry largely ignores both definitions and tries to make it mean something like "a new game" or a "a major enhancement of the game." In the first case, "edition" is misleading because a new edition is usually intended to update something, not replace it with something that may or many not be similar. In the latter case, it's arbitrary, because either fixing a section of the grappling rules with errata or adding a new class alone would be enough to justify calling something a new edition. Any time enough substantial errata is issued and they produce a new printing that incorporates it, that should really be called an edition. Knowing which edition you have should ideally tell you what rules it actually contains.

 

[Oofta]

Every one of those patches is a different "version," it will tell what version number right on the screen.

Depends on how you define version. If I have a spreadsheet in Excel, it still works without upgrade after the patch and if I open the same spreadsheet in an older version it will still load.

But it really, really doesn't matter. Call it what you will.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Knowing which edition you have should ideally tell you what rules it actually contains.

Yes, and what do we usually use to understand what edition a book is? It's not unusual for it to be the year it was published.

 

[Vael]

What makes it "in the middle"?

4e Essentials was completely mix-and-match with all previous 4e stuff, and did not invalidate anything from early 4e. Just like Tasha's or Xanathar's.

3.5ed Replaced a number of things from earlier, and but you could somewhat freely mix-and-match what was left from a rules perspective (until material was updated) without mechanical change.

2024 D&D not only replaced a number of things, but some of the things that haven't been replaced can't be freely mixed-and-matched, like you can't pick a 2014 feat for your 1st level feat, even though all of the prerequisites (none) are met.

If anything, 2024 D&D seems further than 3.5ed from 3ed.

I fully confess I didn't play 3.0, so this is more based on second hand knowledge than experience. But ... Psionics was completely reworked, no different casting stat depending on your specialization, death to Psionic attack modes. 3.5 also changed its skill list (Innuendo and Read Lips were skills?), revamped several core classes (Rangers always have to have a second take it seems), and such. My understanding is that 3.5 classes also superseded 3.0 classes on the spot, so this idea of free mix-and-match seems questionable, but again, never played 3.0.

My understanding, however, is 3.5 books didn't acknowledge 3.0, one had to go online to find conversion manuals. That's not the case here, as the 2024 PHB has guidelines written into it on how to use older material.

So I take issue that it was easier to use 3.0 material in 3.5 than it will be to use in 2014 material in a 2024 game. Free access to any feat at first level prior to 2024 was not universal, only variant human could. Some campaign specific backgrounds, or an optional Tasha rule (with DM approval considered you are basically making up a race species) offered limited access so this idea that 2024 character creation has suddenly cut off all these feats is not true considering you couldn't get them anyway. A free feat at first level was certainly a popular house rule, but I certainly never played with it.

So, yeah, I do still think 2014 and 2024 material are closer and more consistent than 3.0 and 3.5 material.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Don't get me wrong, it's ALSO marketing, but it's smarter, better marketing than they were saddled with once they started playing games with edition numbering (which was pretty much always). Getting off that bandwagon is difficult (as we can see by all the opinions) but it's not a bad idea, IMO.

By whose measure is being more opaque and confusing better?

 

[Vaalingrade]

What will happen if you call it something else?

The worst punishment of all: this thread.

 

[Daztur]

Yeah. "New" 5e (will work for a few years, after which you can probably just say "D&D").

"Want to play D&D? We use the latest stuff." Is already what most people do (assuming that they even need the second sentence).

If you're someone who switches editions regularly (say, playing a 1e game occasionally, or whatever) you can say "2024" or just "24". A lot of people use "5.24" but that works better in the typing than it does in the speaking.

If you really have to, you could join those hooked on a marketing scheme from 20 years ago (like @Maxperson above) and call it 5.5. I mean, I hate it, but anyone familiar with 3.5 will at least know what you mean by it...

I'm not so confident that 5.5e will displace 5e to the extent that yiu won't have to specify which version of D&D you'll be playing in a year or two. It'll probably be easily the biggest RPG on the market, but I don't think it'll ever get close to 5e's absolute dominance of the market at its peak. Don't think that was ever possible in the first place.