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

[Sulicius]

It doesn’t really matter to me whether it is called a new edition or not, since it’s backwards compatible.

I have just found it is easier to explain to my players and friends as a new edition.

 

[Zardnaar]

Voted no it's really a 5.5 in everything but name.

3.0 to 3.5 or 1E to 2E is the best comparison or maybe the old Basic line.

So it's a revised/5.5/glorified errata take your pick.

 

[Minigiant]

You do realize that 5e is the simplest ruleset, right? FAR simpler than 3e was.

Again I mean exceptions based.

5e has more exceptions based design than 3e.

3e has a more complex base but there are few ways in the PHB to "get around" the core rules.

In 5e core, your fighter can get 2 actions, reroll saves, and now reroll attacks.

In 3e core, it's 5ft and full attack or move and 1 attack or spell. No bonus action attack. No extra action. No rerolls. No reckless attack (heedless charge was a supplement feat), No cunning action. No Cantrips.

The 2024 update barely changed any core rules. It's all exceptions based buffs and nerfs.

 

[mamba]

It could be an edition, a revision, a version, a. 2, or a smerp. But the fact that the marketeers in charge have pointedly refused to give it a name other than D&D has left the job to the community

it is a revision and its name is D&D 2024 core books / PHB 2024, all of this straight from WotC…

 

[mamba]

Theory - those who dislike the overall changes are much more likely to call this a new edition?

I dislike them and I do not, for what that is worth

 

[KYRON45]

PHB 2024 is wordy? I mean, it wasn't me that named it - I have no stake - but I really don't get that assertion.

It's simple logic really. "you" said it and "they" didn't so "you" must be wrong.

 

[Daztur]

It doesn’t really matter to me whether it is called a new edition or not, since it’s backwards compatible.

I have just found it is easier to explain to my players and friends as a new edition.

"Backward compatible" isn't an objective standard. It's all a sliding scale. I've played a very fun campaign in which the players used 5e stats and adventured in a 0e dungeon with me using unconverted 0e HPs, spell effects, etc. and handwaving everything that didn't work. Was so much fun I did another campaign with 5e characters and a Basic D&D dungeon. Worked fine. Does that mean that 5e is backwards compatible with 0e? No, not really.

Meanwhile a bunch of stuff like how races and backgrounds work in 5e are completely different from how they work in 5.5e. Can you make it work? Sure, but they're pretty different. Meanwhile 5e subclasses aren't compatible with 5.5e classes as the levels at which a lot of classes get subclass abilities are different in many cases. Is a 5e monk compatible with a 5.5e party? Technically yes, bit it'll be hilariously underpowered to the extent that it'll cause a lot of problems.

"Backwards compatibility" isn't going to be determined by anything that WotC says, it'll be determined by how many DMs mix and match 5e and 5.5e books. On the one hand as a kid we mixed 1e, 2e, and Basic books pretty freely and nobody really gave a naughty word if something was published for 1e or 2e. But on the other hand 3.5e was backwards compatible with 3e, officially at least, but I almost never saw DMs allowing 3e content in there 3.5e games so any claims about backwards compatibility didn't matter at all. Same with PF 1e and 3.5e.

Now if your home DM lets you stick Tasha's content on your 5.5e character then you're good to go, but I'm willing to bet that by the end of next year there'll be a pretty hard line between 5.5e and 5e tables and most DMs are not going to let players mix and match stuff.

 

[Oofta]

Well, what I didn't say was that Dungeons and Dragons is in a Doomsday scenario. I also didn't predict the imminent death of Dungeons and Dragons. You said those things.

I did say that the 5.5 edition will probably last about as long as the 3.0 edition. It will be a short edition.

The problem is it will be hard to tell when this one ends and the next begins because, I believe, there will be no future editions. Instead, we'll get updates to our digital assets and maybe a splatbook or two.

It is my opinion that Wizards of the Coast is wisely committed to the Second Great Digitization of the Game.

It's only going to last 3 years and there's not going to be another version ever is pretty much a doomsday scenario. Except now you're qualifying that with saying you're talking about that there will be splat books ... which is not at all the same thing as what happened with 3E. I doubt we will have to wait 3 years for the first splat book.

As far as going all digital I'll believe it when I see it, it's not going to be any time soon. I think it's a claim being pushed for eyeballs by certain streamers that has no basis in reality. On Amazon alone they're still selling thousand of PHBs every month and have been for a long time. Are they providing digital options? Of course. But the cost of printing the books is minimal compared to the cost of the development of what goes into the books and a lot of people still like physical copies.

At the same time I see no reason to think we'll see "digital updates" at the level of the 2014 revisions any time soon. It' been a profitable business model for them, there's no reason to change. Unless of course there's some kind of doomsday scenario.

 

[KYRON45]

I do love that new book smell.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Why would it matter if it was a new edition?

Because a big company told us to stop using that word.