5.5E The future of edition changes and revisions

Without even finishing the post, much less the thread:

2e was not embraced that warmly. Anecdotally I knew of more groups not playing then did. Sales of core books also never got to where they were in the 1980s.

Forget not T$R.
We rejected it…but it is the DM did grab the monstrous manual
 

log in or register to remove this ad

A few thoughts.

1. Lore changes matter a lot less than people seem to think. All you have to do is compare a 5e Monster Manual to an earlier one. Virtually every single monster is changed and often changed significantly. Either the background lore of the race is added to or sometimes completely revised and no one cares. You never hear about how they changed all this lore going into 5e. Because they certainly did, but, again, no one cares. So, all this tempest in a teacup about ASI's and changing this or that race is just the whipping boy du jour and will fade away once people find some other bone to chew on.

2. After ten years, it's not unreasonable to think that we could use a refreshed Core 3. Does anyone really think that's it's unreasonable? That we've learned so little about the game and game design in the past ten+ years that we can't revise the game?

3. The OP mentioned how there wasn't much kerfuffle when 3e rolled out. Umm, there's a pretty large community over at Thunderfoot that might disagree with you there. Never minding an entire OSR community that rejects 3e completely. Might not be as large as the Paizo community but, it isn't small.

4. So long as they don't massively change things, most of the 5e books will still be viable. Sure, you might have some minor changes to race - but that's really easy to institute. Heck, it's quite possible that the majority of people won't even notice. What are the ASI's, without looking it up, for a Halfling? Sure, you might know it offhand, you D&D nerd you :D, but, most people have no idea. Changing a svirfneblin's abilities? Virtually no one is going to notice. We're talking about a race that is played at a tiny, tiny fraction of tables. 99.9% of tables won't even know the difference. And, none of that will impact, say, the modules or splats, which mean that you can still play Hoard of the Dragon Queen after the revision without any difficulties.
My preference would have been to make a 6e, incorporating any and all changes they wanted to make and accompanied by a new campaign setting conforming to their new sensibilities. Then I could have happily ignored it and continued with my heavily houseruled 5e game. Big mid-edition changes bug the heck out of me. I don't like the majority of what they're doing, and the worst part is that 3rd party publishers making things I do like are likely to "follow the leader" on this stuff.
 

From 3.0 to 3.5 there was a strong financial incentive to obsolete the 3.0 books and sell the whole line back again to the same audience. The lack of market growth and revenue stream from the splat mill required it.

Now there is significant revenue from licence arrangements with Roll20 and FantasyGrounds, they are getting subscription revenue from D&D beyond and some very sweet player data. They are dropping an edition change in to a much larger and expanding market. That amounts to a very strong incentive to not upset the apple cart.
That is why I would expect additive changes with little direct replacement of older content. Power creep but to be honest in my opinion there is less power creep so far than introduced in the average splat in the 3.5 era.
There is at least one rather lengthy thread here discussing/complaining about the recent direct replacement of older content. I have seen very little indication that any additive changes are on the horizon.
 

my first Con I was 14ish I went with my best friend and she was called names I can not type here and I was told to go pound sand becuse 2e was training weeks for babies real men play the one and only Advanced Dungeons and Dragons… we had been playing for a few months maybe (had the book a bit longer but couldn’t get a group together) the only reason I didn’t quit was because my best friend said “gee must be loser day then for that table”

Her comebacks are way more curse fueled today.
I know you are from New ENgland... please tell me this wasn't a big con nor is it still running?
 

UngainlyTitan

Legend
Supporter
There is at least one rather lengthy thread here discussing/complaining about the recent direct replacement of older content. I have seen very little indication that any additive changes are on the horizon.
Here we run into the nomenclature of "differences of small changes". I do not regard changes like new version of the monster or even stuff like the Tasha changes for the ranger as invalidating older content. You can build a Hunter Ranger in my game and even replace Primeval Awareness and keep Favoured Enemy, if you want.
I am quite willing to use a Monster Manual Archmage with full slot progression and spells along side a magic user from the newer books with a multiuse Ranged/Melee Spell attack and a more limited spell list and no spell slots.
I do not regard that as a change of any significance. As for lore, I have never been bothered by lore over the last 40 years so why should I start now.
I also regard the controversies here as a storm in a teacup. It is a relatively small number of people with some particular issues. I am not denigrating those issues, they are important to those people to varying degrees. Some will move on and keep their version of the game going, other will play the new version and more will accept some changes, forbid other and houserule some as well. As was ever done.
In the grand scheme of things, ENWorld forum users in their entirety are not worth WoTC marketing getting out of bed in the morning.
 

Here we run into the nomenclature of "differences of small changes". I do not regard changes like new version of the monster or even stuff like the Tasha changes for the ranger as invalidating older content. You can build a Hunter Ranger in my game and even replace Primeval Awareness and keep Favoured Enemy, if you want.
I am quite willing to use a Monster Manual Archmage with full slot progression and spells along side a magic user from the newer books with a multiuse Ranged/Melee Spell attack and a more limited spell list and no spell slots.
I do not regard that as a change of any significance. As for lore, I have never been bothered by lore over the last 40 years so why should I start now.
I also regard the controversies here as a storm in a teacup. It is a relatively small number of people with some particular issues. I am not denigrating those issues, they are important to those people to varying degrees. Some will move on and keep their version of the game going, other will play the new version and more will accept some changes, forbid other and houserule some as well. As was ever done.
In the grand scheme of things, ENWorld forum users in their entirety are not worth WoTC marketing getting out of bed in the morning.
I don't disagree about WotC's lack of interest in ENWorld, but they have clearly made changes recently intended to replace large amounts of material with new versions. Whether or not those changes matter to an individual are irrelevant to that fact.
 

UngainlyTitan

Legend
Supporter
I don't disagree about WotC's lack of interest in ENWorld, but they have clearly made changes recently intended to replace large amounts of material with new versions. Whether or not those changes matter to an individual are irrelevant to that fact.
What is stopping you using the older material. What old stuff specifically no longer allowed?
 

What is stopping you using the older material. What old stuff specifically no longer allowed?
Nothing is stopping me, and I am and will continue to use the older material, houseruled as I see fit.

On DDB, WotC has begun moving content that they have replaced (including the entirety of Volo's and Mordenkainen's, among a few other things) into "legacy" content that in the next few days will no longer be available for purchase. As far as they're concerned, that is clearly a direct replacement of content (and in some cases a removal of such). There is no reason to believe that WotC won't follow suit with AL and eventually physical product, including the 2014 core books when they get around to replacing them.

That of course doesn't have to affect whether or not a particular person or group can use that content, but it is a clear indication of WotC's intentions, and where they want the community to go.
 

Rabulias

the Incomparably Shrewd and Clever
My preference would have been to make a 6e, incorporating any and all changes they wanted to make and accompanied by a new campaign setting conforming to their new sensibilities. Then I could have happily ignored it and continued with my heavily houseruled 5e game. Big mid-edition changes bug the heck out of me. I don't like the majority of what they're doing, and the worst part is that 3rd party publishers making things I do like are likely to "follow the leader" on this stuff.
Barring a 4e/Pathfinder split among the playerbase, 99% of third party publishers will follow the current version of D&D, whether it is 5.5e or 6e. If you are happy with 5e as it stands, I would think your preference would be for 5.5e, as it will be easier to convert that material to 5e than it would be to convert 6e material.

For myself, I am pretty satisfied with 5e as it stands. The power creep of the recent books does not appeal to me. And I see the benefit of simplified, streamlined monsters, but I don't want them to be the only option -- I would like multiple varieties! Easy-to-run monsters for beginners or more casual games, and versions with more options for those who want more complex opponents. Easier-to-run monsters sound like a middle ground between 4e's minion rules and full, complex creatures.

The anniversary edition will attempt to rebalance the power level for all player options. If they succeed and it's still fun, I might embrace the new rules. IMO the 5e chassis makes it easy to tweak the rules, so I can mix and match, using the elements I like. That will be easier with a 5.5e than with a 6e.
 


UngainlyTitan

Legend
Supporter
Nothing is stopping me, and I am and will continue to use the older material, houseruled as I see fit.

On DDB, WotC has begun moving content that they have replaced (including the entirety of Volo's and Mordenkainen's, among a few other things) into "legacy" content that in the next few days will no longer be available for purchase. As far as they're concerned, that is clearly a direct replacement of content (and in some cases a removal of such). There is no reason to believe that WotC won't follow suit with AL and eventually physical product, including the 2014 core books when they get around to replacing them.

That of course doesn't have to affect whether or not a particular person or group can use that content, but it is a clear indication of WotC's intentions, and where they want the community to go.
I think we are going to have to agree to differ, at a minimum for me to regard something as an edition change to PHB and DMG would have to be replaced with some significant changes. Colo's and Mordenkainen's going out of print while the basic rules of the game is defined by the 2014 rule books is not an edition change.
Now if a new PHB and DMG are printed in 2024 that can be legitimately called a new edition but if I and my player can play characters from the 2014 book along side I am not going to be bothered.
It we cannot then we will consider the changes at the time and whether or not to follow them.
 

Hussar

Legend
Nothing is stopping me, and I am and will continue to use the older material, houseruled as I see fit.

On DDB, WotC has begun moving content that they have replaced (including the entirety of Volo's and Mordenkainen's, among a few other things) into "legacy" content that in the next few days will no longer be available for purchase. As far as they're concerned, that is clearly a direct replacement of content (and in some cases a removal of such). There is no reason to believe that WotC won't follow suit with AL and eventually physical product, including the 2014 core books when they get around to replacing them.

That of course doesn't have to affect whether or not a particular person or group can use that content, but it is a clear indication of WotC's intentions, and where they want the community to go.
I'm going to question your definition of "large".

I mena, even if you replace Volo's and Mordenkainen's, how big of a change is that actually? Most of the changes are pretty minor - some language cleanups and whatnot. I mean, if they change how archmages work, for example, how much will that actually impact most people's tables? Most creatures DON'T cast spells right now. Creatures with actual spells are already the minority of creatures in the game. If we then exclude creatures that have magical abilities that aren't classes as spells already (like a dragon's breath weapon, or an Aboleth's Enslave), we're talking about even fewer creatures.

To drill right down to it, exactly how many changes are we actually talking about? "A lot" is pretty vague and doesn't really tell me anything. I think there's a danger here of seeing a bunch of small changes and thinking, "Wow, they are changing so much" when, in actual fact, most of the changes will not matter at all to most tables at any given time.
 


WOTC has no incentive to make major changes to the books. Those arn't the money makers. The books are just an IP farm to support merchandise.

Expect things like D&D themed restaurants, a cinematic universe, and a streaming service!
 

Hussar

Legend
Interesting. And, honestly, pretty in keeping with what I said. Most of those changes will have very little impact on most tables.

Looking through those links, most of it is simply clarifying language. A few bits and bobs and frankly, mostly stuff that no one is actually going to notice.
 

Interesting. And, honestly, pretty in keeping with what I said. Most of those changes will have very little impact on most tables.

Looking through those links, most of it is simply clarifying language. A few bits and bobs and frankly, mostly stuff that no one is actually going to notice.
Almost every spellcaster suffered a drastic cut to spells known, and replaced commonly used spells with abilities that are somehow no longer spells. Yes, its a small percentage of total monsters, but the ones it does affect are in many cases often used or spotlighted in games. Its a serious blow to process simulation, which as you know is very important to me and already an area where D&D needs more help than it used to. Combined with a series of major lore changes (most of which I also don't like), and everything WotC is doing points to a future i don't want.
 

Expect things like D&D themed restaurants, a cinematic universe, and a streaming service!
so far we have a movie... and as much as I hope it is seen by general audiences to be awesome, I think that your dream of D&D themed restaurants, a cinematic universe, and a streaming service is premature (not saying WotC isn't ALSO counting there chicks before they hatch they may be)
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
Almost every spellcaster suffered a drastic cut to spells known, and replaced commonly used spells with abilities that are somehow no longer spells. Yes, its a small percentage of total monsters, but the ones it does affect are in many cases often used or spotlighted in games. Its a serious blow to process simulation, which as you know is very important to me and already an area where D&D needs more help than it used to. Combined with a series of major lore changes (most of which I also don't like), and everything WotC is doing points to a future i don't want.
5E already isn't a process simulation system, ao it's not a fundamental change.
 

so far we have a movie... and as much as I hope it is seen by general audiences to be awesome, I think that your dream of D&D themed restaurants, a cinematic universe, and a streaming service is premature (not saying WotC isn't ALSO counting there chicks before they hatch they may be)
How about we start with a D&D themed fast food combo?
 


Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top