RPG Evolution: The Half-Edition Shuffle

The next edition of Dungeons & Dragons is finally on the horizon, but it's not here just yet. So when do publishers makes the shift?

The next edition of Dungeons & Dragons is finally on the horizon, but it's not here just yet. So when do publishers makes the shift?

thehalfeditionshuffle.png

A Historical Model​

D&D has been through several editions in recent memory, but few match the recent transition between two compatible editions. Although backwards compatibility is often promised, it's rarely delivered. And there's also the consideration of the thousands of small press publishers created through the Open Game License movement, which didn't exist before Third Edition. Of all the edition shifts, the 3.0 to 3.5 transition seems closest to what D&D is going through right now, so it's a good place to start this thought experiment.

Compatible, Sort Of​

Fifth Edition's transition to Sixth involves tweaks to the game. Those tweaks seemed largely cosmetic, at first. With the release of Mordenkainen's Monsters of the Multiverse, it's clear that the spellcasting section of monsters is going to be significantly changed. In short, while players may find their characters compatible with the latest edition of D&D, DMs may find their monsters aren't. And that's a problem for publishers. But mechanically, all of these issues can be addressed. What really matters is what customers think. And that's often shaped by branding.

What a Half-Edition Means​

The transition between Third Edition and 3.5 was more significant than many publishers were expecting. You can see a list on RPG Stack Exchange, which shows just how much the new edition changed the game.

This did not go unnoticed by consumers. The OGL movement was still developing but it caught many publishers by surprise, including the company I wrote for at the time, Monkeygod Publishing (they're no longer in business). When we released my hardcover book Frost & Fur, the only identifier was the D20 System logo. Little did we know that it was imperative to identify the book as 3.5-compatible (which it was), because stores wouldn't carry it and consumers wouldn't buy it if it wasn't.

There wasn't nearly as much communication from WIzards of the Coast back then as to how to prepare for the edition change, much less columns from the company explaining their strategy. More communication about the upcoming edition may mitigate its impact on third-party publishers.

Between the DM's Guild and DriveThruRPG, there is now an ecosystem that can more readily update itself without taking up shelf space or clogging up inventory. Digital products can be changed, covers can be rebranded, and newsletters can announce the update. Wizards of the Coast has also given considerable lead time on the coming changes by announcing the edition well in advance and updating books piecemeal so developers can see what changed. But there's still one important piece of the puzzle.

What Do Consumers Think?​

One of the ongoing concerns for supporting publishers of Third Edition was how the Open Game License would be updated and, at least as important, how to identify that compatibility.

Updating the OGL enables publishers to ensure their products are compatible. The OGL doesn't specify stat block structure, so it may not even be necessary to update the license much if at all.

Identifying compatibility will be even more critical. At some point, publishers will start identifying their products as Sixth Edition compatible. And that will happen when consumers shift their spending habits.

The Changeover​

But first, WOTC has to declare that Sixth Edition has officially arrived. Wizards was hesitant to put a number on Fifth Edition, preferring instead to indicate it was simply D&D to potentially head off edition controversy. Failure to do that in a timely fashion (or worse, failure to recognize a new edition at all and continue calling it Fifth Edition) will cause potential confusion in the marketplace, with both consumers and publishers.

At some point the tide will turn and consumers will expect compatibility with the new edition. That change is complicated by the fact that Sixth Edition should be largely compatible with Fifth Edition. But only consumers can decide that for sure; if they don't feel it is, there will be a sharp drop off in Fifth Edition buying habits. For smaller publishers, they'll stay close to the market to determine when that shift is happening and how to transition smoothly without harming their business model.

Getting it right can be lucrative. Getting it wrong can sink a company. The market convulsed massively when 3.5 came out, wiping out publishers and game store stock that were unprepared for the change. Here's hoping with enough foresight and planning, we don't have a repeat of the 3.0 transition.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Michael Tresca

Michael Tresca


log in or register to remove this ad





Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
Maybe you quoted the wrong post of me then?
So you read carefully, but then quoted the post where i did not suggest taking a feat?
Um, that's the point. Go back and re-read what I said more carefully. My words are about you NOT suggesting the old characters take a feat. ;)

Not that the issue would have change had you suggested it. I just didn't attribute such a suggestion to you in my responses.
 

eyeheartawk

#1 Enworld Jerk™
By less accessible do you mean e.g. for visually impaired people? Or is it that tactical combat supposedly makes the game harder. I'd probably disagree with the latter - lots of people are quite familiar with board games and might well find that more accessible than theatre-of-the-mind combat.
I'm simply saying that going from the way to it is now, which is, not requiting a grid and miniatures, while still supporting that style of play to going to a tactical design that requires a grid and minis turns alot of people off straight away. Why would they do that?
 

Um, that's the point. Go back and re-read what I said more carefully. My words are about you NOT suggesting the old characters take a feat. ;)

Not that the issue would have change had you suggested it. I just didn't attribute such a suggestion to you in my responses.

That was the post you quoted:

And they probably are.
And still if you can say: just take x from the old edition and divide it by 2 to get the value y for the next version, it is backwards compatible, because the function is easily applied even on the fly
(At least for most 4th graders... ).
If you played played a 3.0 adventure and they told you that 3/4 cover gives +7 AC now only gives +5 AC you deduct 2 and go on. Or if you are told to make a pick pocket check, you know that you now have to make a sleight of hand check. Or when you take your character that had chosen tough and skill focus, you can keep that character but now have to add level - 2 hp and 1 to the relevant skill check. Or if you have improved critical and a magic weapon that improves the critical range, you don't add it anymore.
You could also say, leave your character as is, it is roughly the same.
If that is not compatible for you, that is a pretty narrow definition. My opinion strongly differs from yours.

And this was your answer:
Feats are not minor and do not leave the characters roughly the same. If the new PCs have to pick up a feat and convert to the new version in order to be on par with new PCs, that's not backwards compatible.

So I thought your post was an answer to the post you quoted. I now understood that you meant my suggestion from an earlier post. So I apologize if that was not obvious to me.

And maybe my comprehension fails me today.
 



Remove ads

Remove ads

Top