D&D (2024) The impending mess that will be backwards compatibility

Didn't the 4th edition PHB say it was 4th edition on the back cover in the text paragraph and in the blu bar? The 5th edition says it on the back cover too, right?
maybe, not sure, and who says 1DD will not have something to tell it apart? I certainly have no reason to believe it won’t
 

log in or register to remove this ad

The back-cover-text on the 2014 PHB refers to its companion books as "the fifth edition Dungeon Master's Guide and Monster Manual," but nowhere in or on the book does it self-identify itself as "fifth edition." Believe me, I just checked quite carefully.
you just said it shows 5th edition... what do you think "the fifth edition Dungeon Master's Guide and Monster Manual," means?
 



More personal attacks. I'm trying to express my thoughts without particularly insulting anyone. Would love it if you attempted the same.
It was not meant as an attack. Sorry that it came around this way.

To clarify: I really loved essentials, as you did. I think, with essential as the first book (and with good testing and proof reading) , 4e would not have failed.

I just mentioned, that maybe your tastes (and sometimes mine) are not always what the majority will like and buy.

This is why I were genuinely happy that you could enjoy the movie.
 
Last edited:

Sure it was, but it does not say so. So saying the 1DD PHB somehow has to include a version number when this did not and you had no complaints then is inconsistent.

The new 1DD PHB clearly is not mean to be thought of as the same book, no idea what makes you say so. Compatible does not mean ‘the same book’
Same edition, same name. Different book. Seems needlessly confusing to me.
 

you just said it shows 5th edition... what do you think "the fifth edition Dungeon Master's Guide and Monster Manual," means?
I'm saying that nowhere does it explicitly self-identify itself as the "fifth edition Player's Handbook," just that this particular printing of the Player's Handbook is usable with "the fifth edition of..." the other books. It's a semantic distinction, and a slightly weird one to get hung up on. I'd definitely consider it "fifth edition," in as much as that label has any empirical meaning.
 

In any case, it feels like they will need to change something in the descrption used on Amazon (say)...

About this item says: The essential rulebook for Dungeons & Dragons (5th edition)
ASIN: 0786965606
Item model number: WOCA9217
Release date: August 19, 2014

... because otherwise the old version could be sold just like it as far as used copies, right? And just changing the ASIN or Item Model Number feels like it would be confusing. Either something about which printing it is or which version or which edition in big letters somewhere would seem standard?
This is exactly what I mean by needlessly confusing. At the very least they should tell Amazon what to call it.
 

I'm saying that nowhere does it explicitly self-identify itself as the "fifth edition Player's Handbook," just that this particular printing of the Player's Handbook is usable with "the fifth edition of..."

and what does "this version is for the 5th edition books" doesn't tell you that it's 5e...
the other books. It's a semantic distinction, and a slightly weird one to get hung up on. I'd definitely consider it "fifth edition," in as much as that label has any empirical meaning.
 


Remove ads

Top