D&D (2024) We’ll be merging the One D&D and D&D forums shortly

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

Yeah tbh I don’t forsee any issue with a DM in 2026 using a mix of player options and monsters and magic items and just using the rules that make sense for them between memory and what’s in the most current printing of the phb.

I foresee plenty of problems when the DM and players have different ideas about what the rules do depending on what book they've read. But I usually play with people who try to learn the rules. If everyone just goes with what the DM says, you don't need a rulebook at all, regardless of edition.

 

[Parmandur]

We once played OD&D, AD&D, and B/X at the same table for an extended period of time with no trouble. True fact.

I started with 3.3-ish: 3.5, but not consistently. 5.

 

[Parmandur]

No, they’re being overcautious with their wording, because online fan communities (especially on the most popular social media platforms) are obnoxiously pedantic.

Because “you get your Druid circle 1 level later” isn’t an incompatibility by any measure but the most egregiously pedantic.

wotc hasn’t refuted there being revision in the new core books. They’ve denied (correctly) the claims that it’s a new game.

Because it isn’t a new game, it’s 5th edition D&D.

I don't expect most active players I know would be able to tell the difference between the sets of Classes without doing a side by side comparison

 

[Parmandur]

But I usually play with people who try to learn the rules.

This is alien to my experience.

 

[MockingBird]

I don't expect most active players I know would be able to tell the difference between the sets of Classes without doing a side by side comparison

Same

 

[Mannahnin]

Okay, sure, names are useful. But 5.5e isn't going to predominate. The "precedent" is a single edition, and notably an edition I often have often seen others refer to as 3.X, because they include both the before and after into a single group.

Meanwhile '24 DnD, OneDnD, anniversary edition, "the new rules", those are very viable contenders for simple, straightforward names that are descriptive and have a single, quite large advantage over the other two major contenders. And that is, unlike 5.5e or 6e, they don't have the baggage of a specific perspective/take on the game. Most everyone who I see using 5.5 tend to have very specific, often negative, views on the ruleset coming up, and the company in general. People who have picked up on that (like myself) are going to explicitly avoid using those terms. And since it is the people who like the new rules, and want to spread them who will be giving the name out to people, not those with negative views.... shrug I just don't see 5.5 catching on.

If you want to refer to both WotC 5e book sets collectively as 5.x, I'm down.

I've always used 3E or 3.0 to refer to that edition when I'm talking about that edition, 3.5 when I'm talking specifically about that one, and 3.x when I'm speaking more generally about stuff common to them both.

So far I've mostly used 5.5 to talk about the new books, in part because of the precedent (although I understand some folks don't think it's an important one). I think 5E Revised (5ER or 5Er) is starting to look more accurate, though, for two reasons. 1) The revisions I've seen so far seem a bit less extensive than 3E to 3.5. 2) WotC isn't actually printing "5.5" on the books like they did with 3.5.

I don't have any particular objection to D&D24 or the even shorter D24 or 5E24 or other brief variations either. I just want something compact and pithy. If it fits into the existing edition discussion numeric conventions (0E/OD&D, 1E, B/X, BEMI, 2E, RC, 3E, 3.5, 4E, 5E) aesthetically that's preferable.

Whatever term the major youtubers and tiktokers use to differentiate "new D&D" from "old D&D" is probably going to be what sticks in the larger community.

Yes, I suspect you're right.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

This is alien to my experience.

That's the great thing about D&D, it works for so many different playstyles!

 

[EzekielRaiden]

That's the great thing about D&D, it works for so many different playstyles!

Well. It works for some different playstyles.

Others are, these days, actively excluded. And this is hailed as a victory. Long live the big tent, but not so big that it lets those styles in.

 

[CleverNickName]

I'm probably going to regret asking this, and if the answer is obvious I apologize for not following all 22+ pages of this thread very closely, but:

Well. It works for some different playstyles.

Others are, these days, actively excluded. And this is hailed as a victory. Long live the big tent, but not so big that it lets those styles in.

Which styles are you referring to?

 

[Mannahnin]

I'm probably going to regret asking this, and if the answer is obvious I apologize for not following all 22+ pages of this thread very closely, but:

Which styles are you referring to?

Are you TRYING to get the thread locked?