Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9266964" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Okay. Is it not still a &quot;ready-to-hand nearly-identical example&quot;? I feel like the relevant similarity is being drowned out merely because of a rather inconsequential few words.5e very, very strongly resembles 3e (by explicit intent.) The total gap between &quot;5e as published in 2014&quot; and &quot;5e as published in 2024&quot; is quite comparable to the gap between 3.0 and 3.5e. Naming conventions are primarily useful for the actively engaged community, and that community will tend to have an outsized influence on what conventions develop. I think it safe to say that, at the very least, &quot;5.5e&quot; has a head start relative to other names. Unless WotC does an awful lot of active lobbying to get people to use a different name, that head start will be a durable advantage. Given their explicit stance is that they're apparently going to try not to name the new books anything, they don't seem to be interested in doing that level of active lobbying for a specific name. Hence, it is the community that will decide. And that community seems to lean toward &quot;5.5e,&quot; if it leans anywhere at all.And, frankly, I think the fears about 3PP being negatively affected are unfounded. Folks that are so casual as to be genuinely ignorant of the Totally Not A Revision, We Pinky Swear are, 99 times out of 100, not going to be the kinds of people who would be buying 3PP to begin with. Such books are already chasing a niche of a niche, where folks need to know that there's something to look for in order to even be looking. The fact that products of yesteryear have so often used phrases like &quot;for the world's most popular roleplaying game&quot; etc. makes it rather questionable that it is so essential to avoid every tiny incongruity in naming.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 9266964, member: 6790260"] Okay. Is it not still a "ready-to-hand nearly-identical example"? I feel like the relevant similarity is being drowned out merely because of a rather inconsequential few words. 5e very, very strongly resembles 3e (by explicit intent.) The total gap between "5e as published in 2014" and "5e as published in 2024" is quite comparable to the gap between 3.0 and 3.5e. Naming conventions are primarily useful for the actively engaged community, and that community will tend to have an outsized influence on what conventions develop. I think it safe to say that, at the very least, "5.5e" has a head start relative to other names. Unless WotC does an awful lot of active lobbying to get people to use a different name, that head start will be a durable advantage. Given their explicit stance is that they're apparently going to try not to name the new books [I]anything,[/I] they don't seem to be interested in doing that level of active lobbying for a specific name. Hence, it is the community that will decide. And that community seems to lean toward "5.5e," if it leans anywhere at all. And, frankly, I think the fears about 3PP being negatively affected are unfounded. Folks that are so casual as to be genuinely ignorant of the Totally Not A Revision, We Pinky Swear are, 99 times out of 100, not going to be the kinds of people who would be buying 3PP to begin with. Such books are already chasing a niche of a niche, where folks need to know that there's something to look for in order to even be looking. The fact that products of yesteryear have so often used phrases like "for the world's most popular roleplaying game" etc. makes it rather questionable that it is so essential to avoid every tiny incongruity in naming. [/QUOTE]

Verification