D&D (2024) What is your preferred naming for the 2014 and 2024 versions of D&D?

[EzekielRaiden]

Thus far, if we add up all the many many ways of saying "It's 2014 vs 2024," assuming Schneeland didn't vote and thus adding 1 more for them, it happens to be precisely tied for "5.0/5.5" vs "all the ways of saying 2014 vs 2024."

Now, whether those folks would like being lumped together, I'm not sure. But I'm inclined to think they would not. It is, of course, still early days.

 

[Nikosandros]

I'm going to call it "Bob".

 

[Parmandur]

I'm going to call it "Bob".

Still better than "5.5"

 

[aco175]

I'm going to call it "Bob".

I'd be onboard with 5ob, called sob. I'm still thinking that these will all settle over the next year and one will win out. I plan to call it 5.5 if I need to differentiate things. If something else wins out, then fine, but I will try to keep 5.5 until then.

 

[R_J_K75]

Looking at the back covers of the PHB, DMG and MM, they all say...revised and expanded...companion to the PHB (2024), DMG (2024) and MM (2025). As with the (2014) versions the only mention of fifth edition is on the back cover so that seems to confirm what WotC plans to call it, so that would be my choice. I think they should have given a more definitive nomenclature to differentiate it from previous versions of the game.

 

[Parmandur]

Looking at the back covers of the PHB, DMG and MM, they all say...revised and expanded...companion to the PHB (2024), DMG (2024) and MM (2025). As with the (2014) versions the only mention of fifth edition is on the back cover so that seems to confirm what WotC plans to call it, so that would be my choice. I think they should have given a more definitive nomenclature to differentiate it from previous versions of the game.

Well, the main reason to make a clear differential ia if there is a break in the product line. However, since the only vooks they have sold for a decade are compatible and they aren't making a break in the product line...making a clear difference traction would actually be more confusing for the average person than helpful. WotC approach makes solid sense.

 

[R_J_K75]

Well, the main reason to make a clear differential ia if there is a break in the product line. However, since the only vooks they have sold for a decade are compatible and they aren't making a break in the product line...making a clear difference traction would actually be more confusing for the average person than helpful. WotC approach makes solid sense.

I suppose that logic will hold true if they continue printing the 2014 core books. I'd assume they will continue printing the adventures, but the 3 cores, Xanathars and Tashas most likely not; I'd put Mordenkainens in there too.

 

[Parmandur]

I suppose that logic will hold true if they continue printing the 2014 core books. I'd assume they will continue printing the adventures, but the 3 cores, Xanathars and Tashas most likely not; I'd put Mordenkainens in there too.

Only the core, though: Xanathar's, Tasha's, Monsters of the Multiverse and all the other 5E books have been set up to work with the '24 rule books. WotC confirmed to Christian Hoffer that all 5E Suvclasses will be able to work with the new Class chasis, and there will be specific guidance about using old Rave or Background options. So of they keep all the supplements in print, it would be co fusing to customers to nro make it clear they still work.

 

[M.L. Martin]

Irrelevant.

 

[cbwjm]

It largely doesn't matter, I'll likely call the edition as a whole 5e and use 5.5 if I need to differentiate between early or new. This is pretty much what I do for 3e/3.5. I think that no matter what people choose, others will understand what they mean, at least on ENworld.