D&D 5E Would you buy an updated PHB every year?

[Mistwell]

That's true, but I wouldn't feel safe about it. The PHB has been out a few weeks only, and people are already complaining about a few stuff. Nothing major at all, but still stuff that is so clearly fixable (e.g. Druid's near-immunity to damage with at-will wildshape use at 20th level, Fighter's unlimited HP healing via second wind) that they will have a hard time resisting the temptations to do so, if complaints are loud enough.

One very consistent thing we've seen with 5e is they've entirely ignored the volume of complaining, and only looked at quantity. Loud voices seem meaningless to them this time around. So if 50 loud people complain about the Druid's level 20 ability, but 500 people approve of it in survey feedback, I feel safe in saying they will go with the 500.

 

[Stalker0]

Mearls has also said they would only issue errata on things which are absolutely necessary - which there is wide agreement needs a change, as opposed to merely having a convenient change. Given that, I think there is a very very low chance of "hundreds of small changes".

So lets start a pool on when the halfling art gets erratted

 

[Mercurius]

I'd like to see them update the Basic document and new printings of the PHB with minor corrections, errata, and re-wording, but then I'd also like to see a "revised edition" ever 2-3 years for any moderate to major changes, including even some new art (and excision of bad art, like the infamous halfling).

I mean, what's wrong with improving the game? It doesn't have to be as large as 3.5, but what about "5.2" after two years that was still backwards compatible? I'd go for that.

 

[DMZ2112]

No, I wouldn't, but I also probably wouldn't bother pursuing or downloading an errata PDF, so I'm not sure if I'm really answering your question. I'm not such a rules wonk that I couldn't be perfectly happy playing this particular iteration of D&D5 for perpetuity.

What I'm kind of hoping both Paizo and Wizards are doing is getting off the edition treadmill. I would be fine with errata PDFs and updates to Dungeonscape/the PRD as necessary, yearly "targeted updates" as described by Mearls, and maybe updated core hardbacks every five years similar to a "point-five" edition, but what I would hope is that this would be an /ongoing/ solution, with the game evolving organically over time rather than being subject to a six-to-eight-year reboot cycle.

I would buy new core books every /five/ years if if meant my supplementary material never became obsolete or required baseline conversion. Yes, I would do that.

 

[DMZ2112]

So lets start a pool on when the halfling art gets erratted

One correction to my previous post: if they release an updated PHB next year with the halfling art replaced, I will buy that book. I would buy that book whenever it was published. I would buy that book /next month/.

 

[Juriel]

I'd gladly support a product that had been written well, with an eye towards ease of use and clarity.

This is, obviously, not that product.

Also, those halflings are an assault on readers.

 

[billd91]

Would I buy one every year? Not a chance.

I might, however, buy a single volume of fixes compiled after a few years. Call it a patch book of rule clarifications, rule revisions, whatever. I could conceivably go for that. That's probably more like what 3.5 should have been with revised rangers and bards and some revised spell descriptions rather than the surprisingly large overhaul it was.

 

[GameDoc]

No.
Hells no.

But, if once a year they added errata to the newest printing of the PHB that wouldn't be bad. Especially if also added to Basic and a free update document.
After three or four years you could choose to buy a newer copy. Or not.

But they should try and keep the revisions down to essential fixes. Even a 3.0 to 3.5 is too much.

This.

At some point you've got so many lines of errata text that there may be an incentive to incest in an updated hardcover. But it should be be a necessity, just a convenience if you want to take it.

Barring that, I might buy a version with the same content if it represented a better-organized presentation.

 

[GameDoc]

No, I wouldn't, but I also probably wouldn't bother pursuing or downloading an errata PDF, so I'm not sure if I'm really answering your question. I'm not such a rules wonk that I couldn't be perfectly happy playing this particular iteration of D&D5 for perpetuity.

What I'm kind of hoping both Paizo and Wizards are doing is getting off the edition treadmill. I would be fine with errata PDFs and updates to Dungeonscape/the PRD as necessary, yearly "targeted updates" as described by Mearls, and maybe updated core hardbacks every five years similar to a "point-five" edition, but what I would hope is that this would be an /ongoing/ solution, with the game evolving organically over time rather than being subject to a six-to-eight-year reboot cycle.

I would buy new core books every /five/ years if if meant my supplementary material never became obsolete or required baseline conversion. Yes, I would do that.

And this too.

 

[Jester David]

As an example, I purchased a second copy of the Pathfinder Core Rulebook a few months back.
After six printings, the book has a fair amount of errata, mostly focused on Stealth and the monk but some other small changes. And my Core Rulebook was pretty beaten up and I had some extra cash. So *choosing* to get a new copy was fine. And I know that copy will also last a while, hopefully as long as my first.

If WotC puts out heavy errata like they did for 4e, and you're *really* incentivized to buy a new book, I might paradoxically be less motivated, as I know that they might (read: will) make more changes in a few months. There's always the feeling that what you're purchasing is temporary, and if you wait until next time it will be even more complete. I'm incentivized to wait.
(And, again, I did this with Pathfinder, delaying my purchase of a back-up Core Rulebook until they released a new printing.)

Errata with each printing is fine. Especially if it's just that: correcting typos and clearing up RAW when needed.
Annual updates are also fine, so long as there's a conversion document that's only 1-2 pages and can be kept with the book.

But when there's lots of rebalancing and rules correction, it devalues the purchase. If there's a lot of corrections it's harder to reference the rulebook as any content could be updated content, so all content needs to be treated as potentially errated content.