D&D 5E Would you rebuy all the books if they were updated?
- Thread starter Thank Dog
- Start date
Olaf the Stout
Legend
Possibly. It would depend how many years from now the core rulebooks were updated and how many changes were made.
A shorter time, or few changes mean that I'd be less likely to re-buy the core rulebooks. It would definitely be a judgement call for me.
A shorter time, or few changes mean that I'd be less likely to re-buy the core rulebooks. It would definitely be a judgement call for me.
Jester David
Hero
I remember switching to 3.5 from 3.0.
I was at a comic con with friends and planning on DMing a one-shot and thought having a second set of books would be handy. The books had just come out and all the vendors were selling them three-for-$75, but one was selling them three-for-$50.
That's why I bought the books. I might not have otherwise. Or at least not until I got into organized play.
I'm really not interested in buying the books again so soon. In the past fourteen years I've bought five PHB style rulebooks. Six if you count Pathfinder. I'm averaging one every two-and-a-half years. That,s too damn often.
Just getting 5e was tricky for me to justify. I have enough games. I'm not buying a book that is mostly the same.
I was at a comic con with friends and planning on DMing a one-shot and thought having a second set of books would be handy. The books had just come out and all the vendors were selling them three-for-$75, but one was selling them three-for-$50.
That's why I bought the books. I might not have otherwise. Or at least not until I got into organized play.
I'm really not interested in buying the books again so soon. In the past fourteen years I've bought five PHB style rulebooks. Six if you count Pathfinder. I'm averaging one every two-and-a-half years. That,s too damn often.
Just getting 5e was tricky for me to justify. I have enough games. I'm not buying a book that is mostly the same.
Mercule
Adventurer
I understand editions happen. I've seen it in other games. D&D actually tends to be less frequent than some. I'm not railing against moving to a new edition with cleaned up rules -- though I'd like changes to be more of the order of 1E to 2E or 3E to 3.5E, not the sweeping rewrites of 3E to 4E or 4E to 5E (although I like 5E better than either 3E or 4E).
I also think that getting player feedback is good. I just don't like the "living system" concept. An edition is based on the core books, especially the PHB. That needs to be solid enough, before release, to last the duration. I'd be okay with a reprint with some clarifications -- genuine clarifications, not changes; I believe they did that in 2E, though I don't remember for sure.
Changes to the core rules at a sufficient level to warrant a new PHB is pretty much the definition of a new edition. To "errata" things to the point that the original PHB doesn't actual contain what you need for RAW play at a table is indicative of a mentality that's more house-rules or playtest focused, not creating a stable, approachable product.
If I create a new subsystem for descriptive critical hits (to pick a classic) or post an Eberron conversion to 5E, there's quite a bit of leeway for me to come back and tweak things. Those are table rules that I'm sharing with other tables, one hobbyist to another. Do as you will.
If I were to get officially licensed to write the Eberron conversion, there would be a higher expectation of quality. If I find out that the printer didn't include the sentence about "recharges after a long rest" or I omitted it, thinking it was implicit, then it's "errata" for me to post a clarification and/or fix it in future printings. It's not okay for me to decide later that it's underpowered and officially change it to scale with level (or whatever). That wasn't part of the rule when written. I can certainly put it in some sort of "recommended changes" or even a FAQ, but the published rule is still the published rule for the duration of the edition.
That's not treating it as a published work. Books aren't video games. They don't get patches or DLC. The closest you get are additional source books, which are additive, not replacements. It's a restriction of the medium and a professional lives with it.
Is there a threshold? Sure. If they officially change one or two "recharge with long rest" to "recharge with short rest", it's not a big deal. But, they should feel bad about having to do it. Opening the door, up front, or swinging it wide isn't cool; it's unprofessional. It isn't "responsive"; it's sloppy. It pretty much invites bad game design because "hey, we'll just errata it, if it doesn't work".
I have no problem with table rules -- I actually expect them. I have no problem if Mearls has his own table rules, or even if he posts them somewhere. I have a problem when the rules to the game are explicitly and officially fluid. Treat the product I bought as though it's a business or I won't be buying product from you. I might drop a couple bucks in your tip jar, but you're just another DM posting some of your ideas for people to read and you've lost your authority as "the definitive source".
Zaran
Adventurer
The thing is, everyone is already complaining about how inadequate the Beastmaster Ranger is. If they came up with a better version, I think I would rather have a new copy of the phb than have Ranger splatbook with a Beastmaster 2.0. Corrections to the core books should be put in as soon as the books as soon as a new printing is done. Let people have the corrections if they want to buy the books again. I would be more irked if they Didn't correct mistake in future printings. Will I go out and buy a new version ? Not unless a) the book I have is falling apart or b) I'm constantly needing the new info to play. They did this Star Wars Saga and the world didn't burn.
Jester David
Hero
In that example I think there are three routes they could realistically take.
1) Errata. Update the book, change it for the next printing and include a conversion document
2) New version. In an accessory, include a revised Beastmaster
3) Basic. Add that ranger to Basic as a free expansion.
They could certainly do some form of combo, such as adding it to Basic and adding the revised version to future printings. So people can choose to buy the book or have all the full rules.
Personally, I like that approach as it sets a bar: if they're not comfortable giving away the revised content, it's not something they should ask people to buy. Either it's too small or requires too much of a fix.
Mercule
Adventurer
Sounds like exactly the sort of content that Dragon magazine should have. Include it in the occasional "Best of" volumes. Clearly, YMMV.
This is one of the things that worries me about getting player feedback. People theorycraft and then base their opinions solely on the popular theorycrafted model. In actual play, the beastmaster ranger is just fine as it is and really does not need to be changed. I really hope that the survey doesn't come out until people have gotten over relying on theorycrafting and have actual play experience.
