21st May 2024 is the official release date!
Update--WotC has taken down the promo image and replaced it with one without a release date. See more here.
5E isn't an edition of AD&D, so I don't understand the relevance of the word "Advanced". They were ALL versions/editions of D&D, despite the naming convention of their respective eras.Yeah, but none of those were editions of the AD&D. They were a separate D&D game. Basic, BECMI, etc. The 2e books with new art changed next to nothing as far as rules go, so those weren't even a half edition. So we have 1e, 2e, 3e, 3.5e, 4e(maybe essentials was a .5) and 5e. And soon 5.5e.
I'll buy a fork in the software, but they basic ran at the same time as advanced and was supported separately. It can't be just another edition of the game. Editions don't run concurrently, they run sequentially.Not a separate game, but a different iteration of the same game. A fork in software speak. To be honest, the edition tree of D&D looks like something like this:
OD&D -> Basic (Holmes) -> Basic (B/X) -> Basic (BECMI) -> Rules Cyclopeida -> D&D3e (continues below)
------- \-> AD&D 1e -> 2e -> D&D 3e -> v3.5 -> 4e -> 4e Essentials -> 5e (2014) -> 5e (2024).
They built off of the other rules, but were not changes to the core of the game. To be a new edition or half edition, the core rules need to change. The only way that the skills and powers or 1e UA could change core rules is if the DM opted into them. That's a major difference over 3.5e or 5.5e. It's likely a major difference over essentials.Now I base my argument of Edition based on what version of the Player Rules the game references back to. While Skills & Powers or Unearthed Arcana (1e) certainly feel like half-editions, they still build off the original PHB. Whereas 4e Essentials, while compatible with original 4e, could be played without ever touching the 4e PHB. (RC + Heroes of X + DM Kit + Monsters of Nentir = a perfectly playable 4e).
The couldn't be the same game. They ran and were supported concurrently with AD&D and I think even 3e(not positive on that). That makes them different games or at least different forks in the "software." AD&D began with 1e and went on from there.No, I meant that OD&D, BD&D and AD&D were "different games."
Realistically, I see at least ten editions of D&D prior to 3E.
if the dust had settled by then, then there would no longer have been a necessityI'll agree on the latter, but I still think by the time Paizo even realized this product was a necessity, the OGL dust had settled.
and the reason why they wanted to rid themselves of the OGL / dependency on WotC is?This was a product that they wanted to get out to rid themselves of Wizards taint and jump start ORC, not that they needed to make to print books in 2024.
It is. They dropped the word "advanced", but the numbering clearly marks it as AD&D, since AD&D was 1e and 2e, then came 3e which by numbering made it the next edition of "advanced."5E isn't an edition of AD&D, so I don't understand the relevance of the word "Advanced". They were ALL versions/editions of D&D, despite the naming convention of their respective eras.
it is an evolution of AD&D, not D&D, classes and races are separate5E isn't an edition of AD&D, so I don't understand the relevance of the word "Advanced". They were ALL versions/editions of D&D, despite the naming convention of their respective eras.
I think that some of Tasha's sub classes will get all updates to bring them in line. The Beast barbarian needs it's level 3 power tinkered with with the addition of weapon mastery.Well, currently it's in Tasha's, and theybare taking Tasha's options as-is and putting them into the PHB, so it doesn't need an update as it stands. I do expect if they make some sort of return to Eberron, like a Xendrik slipcase set or something, they will reprint it.
That's pretty true of 3.0->3.5, but there was good reason to upgrade because there were a lot of ""OMGWTF?!?!?!?!?!?!" things fixed. One of the most eyemelting ones that spring to mind were umm... cause wounds(?) that set the target's current & max HP to 1d4hp & I think there were things like a wall of whales with a summon beast type spell being silly powerful compared to shigher leveltuff like wall of stone.... Not 100% sure on that second one being 3.0 rather than some 2.0+splat or something thoughYeah. The ".5" was a novelty name that appealed to computer geekery, like "2.0".
My impression is, the shift from 3.0 to 3.5 seemed at first a minor tweak, that turned out to be a big deal, that effectively forced players to repurchase all of the same books.
I expect the 2024 characters to play fine alongside 2014 characters, and in this sense everything is 5.0.
But we will see. All of us will know if 2024 turns out to be 5.0 or 5.5.
I will happily purchase the 2024 core books, because I want a rulebook with all of the updates anyway.
You sure seem to be enjoying picking and choosing what's allowed to "count" and what isn't.The couldn't be the same game. They ran and were supported concurrently with AD&D and I think even 3e(not positive on that). That makes them different games or at least different forks in the "software." AD&D began with 1e and went on from there.
That would be Harm(the opposite of Heal) that set hit points to 1d4 remaining. Not maximum. So healing could bring the target back up.That's pretty true of 3.0->3.5, but there was good reason to upgrade because there were a lot of ""OMGWTF?!?!?!?!?!?!" things fixed. One of the most eyemelting ones that spring to mind were umm... cause wounds(?) that set the target's current & max HP to 1d4hp & I think there were things like a wall of whales with a summon beast type spell being silly powerful compared to shigher leveltuff like wall of stone.... Not 100% sure on that second one being 3.0 rather than some 2.0+splat or something though