Why it was called "Dungeons & Dragons 3e"

[aco175]

I recall all the Dragon articles with the countdown to 3e and they explaining why and how things were going to change. I did not like the change at first, but by the end of the series, I was onboard to swap over.

I'm not 100% onboard right now with the new stuff coming, but expect that I will like the changes overall.

 

[Alzrius]

I recall all the Dragon articles with the countdown to 3e and they explaining why and how things were going to change. I did not like the change at first, but by the end of the series, I was onboard to swap over.

It took me about six months after the new edition came out, mostly through exposure with my college group.

 

[JEB]

Dropping the Advanced term for 3e was intended to reunify the branding from the divergent branches back into a single game identity. I think once WotC inherited the game, they'd have done the same whether either 2e or BECMI were moribund or not.

Yeah, I assumed this was why they made a point of including Basic D&D monsters like the athach and aranea in the 3e Monster Manual.

 

[Jack Daniel]

▯

 

[Old Fezziwig]

I think the thought was that it was the successor to the AD&D line, and since the the need to contrast it to the by then moribund D&D (BECMI/Cyclopedia) line no longer existed, they dropped the Advanced adjective.

WotC and Peter Adkison had to buy out Gygax and Arneson's residual rights to D&D to do this, if memory serves — I think both of them would have been due royalties on a new edition of D&D otherwise. I'm sure someone else here probably has a clearer recollection of the exact details/description.

 

[Mannahnin]

3rd Edition is 3rd Edition because it replaced 2nd Edition. It very easily could've been called Advanced D&D 3rd Edition, but WotC determined that calling the game "Advanced" was bad marketing and duly dropped the new-player-repellant from the title.

There wasn't a reconvergence of the twin game lines; the Original/Basic D&D line was killed off dead. Its last release was in 1996; WotC acquired TSR in 1997; and in 1999, WotC's TSR released the D&D Adventure Game as an introductory product for AD&D 2nd Edition. An AD&D boxed set wearing the D&D brand name, a year before the release of 3e.



When I first got my 3e PHB in 2000, I remember being struck by the clear continuity between 2e and 3e in at least one interesting place: spell descriptions. Read the text of fireball as it appears in 1e, 2e, and 3e, and you'll see the sort of thing I mean.

I was going to give the same citation and explanation.

3E, despite massive overhauls to the core rules and systems (the introduction of Feats and Skills, the new multiclassing rules, BAB, the unified central d20 mechanic, three saves...), still has massive textual overlap with AD&D. This is seen most obviously in the spell descriptions, but also in stuff like the magic items and monsters.

AD&D 2nd ed was the flagship product TSR produced when WotC took over. Customers had been buying, and stores had been stocking, "Second Ed" for eleven years by the time 3rd came out. So it made perfect sense for the new edition succeeding it to be 3rd edition.

AD&D vs D&D was always a cumbersome source of consumer confusion and D&D was the brand name the general public all recognized and knew. Keeping that simple alliterative name was the obvious choice, from a marketing perspective.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Having owned my FLGS since 1993, I remember being "in the trenches" as much of these things happened. While I think it's an historical retcon (I believe that 3e was called 3e because it replaced 2nd Edition, but that Advanced was a pointless piece of bad marketing, and was dropped), I actually really like the concept that "First Edition" is Dungeons & Dragons (OD&D et al); "Second Edition" is AD&D (1e & 2e); "Third Edition" is 3.0 & 3.5; "Fourth Edition" is 4e & Essentials; and "Fifth Edition" is 5e 2014 & 5e 2024 & probably whatever comes next.

It actually gives the term "Edition" when it comes to D&D some meaningful consistency, without throwing all the numbers out.

 

[Mannahnin]

Having owned my FLGS since 1993, I remember being "in the trenches" as much of these things happened. While I think it's an historical retcon (I believe that 3e was called 3e because it replaced 2nd Edition, but that Advanced was a pointless piece of bad marketing, and was dropped), I actually really like the concept that "First Edition" is Dungeons & Dragons (OD&D et al); "Second Edition" is AD&D (1e & 2e); "Third Edition" is 3.0 & 3.5; "Fourth Edition" is 4e & Essentials; and "Fifth Edition" is 5e 2014 & 5e 2024 & probably whatever comes next.

It actually gives the term "Edition" when it comes to D&D some meaningful consistency, without throwing all the numbers out.

At this point the common nomenclature is well established, though. 2nd ed is 2nd ed. AD&D before that is (retroactively) 1st ed. And that means OD&D is 0E.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

At this point the common nomenclature is well established, though. 2nd ed is 2nd ed. AD&D before that is (retroactively) 1st ed. And that means OD&D is 0E.

I get that. I'm saying that I like the other way of looking at it. Partly because WTF is a "Zeroth Edition"? My point is not that it's a concept that is likely to be widely adopted, but that it's one that makes good sense.

 

[Mannahnin]

I get that. I'm saying that I like the other way of looking at it. Partly because WTF is a "Zeroth Edition"? My point is not that it's a concept that is likely to be widely adopted, but that it's one that makes good sense.

Speaking as a guy who came up with THAC0, seeing 0E as just the entry before 1E on a number line presents no conceptual hurdles for me.

But I respect your aesthetic preference!