5.5e

[carrdrivesyou]

So looking at the Tasha's preview...there are a lot of changes happening. Not necessarily to the format of the game, but to the mechanics of several classes as presented in the PHB. So far, they have been really good at publishing new prints of the core books with the errata changes. However, Tasha's seems to be far more in depth in a lot of cases (looking at you Ranger), and the addition of alternate class features really makes things complicated. So are we looking at 5.5e? Or are we looking at a source book that may or may not have banned options at certain tables? What's the general consensus?

[Unoriginal]

So looking at the Tasha's preview...there are a lot of changes happening. Not necessarily to the format of the game, but to the mechanics of several classes as presented in the PHB. So far, they have been really good at publishing new prints of the core books with the errata changes. However, Tasha's seems to be far more in depth in a lot of cases (looking at you Ranger), and the addition of alternate class features really makes things complicated. So are we looking at 5.5e? Or are we looking at a source book that may or may not have banned options at certain tables? What's the general consensus?

It's not 5.5, it's just a vitamin shot to keep the game relevant on the market.

A .5 edition happens when there are so many erratas replacing the previous rules that the game is fundamentally changed. The Tasha's stuff is purely optional and only offer alternate options, not erratas.

So no, 5e is going to stay 5e for a good while longer. And even longer now that the Tasha's addresses some of the most divisive aspects of this edition (doesn't mean it will necessarily solve the division, of course, but controversy sells just as much).

[jaappleton]

This is far from the first time this has happened in an edition of D&D.

At one point in 4th Editions life cycle, they gave every race another ability score option. Warforged went from +2 Con and +1 Str, to +2 Con and +1 Str or Int, for example.

Tasha's simply went the extra mile with character creation, in my opinion.

I'm not certain that is going to happen, but..... I'm just saying, 2024 marks the 50th anniversary of D&D. Sounds like a good time to launch a new edition of some kind.

[Anonymouswizard]

I wouldn't be shocked if we're in the period where current books are used as a testing ground for the new edition.

That said, I'm not sure we'll see an official 5.5 for a while, if it happens it'll probably be in 2024 for the 50th anniversary. It's a convinient time, allows another few years of selling 5e and helps build hype.

I'm not certain it's going to happen though. 5e is too popular for them to make a massive change, although I suspect an updated Player's Handbook which includes the new racial customisation rules to be coming along at some point.

[Waazraath]

I don't see any reason for a 5.5e to be honest. Think that if they are going for an update, it'll be 6th, and given what people said about the 50y anniversary, that might be a good moment. 5e has been around, what, for 10 years then? Even casual gamers will have played quite a lot of different classes and races by then, and might be inclined to try the new thing.

[SiCK_Boy]

Most edition changes have been preceded by sourcebooks bringing a lot of new rules options to the table.

The Player Options books came toward the end of 2nd edition; Tome of Battle did something similar toward the end of 3rd edition.

I feel like Tasha’s has the making of such a transitional / pivot moment. As optional as people want to think of these rules, the fact that some of them are already added to AL is an indication there’ll be a lot of pressure on DMs to just accept them as the new default.

It could be a change of edition that doesn’t state its name, with new editions of the core books coming out in 2024. Maybe they’ll take a leaf out of the videogame industry and try to get rid of the notion of cons9le generation / edition version, moving toward the reedition of an updated PHB while having most books and products remain backward compatible, at least for the next few years.

One key indicator of the likeliness of a new edition is probably the sales numbers on the PHB. As long as that book keeps posting great sales number, they won’t officially turn the page on 5th edition.

[Willie the Duck]

So looking at the Tasha's preview...there are a lot of changes happening. Not necessarily to the format of the game, but to the mechanics of several classes as presented in the PHB. So far, they have been really good at publishing new prints of the core books with the errata changes. However, Tasha's seems to be far more in depth in a lot of cases (looking at you Ranger), and the addition of alternate class features really makes things complicated. So are we looking at 5.5e? Or are we looking at a source book that may or may not have banned options at certain tables? What's the general consensus?
My take is that this:
Xanathar's Guide to Everything was 5e's Unearthed Arcana -- as in, the original, 1e AD&D book. It had some new (sub)classes, a few altered rules, some optional boosts (1E's UA almost universally increased the level limits for demihumans, XGtE decreased magic item creation times significantly), and some new side-wingdings and whatnots. Tasha's is much more a case of 5e's Unearthed Arcana -- as in, the 3rd Edition book. It includes som new (sub)classes, but also some massive rewrites and optional rules and genuine 'fixes,' many -- if left to the players to self-administer and excluding DM oversight -- of which could alter the power and balance between various race-class choices.

So I guess my take is that this book is nothing new -- we've seen something similar each edition, and whether you consider it to be '.5' or not depends on what you mean by that -- we've only really had one official .5 edition, and that one was really different from this, mostly focusing on changing specific spells and actual mechanics (such as the DR system).


I wouldn't be shocked if we're in the period where current books are used as a testing ground for the new edition.
I wouldn't be shocked, but at the same time I wouldn't bet on it.

[MaxWilson]

So looking at the Tasha's preview...there are a lot of changes happening. Not necessarily to the format of the game, but to the mechanics of several classes as presented in the PHB. So far, they have been really good at publishing new prints of the core books with the errata changes. However, Tasha's seems to be far more in depth in a lot of cases (looking at you Ranger), and the addition of alternate class features really makes things complicated. So are we looking at 5.5e? Or are we looking at a source book that may or may not have banned options at certain tables? What's the general consensus?

I suspect it will be divisive. Up until now forum culture has, rightly or wrongly, mostly assumed a rules monoculture: multiclassing and feats are in, stat rolling is out, magic items don't really exist beyond a bare minimum, no extra feats or charms/Epic Boons are in play. E.g. even though the DMG authorizes the DM to award bonus feats to PCs in play, the forum culture pretends that feats are entirely tied to class advancement to the point of bemoaning that you "can't" have feats until Tier 3 when you finish maxing your attack stats.

Tasha's has enough optional rules are PC-specific perks for the DM to hand out that I think the culture starts to shift, maybe even bifurcate, between DMs who are (and players assuming their DMs will be) playing strictly by PHB rules and those who handing out bonus abilities to their PCs, like the monk's explicitly optional Ki-Fueled attack (see below screenshot), either as rewards during play or as automatic rights gained by leveling up. I suspect bonus feats will continue to be (assumed to be) rarer than bonus Tasha's abilities though because few players read the DMG.

So yeah, my prediction is some degree of cultural forking, maybe separate forums.

https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/BJZQfteOMdeL0WKYRuH_r1QBALI=/0x0:2348x2757/1120x0/filters:focal(0x0:2348x2757):format(webp):no_upsca le()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/21995393/Tashas_Cauldron_48.jpg

[KorvinStarmast]

Still waiting for the weapons specialization optional rule ... :smallyuk:

5.5e. We don't need it.

[Dork_Forge]

Forking into 5.5e any time in the near future would be bad move imo. So many new players are coming into the game every week, investing money into the game. I wouldn't be surprised if D&D has the largest following in its history right now, transitioning that user base at all will be painful, doing it for anything short of an entire edition shift doesn't seem like a wise move when satisfaction with the base game is pretty high.

[Thunderous Mojo]

I
So yeah, my prediction is some degree of cultural forking, maybe separate forums.


Eberron Dragnmark variants have not necessitated the splitting of the forum.
In 3e days, the sheer number of official products and 3PP, meant no two game tables had the exact same options going, and yet we could talk about the game, together.

I would much rather spend a little effort and write and read about people's real games, then this Flatland version of D&D that is abstracted solely for discussion.

[EggKookoo]

I'm kind of viewing it as perhaps 5.25.

[KorvinStarmast]

I would much rather spend a little effort and write and read about people's real games, then this Flatland version of D&D that is abstracted solely for discussion. I would likewise prefer the forum do that. :smallcool:

[ProsecutorGodot]

I'm pretty confident at this point that even if the designers started making changes with a 5.5e mindset that they wouldn't brand it as such.

5e already has modularity in mind with it's additions, Xanathars and Tasha's are rule supplements that allow for substantial changes to the base game one clearly more than the other.

I think that's what we're going to see until the inevitable 6e reveal in the far future, lots of "everything" books with variant rules that may drastically change core rules when you opt to use them.

[KorvinStarmast]

I'm pretty confident at this point that even if the designers started making changes with a 5.5e mindset that they wouldn't brand it as such.

5e already has modularity in mind with it's additions, Xanathars and Tasha's are rule supplements that allow for substantial changes to the base game one clearly more than the other.

I think that's what we're going to see until the inevitable 6e reveal in the far future, lots of "everything" books with variant rules that may drastically change core rules when you opt to use them. Someone suggested "in 2024" they'd do a refresh based on the 50 year anniversary. That's the earliest it needs to be.

[Corran]

I'm pretty confident at this point that even if the designers started making changes with a 5.5e mindset that they wouldn't brand it as such.

5e already has modularity in mind with it's additions, Xanathars and Tasha's are rule supplements that allow for substantial changes to the base game one clearly more than the other.

I think that's what we're going to see until the inevitable 6e reveal in the far future, lots of "everything" books with variant rules that may drastically change core rules when you opt to use them.
This sounds like playtesting the next edition. Pretty much what happened with 5e. Only this wouldn't be for free. Heh...

[MoiMagnus]

For the moment, that's just options.
5.5e will happen when Tasha's options get added to new printings of the PHB as erratas, if they ever do.

Will that happen? I'm waiting to see how popular are the crossovers MtG and D&D, because if they are popular enough, I can totally see a 6e being designed with MtG in mind from the beginning (so pushing away spells like "plane shift" that don't match well the MtG's universe into settings books rather than keeping them in the PHB).

Assuming they don't go toward a MtG 6e, I think that's not unreasonable to expect a 5.5e to occur eventually, but I'd expect one additional "Someone's book of everything" beforehand, so that would be in ~5 years (with the last "book of everything" in 2-3 years)

[EggKookoo]

I'm pretty confident at this point that even if the designers started making changes with a 5.5e mindset that they wouldn't brand it as such.

I've felt for a long time that we will never see anything called "6th edition." I would not be surprised to see them go to "numberless" edition updates for a while.

[Bloodcloud]

I'm thinking they are heading in a sort of Advanced dnd 5e. Not quite a .5, at least until we get 6e.

[MoiMagnus]

I've felt for a long time that we will never see anything called "6th edition." I would not be surprised to see them go to "numberless" edition updates for a while.

Companies eventually grow worried that their product is no longer accessible to newcomers. That's when a new edition is made. It being called "6e" or something else is just marketing.

Alternatively, WotC would implement a rotation like in TCGs, keeping an updated PHB/DMG/MM as "core books", and progressively marking old non-core books as obsoletes as years advances.

5e slow publication rate mean that they still have quite some time before needing to take action, but they will eventually take some.

[Anonymouswizard]

I'm thinking they are heading in a sort of Advanced dnd 5e. Not quite a .5, at least until we get 6e.

Heh, 5e is already getting quite complicated as it is, although I wouldn't mind seeing a book with expanded tactical combat. Certainly complicated enough to remind me more of AD&D than B/X. I think any kind of advanced 5e would just be another 'Name's Container of Everything' book.

Heck, a rulebook with more rules for conflict in general would be lovely. Debates! Political campaigns! Mass battles (even if such systems never quite work)! Long term pursuit!

I think the main downside of a 6e release is that 5e still has areas that could use a lot of work, including making Inspiration into something my tables don't completely forget about. I feel the problem with 5e is that there's a great base there, but the designers rushed out the core rulebooks without half the systems they implicitly promised (a social pillar with no debate system!? No actual rules for investigation!?).

[Yakk]

New editions are a function of marketing.

Their sales are quite high, both for core books and expansion books.

When that starts to change they will consider a new edition.

Core books continue to sell as D&D keeps growing as a cultural "thing". New editions could get in the way of this.

[GentlemanVoodoo]

In a sense we are in 5.5 territory if the rumors are true that mass mechanical changes seen in the new book are going to be implemented in reprints. Again if rumors are true.

Currently I just view the mechanical changes more as optional rules than anything else. But we are in the twilight period of 5e I feel to where new prints are the test grounds for a new edition.

[Tanarii]

3.5 was a minor set of tweaks to 3e.

4e Essentials was a much bigger revision and released in a utterly stupid way to avoid the "backlash" of a .5 label.

Some of Tasha's definitely mandates a 5.5 instead. The ability score hack needs to be redone to be not utterly stupid. The variant class rules and new subclass rules are less stupid, but defintely could be tested better and rolled out as revisions to existing classes.

So yeah, Tasha's isnt essentials bad, but its definitely worse than .5

[Pex]

3.5 is what the fans called it. It was still 3E. It's just a question if fandom will start calling the game post-Tasha 5.5E or not. Game discussion may say 5.5E for short hand or differentiate between the two as 5E and Tasha 5E. I foresee two reasons for people who would vehemently object to calling it 5.5E: sticklers of convention because the rules aren't changing the Tasha book is merely options no different than Xanathar and those who have what I'm facetiously calling PTSD from 3E, so to say 5.5E reminds them of 3.5E and they don't want 3E baggage in their 5E even if it's only superficial analogy.

Perhaps there can be compromise. Instead of calling it 5.5E and the need for something easier to say/type than Tasha 5E we call it 5TE.

[SiCK_Boy]

3.5 is what the fans called it. It was still 3E. It's just a question if fandom will start calling the game post-Tasha 5.5E or not. Game discussion may say 5.5E for short hand or differentiate between the two as 5E and Tasha 5E. I foresee two reasons for people who would vehemently object to calling it 5.5E: sticklers of convention because the rules aren't changing the Tasha book is merely options no different than Xanathar and those who have what I'm facetiously calling PTSD from 3E, so to say 5.5E reminds them of 3.5E and they don't want 3E baggage in their 5E even if it's only superficial analogy.

Perhaps there can be compromise. Instead of calling it 5.5E and the need for something easier to say/type than Tasha 5E we call it 5TE.

The 3.5 Core Books litterally had the numbers 3.5 on their cover. It wasn't a matter of the fanbase deciding how to call them; that is how the books were presented by WotC itself.

[Unoriginal]

3.5 is what the fans called it. It was still 3E. It's just a question if fandom will start calling the game post-Tasha 5.5E or not.


The 3.5 Core Books litterally had the numbers 3.5 on their cover. It wasn't a matter of the fanbase deciding how to call them; that is how the books were presented by WotC itself.

SiCK_Boy is correct.

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51fpINzU3DL.jpg

EDIT: it seems the non-core books didn't advertise the difference as obviously, but it still exist. This (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1138/how-do-you-tell-if-a-dd-book-is-3-0-or-3-5) talks about the subject more.

[Anonymouswizard]

Some of Tasha's definitely mandates a 5.5 instead. The ability score hack needs to be redone to be not utterly stupid. The variant class rules and new subclass rules are less stupid, but defintely could be tested better and rolled out as revisions to existing classes.

Honestly, I think I'd be less annoyed if this was a .5 edition rather than a sourcebook, because of things like then being able to adjust the races to be balanced with the new system (because the game as written considers a flexible stat bonus an advantage). We'd miss out on things like the new subclasses, but the Genie Warlock is only making me wish there was a decent option for a middle Eastern fantasy RPG on the market. Or that WotC would release an Al-Qadim book rather than more Magic: the Gathering stuff.

[Pex]

Very well, but I like 5TE anyway.