D&D timeline of editions

[Tanarii]

Time line of editions:
1974 - ?? oD&D (approx 3 years)

1977 - 1989 : 1e (12 years; DMG 1977 - 10 yrs)
1985 - 1989 : UA (aka 1.5) (3 years)

1989 - 2000 : 2e (11 years)
1995 - 2000 : PO S&P/C&T (aka 2.5) (6 years)

2000 - 2008 : 3e (8 years)
2003 - 2008 : 3.5 (5 years)

2008 - 2014 : 4e (6 years)
2010 - 2014 : Essentials (aka 4.5) (4 years)

2014 - ongoing : 5e (approx 3 years)

BtW auguries indicate we're coming up on a '.5' for 5e.

[Kantaki]

Going by this timeline there's going to be a sixth edition in two or three years tops.
I mean looking at the lifespans of the Editions 5th's should be up soon.

[Aliquid]

Don't leave out D&D BECMI editions - 1977-1991 (14 years)

There were four releases. I don't know if you would call them editions or not... maybe just major expansions.

[VoxRationis]

BtW auguries indicate we're coming up on a '.5' for 5e.

"BtW auguries?" What are those?

[Tanarii]

Don't leave out D&D BECMI editions - 1977-1991 (14 years)

There were four releases. I don't know if you would call them editions or not... maybe just major expansions.

BECMI is the Mentzer set. What you're talking about is usually referred to as 'Classic':
1977 - 1979 : Basic (Holmes*)
1981 - 1982 : B/X (Moldvay / Cook)
1983 - 1991 : BECMI (Mentzer)

Also Rules Cyclopedia (1991) & Wrath of the Immortals (1993). What's weird (and cool) about BECMI is it kept getting TSR product support into the mid-90s.

*From what I've gleaned, Holmes is considered different from the others. My understanding was that at the time, it was considered a launching pad for AD&D, not it's own thing. That's just history to me though. I started in 1985 with BECMI, although I also played a fair amount of AD&D 1e.

[obryn]

Don't leave out D&D BECMI editions - 1977-1991 (14 years)

There were four releases. I don't know if you would call them editions or not... maybe just major expansions.

Holmes and the other Basic lines have huge differences. Holmes is kind of an evolutionary dead-end, although it was used to test out some changes that would later get rolled into AD&D.

BX and BECMI are incredibly close; BECMI mostly redid some advancement tracks to capture the 1-36 level range thereby further neutering the Thief. RC is just BECMI, compiled and cleaned up a smidge so you have your Weapon Mastery rules when you need them, instead of waiting for the Master set. For most RPGs, which don't make too many changes between editions, this would mean that each was a separate edition. For D&D - where editions imply sweeping changes - they are arguably not.

[EccentricCircle]

If we extrapolate from this data, then arguably the lifetime of an edition is decreasing at a fairly consistent rate of 2 years per edition +/- 1 year. (14, 12, 11, 8, 6, ?).

Extrapolating forwards 6th edition will come out between 2018 and 2019, followed by 7th edition in 2021, then 8th edition in 2022.

Finally in 2023 the team announcing ninth edition will be interrupted when the teams developing all subsequent versions of D&D burst onto the stage in short succession to pitch their version, before being upstaged by the developers of the next iteration.

We will then have reached the D&D singularity, and the universe will collapse in on itself in a game-filled paradox and be replaced with something much harder to simulate in roleplaying games.

If we were to include retroclones in this analysis then arguably this has already happened...

[Cosi]

Those end dates seem wrong. Like yeah, that's when the next edition came out, but that's not when books stopped being published (which seems like a better end of life measure). As far as I can tell, the last essentials book (of the five 4e's wiki lists) was the Red Box, which was released in 2011. By comparison, 3e's last product was in 2007 (per wikipedia).

[Tanarii]

We will then have reached the D&D singularity, and the universe will collapse in on itself in a game-filled paradox and be replaced with something much harder to simulate in roleplaying games.

See, now this is the kind of comment I was fishing for.

[Tanarii]

Those end dates seem wrong. Like yeah, that's when the next edition came out, but that's not when books stopped being published (which seems like a better end of life measure).

My experience is that edition end of life occurs when the next edition is published. In spite of much kicking and screaming* by people who don't want to convert, the majority of the public gaming world adopts the material and switches over in short order.

*kicking and screaming also happens when 1/2 editions are released. I'll be honest, I'm usually one of the kickers and screamers for those.

[EccentricCircle]

See, now this is the kind of comment I was fishing for.

Happy to oblige!

[hamishspence]

By comparison, 3e's last product was in 2007 (per wikipedia).

If we allow for "official online content", Wizards was doing Dragon Magazine issues with 3.5 content right up until the release of 4e.

[2D8HP]

Time line of editions:
1974 - ?? oD&D (approx 3 years)

1977 - 1989 : 1e (12 years; DMG 1977 - 10 yrs)
1985 - 1989 : UA (aka 1.5) (3 years)

1989 - 2000 : 2e (11 years)
1995 - 2000 : PO S&P/C&T (aka 2.5) (6 years)

2000 - 2008 : 3e (8 years)
2003 - 2008 : 3.5 (5 years)

2008 - 2014 : 4e (6 years)
2010 - 2014 : Essentials (aka 4.5) (4 years)

2014 - ongoing : 5e (approx 3 years)

BtW auguries indicate we're coming up on a '.5' for 5e.

I can tell you already know (because you shorten it), but the DMG came out in '79 not '77.

Also, TSR slapped a different cover on '91 Basic, and called in "Classic Dungeons & Dragons" in '94.

The Holmes Basic "bluebook" rules were reprinted in '99 as part of the 25 "Silver Anniversary" Set.

Holmes is... not AD&D, or B/X or OD&D, it's sort of all of them and none of them... and it was AWESOME!

If someone wants to easily learn TSR D&D, probably the easiest way would be to pick up '91 "Basic" or '94 "Classic" (same thing), because those are the most clearly written, but if you want to be COOL, then get Holmes, "Basic", OD&D, and AD&D all within 2 years of each other. That's what I did!


Also 1.5 was LAME! I'm still boycotting it!

[Kurald Galain]

It would be useful to list for each edition when the last book for that edition was published, and not only when the first book for the next edition is published...

[Cosi]

It would be useful to list for each edition when the last book for that edition was published, and not only when the first book for the next edition is published...

I mentioned this already.

Per wikipedia, 3e's last release was 2007. There were several books that year, the latest being Elder Evils, released December 2007. The 4e PHB was released in June 2008. That's about six months between dead tree releases.

Wikipedia doesn't list 4e stats, but as far as I can tell the last physical 4e release was their Red Box set in September 2011. The 5e PHB seems to have released in August 2014, which gives us a three year gap between last and first dead tree releases -- six times the previous edition. If I may be permitted to editorialize somewhat, this does not reflect well on the design team currently working for WotC.

Wikipedia's list of dates is somewhat sparse for 2e, but it looks like they had at least one book (Campaign Option: Council of Wyrms) release in 1999, which means it was at most a year between the last 2e release and the launch of 3.0.

1e into 2e seems to be roughly the same. 1e's Dungeon Master's Design Kit was 1988, the earliest 2e books seem to be 1989. So about a year.

Half editions (3.5 and Essentials) are less than a year IIRC.

As has been pointed out, these dates get closer together if you count web content or magazines, which trickle out until the official changeover happens.

TL;DR -- Usually, it's a year or less between the last dead tree release of one edition and the first of the next edition. The exception to this is 4e into 5e, which is about a three year gap.

[obryn]

To add to the list Dragon 430, the last real release for 4e as far as I can tell, was published December 2013.

[2D8HP]

It would be useful to list for each edition when the last book for that edition was published, and not only when the first book for the next edition is published...

The 1e Adventure "module"

L3 Deep Dwarven Delve - by Len Lakofka was published in 1999 as part of the "Silver Anniversary Set",

and

A0 Danger at Darkshelf Quarry was included with the "Against the Slave Lords" reprint in 2013, making it (as far as I know) the last 1e product published by the owners of the Dungeons & Dragons brand.

So 1e is 1977 to 2013.

A win for 1e!

May 5e last as long.

[Tanarii]

It would be useful to list for each edition when the last book for that edition was published, and not only when the first book for the next edition is published...

As I already said, I don't see much point in that.

My experience is that edition end of life occurs when the next edition is published. In spite of much kicking and screaming* by people who don't want to convert, the majority of the public gaming world adopts the material and switches over in short order.

*kicking and screaming also happens when 1/2 editions are released. I'll be honest, I'm usually one of the kickers and screamers for those.

In other words, the relevant points in the timeline, for both 'end of life' and 'start of life', are the date the new edition is released.

[CharonsHelper]

Wikipedia doesn't list 4e stats, but as far as I can tell the last physical 4e release was their Red Box set in September 2011. The 5e PHB seems to have released in August 2014, which gives us a three year gap between last and first dead tree releases -- six times the previous edition. If I may be permitted to editorialize somewhat, this does not reflect well on the design team currently working for WotC.

I think that's more because 4e was bombing and they weren't in a hurry to throw good money after bad.

With how much more successful 5e is than 4e (and more than 3e I believe) I don't think that you can use the last edition or two as a baseline.

Unlike earlier editions, (and earlier owners of D&D) it doesn't seem like Hasbro is in a hurry to really milk the edition with bunches of sourcebooks. (arguably saturating the market) Likely because it's only a tiny part of their business, Hasbro seems happy to let the core 5e books ride and release sporadic modules, cashing in as much on the D&D brand at least as much through board-games & probably video games etc. going forward.

[Kurald Galain]

cashing in as much on the D&D brand at least as much through board-games & probably video games etc. going forward.

Are any of these known to be in the works?

[CharonsHelper]

Are any of these known to be in the works?

Board games? Bunches.

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgamef...em-board-games

Video Games? Some.

As a hybrid - they put in Lords of Waterdeep board game on iOS.

There's the Neverwinter MMO. (didn't get very good reviews)

Sword Coast Legends (got bad reviews)

[Cosi]

I think that's more because 4e was bombing and they weren't in a hurry to throw good money after bad.

The time gap from 4e to 5e was longer than the time gap between 2e and 3e, and the company producing 2e went out of business. Unless you think 4e was worse for the D&D brand than literally going out of business, there isn't really an excuse here.

With how much more successful 5e is than 4e (and more than 3e I believe) I don't think that you can use the last edition or two as a baseline.

I don't think there's any evidence 5e is beating 3e. There are some statements from Mearls about sales, but they have enough weasel words that I am entirely unconvinced they mean anything.

Unlike earlier editions, (and earlier owners of D&D) it doesn't seem like Hasbro is in a hurry to really milk the edition with bunches of sourcebooks. (arguably saturating the market)

I mean, Paizo manages to make money, and they don't even get to call their shovelware Dungeons and Dragons.

[2D8HP]

....I don't think there's any evidence 5e is beating 3e. There are some statements from Mearls about sales, but they have enough weasel words that I am entirely unconvinced....

As far as I know the biggest selling D&D rules was 83 "Redbox" Basic, followed by the 2000 "3e" PHB.

I've seen many cheap used 3e PHB's for sale over the years (which irks me as I paid full price for mine dagnabbit!), and as far as I know, no one uses it for play anymore, so many switching to 3.5.

So 3e (seperate from 3.5/Pathfinder) AFAIK, had the best selling PHB of all, yet it's orphaned.

[CharonsHelper]

I don't think there's any evidence 5e is beating 3e. There are some statements from Mearls about sales, but they have enough weasel words that I am entirely unconvinced they mean anything.

So 3e (seperate from 3.5/Pathfinder) AFAIK, had the best selling PHB of all, yet it's orphaned.

Okay - if you want to assume that Mike Mearls was lying when he said about a year ago "5e lifetime PHB sales > 3, 3.5, 4 lifetime". Now - that was only the PHBs individually - not collectively. But he did confirm that that was numerically rather than by $ (since inflation would help on that front).

I mean, Paizo manages to make money, and they don't even get to call their shovelware Dungeons and Dragons.

I didn't mean that Hasbro COULDN'T make $ by producing more sourcebooks - just that (pretty obviously) they don't seem in a hurry to do so because, unlike TSR & Paizo, they're not a one product line company. WoTC seemed eager to have D&D follow the MtG model.

I don't think Hasbro is as interested in squeezing every bit of profit out of 5e - they have plenty of other things to invest their resources in. Instead they're happy keeping the margin higher. (admittedly - that's purely my hypothesis)


Edit: relevant -

[Cosi]

Okay - if you want to assume that Mike Mearls was lying when he said about a year ago "5e lifetime PHB sales > 3, 3.5, 4 lifetime". Now - that was only the PHBs individually - not collectively. But he did confirm that that was numerically rather than by $ (since inflation would help on that front).

My recollection of that claim was that 5e was "on track" to beat 3e. Which is, of course, meaningless because you can fit any data to some track that passes any given fixed point by some point in the future. Until Mearls says "we have sold more 5e books/PHBs/whatever than 3e books/PHBs/whatever" without any meaningful caveats (like "on X platform" or "we expect to"), you should assume that it is not the case.

I don't think Hasbro is as interested in squeezing every bit of profit out of 5e - they have plenty of other things to invest their resources in. Instead they're happy keeping the margin higher. (admittedly - that's purely my hypothesis)

Then what are they paying people for? If you just want to sell the books you have already written, why does Mike Mearls have a job? If all you want to do is sell more PHBs, MMs, and DMGs, you do not need to give him any money.

[Kurald Galain]

As far as I know the biggest selling D&D rules was 83 "Redbox" Basic, followed by the 2000 "3e" PHB.

That is indeed the case. This graph is from 2015, so 5E and PF have seen additional sales since.

[CharonsHelper]

Until Mearls says "we have sold more 5e books/PHBs/whatever than 3e books/PHBs/whatever" without any meaningful caveats (like "on X platform" or "we expect to"), you should assume that it is not the case.

He did - last summer. He said that the 5e PHB had sold more than 3e, 3.5, or 4e PHBs (individually - not collectively).

Then what are they paying people for? If you just want to sell the books you have already written, why does Mike Mearls have a job? If all you want to do is sell more PHBs, MMs, and DMGs, you do not need to give him any money.

They're coming out with some new stuff - but they're certainly not churning them out like previous editions were.

[Yora]

Marketing. Last thing I heard a while back is that there's not actually a D&D development team anymore. Just management that outsources the creation of adventures.

[Cosi]

I think that bar chart is overinflating BECMI. Wikipedia claims four distinct versions of the Box Set, and even if they are "very similar", you should at least combine 3.0/3.5/maybe PF as well if you're combining them.

He did - last summer. He said that the 5e PHB had sold more than 3e, 3.5, or 4e PHBs (individually - not collectively).

Can you cite the article (or talk or whatever) where he says that without caveats?

[2D8HP]

He did - last summer. He said that the 5e PHB had sold more than 3e, 3.5, or 4e PHBs (individually - not collectively)....

He did?