It's D&D, not 5E and not NEXT.


4th Edition

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I know folks are inclined to use these terms when describing the new rules, but I've seen no example on any printed or electronic product that uses either term (post play-test).

Whenever I talk to anyone about the game, I deliberately avoid calling it anything other than D&D. I believe that deploying that kind of language perpetuates the mentality of edition wars and community polarity around them.

Think Globally.
Start Locally.

(Yes, btw if you're interested, I am playing the new D&D)


6 people marked this as a favorite.

To me, it is 5th edition, even if they don't have that 5 near it. Why? Because there are many forms that D&D has taken over the years, and it makes it easier to differentiate between those versions when speaking to others. Of course, if you say "the new D&D" then I am sure people will understand what you are talking about.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Azmyth wrote:

I know folks are inclined to use these terms when describing the new rules, but I've seen no example on any printed or electronic product that uses either term (post play-test).

Whenever I talk to anyone about the game, I deliberately avoid calling it anything other than D&D. I believe that deploying that kind of language perpetuates the mentality of edition wars and community polarity around them.

Think Globally.
Start Locally.

(Yes, btw if you're interested, I am playing the new D&D)

It's going to get called something, if only to distinguish it from other versions.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

To me, it's D&D NextNextPlus, in order to differentiate it from the inevitable D&D NextPlusPlus which will come out in 2019.


As much as I appreciate trying to prevent edition wars, I believe clarity demands use of a nomenclature beyond simply "D&D." Nor do I think calling it "5th edition" is likely to cause conflict, so that's probably what I'll be doing. :)

For the record, I am going to give it a try (next Saturday, in fact).


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Gorbacz wrote:
To me, it's D&D NextNextPlus, in order to differentiate it from the inevitable D&D NextPlusPlus which will come out in 2019.

Yes, Gorby, we get it. You hate all things WotC. Thanks for that. :/

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Blah blah blah.


Azmyth wrote:

I know folks are inclined to use these terms when describing the new rules, but I've seen no example on any printed or electronic product that uses either term (post play-test).

Shrug. The more fool they, then. You'll need some way to distinguish what you're playing now from what we were playing in 1977 -- or for that matter, from what we were playing back in 1998, or in 2012.

Quote:


(Yes, btw if you're interested, I am playing the new D&D)

See what I mean? If you change products, people will develop different names for the original and changed products. "Fifth edition" is as good a name as any, given that that's what it is.


houstonderek wrote:
Blah blah blah.

You don't say?

Sovereign Court

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Na its 5E for me so I can differentiate it from other iterations. The only way to really stop E.warring is to not participate in it.


Azmyth wrote:

I know folks are inclined to use these terms when describing the new rules, but I've seen no example on any printed or electronic product that uses either term (post play-test).

Whenever I talk to anyone about the game, I deliberately avoid calling it anything other than D&D. I believe that deploying that kind of language perpetuates the mentality of edition wars and community polarity around them.

Think Globally.
Start Locally.

(Yes, btw if you're interested, I am playing the new D&D)

I thought it was officially called D&D Next....

but anyway people are right we need a way to identify what we mean say things like...

"Hey you guys want to play D&D."

I mean it stops the endless question of which D&D if nothing else.

Layout and Design, Frog God Games

1 person marked this as a favorite.

5th Edition is perfectly correct in my opinion, because it's the 5th iteration of the rules.

If I ask someone what game they're playing tonight and they say "D&D", I have to ask them which edition to know what they're talking about. It's just the nature of the beast.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

I think we have confirmation that there is/will be some fine print identifying the latest iteration of D&D as "5th edition".


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Wrong. It is indeed 5th edition.


David knott 242 wrote:

I think we have confirmation that there is/will be some fine print identifying the latest iteration of D&D as "5th edition".

We do.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, for what it's worth, here is a quote direct from the WotC website concerning Mike Mearls role in this new edition of D&D.

"Mike Mearls is the senior manager for the D&D research and design team. He led the design for 5th Edition D&D." -Legends& Lore archive, May 27/14.

So while it's currently not marketed as 5th Edition, they have acknowledged it is the fifth edition of the game - even capitalized as one would do for a name or title.

:-D

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Azmyth wrote:

I know folks are inclined to use these terms when describing the new rules, but I've seen no example on any printed or electronic product that uses either term (post play-test).

Whenever I talk to anyone about the game, I deliberately avoid calling it anything other than D&D. I believe that deploying that kind of language perpetuates the mentality of edition wars and community polarity around them.

Think Globally.
Start Locally.

(Yes, btw if you're interested, I am playing the new D&D)

Among the gaming circle I know, even Wizard's most diehard fans call it 5e. They have good reason to as they are managing campaigns in multiple versions of D+D, including the latest 5E basic rules and it helps to keep those signing on to these campaigns aware of what rules set is in use. Living Divine for instance, has no plans to stop using the 4E ruleset, and these same people are playing in PFS as well.

Not everyone who uses these terms is wasting their time strutting peen in the edition wars others keep bringing up.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
bugleyman wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
To me, it's D&D NextNextPlus, in order to differentiate it from the inevitable D&D NextPlusPlus which will come out in 2019.
Yes, Gorby, we get it. You hate all things WotC. Thanks for that. :/

You're welcome.

At least I'm consistent and not changing my views 180 degrees every other season. :)


6 people marked this as a favorite.

My group still calls Pathfinder "D&D."

Liberty's Edge

Haven't yet played the newest version (probably will do so when I attend the Falcon convention in Stamford Ct. at the end of September) but from what i've read so far it seems like a sort of simplified version of 3.5. My friends and I call it 3.1. It doesn't seem to have any really remarkable improvements or striking innovations and Pathfinder seems far superior; but i'm willing to give it a try even though i'm inclined to think that " the train has already left the station " as far as it's concerned.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Gorbacz wrote:
At least I'm consistent and not changing my views 180 degrees every other season. :)

Yes, because clearly disliking something a company does without deciding they're irredeemably evil for all time makes one a hypocrite.

P.S. Look! Over there!


This thread can only end in tragedy.


Gorbacz wrote:
bugleyman wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
To me, it's D&D NextNextPlus, in order to differentiate it from the inevitable D&D NextPlusPlus which will come out in 2019.
Yes, Gorby, we get it. You hate all things WotC. Thanks for that. :/

You're welcome.

At least I'm consistent and not changing my views 180 degrees every other season. :)

Bugley is trolling you I think.


Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
My group still calls Pathfinder "D&D."

Heck, I still think of PF as D&D. The only reason I call it 'Pathfinder' is that '3.PF' is one more syllable, and '3.P' sounds like some kind of hardcore NRA huntsman slang. ;)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Scott Henry wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
bugleyman wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
To me, it's D&D NextNextPlus, in order to differentiate it from the inevitable D&D NextPlusPlus which will come out in 2019.
Yes, Gorby, we get it. You hate all things WotC. Thanks for that. :/

You're welcome.

At least I'm consistent and not changing my views 180 degrees every other season. :)

Bugley is trolling you I think.

You think it is possible to troll Gorbacz?!?

And while we're on a tangent, liking everything one company does and hating everything another company does is not at all consistent when both companies do some of the same things.


Tequila Sunrise wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
My group still calls Pathfinder "D&D."
Heck, I still think of PF as D&D. The only reason I call it 'Pathfinder' is that '3.PF' is one more syllable, and '3.P' sounds like some kind of hardcore NRA huntsman slang. ;)

Eyrrh, put 3 ps in him till be sprouted a pod!


Azmyth wrote:

I know folks are inclined to use these terms when describing the new rules, but I've seen no example on any printed or electronic product that uses either term (post play-test).

Whenever I talk to anyone about the game, I deliberately avoid calling it anything other than D&D. I believe that deploying that kind of language perpetuates the mentality of edition wars and community polarity around them.

Think Globally.
Start Locally.

(Yes, btw if you're interested, I am playing the new D&D)

There isn't anything fundamentally wrong with edition wars, in as much as it's perfectly okay to love one edition of the game and hate another. It's the community polarity that's the problem - and that's something that needs addressing by slapping people around the face with a wet fish when they start descending into personal insults, not something that'll go away by just confusing everyone by not using version identifiers.

Since 2e, everything that's come out has been a new, different game anyway, with the name just being a branding slapped on the top. The name doesn't really serve any useful function other than to provide a ready-existing customer base for the next version that comes out.

If I tell people we're playing D&D tonight, the first question I'll get asked is "what edition?" with a fairly good chance one or more players will excuse themselves from the game once I reply.

On the topic of actual mentions in-print, see some images here. - even WotC realize they needed to give their customers more info than just "D&D", even if they decided to keep to the simpler product branding for the front covers.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Matt Thomason wrote:
It's the community polarity that's the problem - and that's something that needs addressing by slapping people around the face with a wet fish when they start descending into personal insults

"The beatings will continue until morale improves".


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Azmyth wrote:
Whenever I talk to anyone about the game, I deliberately avoid calling it anything other than D&D. I believe that deploying that kind of language perpetuates the mentality of edition wars and community polarity around them.

You don't have edition wars because they call the editions different things. You have edition wars because there are different editions.

Stubbornly referring to all editions as "D&D" and refusing to clarify which you mean is just going to lead to a lot of confusion. It can work in your private gaming group because, presumably, everyone will know what you're talking about. We're not your private gaming group.


5th edition of D&D is the 5th edition of D&D.

If someone invited me to play D&D I would ask which edition. I would avoid 4e and 5e and play 2e, 3.X and PF. 1e would be played out of curiosity as I never played it. Supposed to be similar to 2e.


goldomark wrote:

5th edition of D&D is the 5th edition of D&D.

If someone invited me to play D&D I would ask which edition. I would avoid 4e and 5e and play 2e, 3.X and PF. 1e would be played out of curiosity as I never played it. Supposed to be similar to 2e.

Exactly. I need to know which version a person is going to try running. I have a few friends that play all the editions and I pretty much will bow out of any attempt at anything TSR related. Just not my cup of tea. So to me, it's important to clarify that the group is running 2E AD&D or 1st because then I can plan on doing something else with my time.

Like Matt Tomason said: "There isn't anything fundamentally wrong with edition wars, in as much as it's perfectly okay to love one edition of the game and hate another." which is very true. In my instance the entire line of a specific companty (TSR) is something that I avoid and that's OK. The problem starts when I attempt to make my beef with the people who play TSR versions of the game.


Diffan wrote:
goldomark wrote:

5th edition of D&D is the 5th edition of D&D.

If someone invited me to play D&D I would ask which edition. I would avoid 4e and 5e and play 2e, 3.X and PF. 1e would be played out of curiosity as I never played it. Supposed to be similar to 2e.

Exactly. I need to know which version a person is going to try running. I have a few friends that play all the editions and I pretty much will bow out of any attempt at anything TSR related. Just not my cup of tea. So to me, it's important to clarify that the group is running 2E AD&D or 1st because then I can plan on doing something else with my time.

Like Matt Tomason said: "There isn't anything fundamentally wrong with edition wars, in as much as it's perfectly okay to love one edition of the game and hate another." which is very true. In my instance the entire line of a specific companty (TSR) is something that I avoid and that's OK. The problem starts when I attempt to make my beef with the people who play TSR versions of the game.

What you don't like 1st ed D&D you must be stupid. (I am kidding here)

I just said the above to illustrate that problems also start when some one else brings the beef over you stated opinion.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
goldomark wrote:

5th edition of D&D is the 5th edition of D&D.

Not counting the original white box set of D&D (original edition OE) or the Holmes, Moldvay, or Mentzer editions of D&D (3 editions of Basic D&D).


What edition of this thread are we on?


Gorbacz wrote:
To me, it's D&D NextNextPlus, in order to differentiate it from the inevitable D&D NextPlusPlus which will come out in 2019.

I'm waiting for D&D DoublePlusGood.


Voadam wrote:
goldomark wrote:

5th edition of D&D is the 5th edition of D&D.

Not counting the original white box set of D&D (original edition OE) or the Holmes, Moldvay, or Mentzer editions of D&D (3 editions of Basic D&D).

That's TSR's fault. When they produced "AD&D 2nd Edition," we (and they) just started counting editions from AD&D, treating D&D like some sort of B.C. "missing link" between Chainmail and true D&D.


DM Under The Bridge wrote:
Tequila Sunrise wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
My group still calls Pathfinder "D&D."
Heck, I still think of PF as D&D. The only reason I call it 'Pathfinder' is that '3.PF' is one more syllable, and '3.P' sounds like some kind of hardcore NRA huntsman slang. ;)
Eyrrh, put 3 ps in him till be sprouted a pod!

Git 'er dooone!


My home groups hates 4th E and feels burned by the 3.5 edition so unless there is some separation in editions they will feel it's all crap. So "5e" or "next" is a far better signifier in getting them to try it again then just D&D.


Azmyth wrote:
Whenever I talk to anyone about the game, I deliberately avoid calling it anything other than D&D. I believe that deploying that kind of language perpetuates the mentality of edition wars and community polarity around them.

Huh. That's quite the belief. Not sure if it's shared very widely.

I'll be sticking with 5e/Next, thanks. Differentiation provides clarity and clarity is good.

Quote:
(Yes, btw if you're interested, I am playing the new D&D)

I would never have guessed.

Liberty's Edge

Paizo Charter Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Just so we are aware, they call it 5th edition in the Starter Set. As soon as I get home I will post the quote and the page.

Liberty's Edge

It is referred to as 5th edition on the back of the starter box.


Diffan wrote:
goldomark wrote:

5th edition of D&D is the 5th edition of D&D.

If someone invited me to play D&D I would ask which edition. I would avoid 4e and 5e and play 2e, 3.X and PF. 1e would be played out of curiosity as I never played it. Supposed to be similar to 2e.

Exactly. I need to know which version a person is going to try running. I have a few friends that play all the editions and I pretty much will bow out of any attempt at anything TSR related. Just not my cup of tea. So to me, it's important to clarify that the group is running 2E AD&D or 1st because then I can plan on doing something else with my time.

Somewhat the same here. I'll play anything at least once if a friend is running it, but which edition and what level we're starting at suggests my attitude regarding chargen and the game.

Playing low level TSR D&D? I know not to take the game too seriously, and I won't bother thinking about my character's personality until and if he survives a few levels. Beer 'n' pretzels game.

Playing low level 3.x? Again, don't bother thinking about characterization. Instead, brush up on my system mastery!

Playing mid+ level? Might be worth thinking about personality and character history, but there will still be plenty of arbitrarium to mentally prepare for.

Playing 4e? Probably worth showing up to game day with a full character, and chances are good that I'll want to stay for more than one session.


Tequila Sunrise wrote:
Diffan wrote:
goldomark wrote:

5th edition of D&D is the 5th edition of D&D.

If someone invited me to play D&D I would ask which edition. I would avoid 4e and 5e and play 2e, 3.X and PF. 1e would be played out of curiosity as I never played it. Supposed to be similar to 2e.

Exactly. I need to know which version a person is going to try running. I have a few friends that play all the editions and I pretty much will bow out of any attempt at anything TSR related. Just not my cup of tea. So to me, it's important to clarify that the group is running 2E AD&D or 1st because then I can plan on doing something else with my time.

Somewhat the same here. I'll play anything at least once if a friend is running it, but which edition and what level we're starting at suggests my attitude regarding chargen and the game.

Playing low level TSR D&D? I know not to take the game too seriously, and I won't bother thinking about my character's personality until and if he survives a few levels. Beer 'n' pretzels game.

Playing low level 3.x? Again, don't bother thinking about characterization. Instead, brush up on my system mastery!

Playing mid+ level? Might be worth thinking about personality and character history, but there will still be plenty of arbitrarium to mentally prepare for.

Playing 4e? Probably worth showing up to game day with a full character, and chances are good that I'll want to stay for more than one session.

That's pretty much where I stand though I give you credit for playing TSR D&D regardless of level.

As for how this stands with 5E, I've found that low level isn't terribly deadly (with HD healing, full overnight healing, and some cleric spells) and that the game sort of stays the same over the course of the game. Now we did run the Tomb of Horrors at 10th level and I had 1 PC die, however that was far more his fault after I had said "Are you sure you wanna do this?". Normally that gives them pause and many times it's for good reason. This time, however, it was a Shrug and plops on this really bad Crown. He touches the crown with the sceptor and it falls off (no problem). He puts it on again and tries the other side.....disintegrated.... oops! Still, it was sorta funny.

Liberty's Edge

Paizo Charter Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Here we go...

Page 4 Starter Set Rulebook under the heading What's Next?

"If you want to create a greater variety of characters or populate your adventure with other monsters, check out the fifth edition Player's Handbook, Monster Manual, and Dungeon Master's Guide."

This line is not in the PDF.

Paizo Glitterati Robot

Locking. We understand where this comes from, but honestly this thread will likely incite more grar than we really want here.

Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Gaming / D&D / 4th Edition / It's D&D, not 5E and not NEXT. All Messageboards
Recent threads in 4th Edition