Quote from Sillvva >>

• There will be guidance for using some of the older character options with the 2024 class designs.

 As an aging DM, I will definitely need Guidance on remembering updated rules and not just automatically reverting to the older ones out of habit.

I'd love to refer to it as: Dungeons & Dragons, Fifth Edition - Now with more stain fighting power! but honestly, once the group decides which rule set to use, we'll just call it D&D as we always have.

Quote from OccultantNate >>

Ya but they called 3.5 that and it's same thing as 3e to 3.5 that everyone was calling it that same thing here that not calling it 5.5 and just the new rules seems a bit odd as even gaming site coverage been calling it 5.5 

No.

There were actually base game changes in 3.5 that flat out broke 3.0 content.  Skills were removed.  They changed how damage reduction worked.  Actual base game mechanics changed.

This hasn't happened in 5e.

I just feel calling it The 2024 Rules is just terrible branding and very boring sounding. And the spoilers for the phb 24 all but state "you can use new monsters and adventures in 2014 rules but can only use character options in 24 if you are a 24 rules character" so it's only backwards compatible with 2014 so it is enough rule changes that just calling it the 2024 rules feel like your underplaying how huge the changes are.  

Quote from Sillvva >>

Quote from Spideycloned >>

D&D Beyond has a lot of discourse on the implementation, but beyond the horrific search feature that every administration has agreed this website has?  This is me now speculating, but character sheets will probably reference the set of rules in which they were created.  2014 classes and subclasses won't see 2024 spells, and 2024 characters won't see 2014 spells, but there might be a toggle to turn those on which will probably create duplicates of them in spell lists.  These are website issues.  They aren't edition issues. 

 Yes. As I've said, we don't have information on how the implementation will look. It might not be 100% smooth right at release. If you're playing with pen and paper, there shouldn't be any issues. I would love to share with you how the rules will interact, but we can't share the details yet.

 Sorry if that came off as an attack, it wasn't. While I've had a lot of public opinion on how the website has been run in terms of updates and discourse to the people, I have faith in the actual running of the website.

You guys are tight lipped because you have to be. Any single word about any single thing will get picked up by 10 different outlets, and then ripped apart and misconstrued until its not even comparable to it's original intent.  There's no point in sneak peaks etc unless the powers at be decide that it is time for it.

That said, this thread is about people calling 5th edition things it isn't.  It's 5th.  It'll be 5th until the developers decide it isn't.  There's a reason 5th originally was set in Forgotten Realms, and then became setting agnostic.  There's a reason Ranger got revised.  There's even a reason Artificers aren't in the PHB, and we aren't privy to those and probably won't be until it's formally announced they'll get updated or not. 

Whenever the topic of the 2024 rules come up in real life, the subject of discussion usually is already D&D specific. I just say the 'new rules' and everyone so far has understood what I was referencing without issue.

Even if people differentiate between 5e and 5.5e, and people say they play 5e, that is still not very helpful since there are so many rules with options/variants that needs to specified and which rules to ignore.

Just in the 2014 PHB/DMG/MM alone, right off the bat we have several different ways of generating stats for characters with rolling, standard array, point buy, and homebrew; honor and sanity scores if it is campaign relevant; creating our own background or only picking from a list; whether alignment matters or not and how it works; if feats are allowed or not; how characters level up (XP, milestone, session based, something else).  Then there logistic rules to factor in, like if we want to keep track of ammo, encumberance, currency weight, life style expenses, food and water, etc., and I highly doubt most tables even keeps track of all that outside the first two. For combat and adventures, there is also a short discussion on initiative, action options, injuries, rest variant, Hero Points, variant skill checks (e.g.: Rogue using Dex to make a persuasion check on a little kid with a "magic" trick), downtime activities, and a whole bunch of other stuff in the DMG.

Saying "default" 5e does not help either, since I doubt many people play the assumed vanilla rules as described in the books, with rolling for stats, no feats, track food and water and life style expenses, and so on. Saying "default" as in the most common way to play is not helpful either, since you still need to tell people how to generate stats (standard array and point buy are probably the most common, but rolling is not rare either, and homebrew stat generation is also a pretty popular thing); people know feats are usually allowed but does everyone get a free feat at character creation too, because that is a popular homebrew rule; we usually track ammo, and we usually ignore lifestyle expenses, but we still need to discuss encumberance, coin weight, and food and water since the community seems more divided on those. Alignment always need a short discussion too, cause that is a stickler for some people.

Quote from Sillvva >>

• There will be guidance for using some of the older character options with the 2024 class designs.
• Any subclasses that have some compatibility headaches like the Circle of the Shepherd or the Hexblade are likely candidates for a revision in the near future. (likely, but not confirmed) 

If people allow new and old content to be used instead of just cutting the old content completely, there should not be much compatibility headaches though. For example with the Shepherd Druid Faithful Summons, if both old and new Conjure Animal spells are allowed, it does not make sense to apply the new spell since the subclass ability clearly references the old spell; but during normal spellcasting, the Shepherd Druid can choose which Conjure Animal that they want to prepare and cast.

It will be headache in AL, but for people running their own games at their own table, you do not have to cut the old content, since the old and new content are functionally different spells with different uses, with the commonality in name only.

Quote from Mezzurah >>

5th Edition 2:  Electric Boogaloo.

 This is the actual best answer

Quote from Sillvva >>

But I have already made several 2024 characters with 2014 subclasses, like a Necromancer for example. The process to do so is very straightforward.

Someone on the "inside" saying that in public! Big news! ;)

 It will remain 5e at the tables I play at simply because I am the person that buys full books with no interest in the new rules or any of the recent other releases, and with wotc removing piecemeal purchases, there will simply be none of the new rules at these tables.

It appears no matter how much wotc doesn't want it called 5.5, it will be the name that sticks if for no other reason they are so adamant on it not being called 5.5, it is like they have no idea how nicknames stick. Already very few places outside of ddb is in not called 5.5, and even here it is referenced 5.5 quite a lot even though we are constantly told it is not 5.5.

Quote from TrippyHippyEcho >>

The rules have changed enough to warrant calling it a new edition. They have changed enough that the creators have stated some Classes are “effectively a New Class”, there are new rules and the rulebooks themselves have been given completely different layout design and information. The changes are more significant than many other games have between editions and you need to buy new books in order to play the up to date version. It is a new edition in everything but name. 

 You can have new classes without it being a new edition. We saw it twice - the redesigned Ranger, and the Artificer. This is just more of that, especially the former.

Quote from Wysperra >>

Quote from IamSposta >>

R5e (revised 5th edition)

 Not 5eR?

 No, IMP “R5e” rolls off the tongue easier.

It just REALLLY gets on my nerves when people say that NOT calling it 5.5 is "marketing" like "marketing" is inherently a bad thing. OF COURSE it's marketing, calling it 5.5 would have been marketing too had they decided to play that angle, and Wizards did back in 2003 when 3.5 was coming out. Although as things stand right now, 3.0 vs 3.5 was a MUCH bigger change than this, just remember the rules for Small characters and weapon sizes (the Order of the Stick actually started with that exact joke). While I agree that Wizards PR was terrible last year, they have greatly improved since, and have been very clear that this is NOT 5.5, and it really is not, for more than a year. Whenever I see someone call the new rules 5.5, it is almost invariably followed by a dismissal of the 2024 changes on some grounds. Wizards made their bed last year with their slow reactions, but this year I find a whole different story, and in fact I find more people online who like the new rules than I find people who don't, or aggressively proselytize Pathfinder or DC20 or whatever. I make sure to call the rules 2024 revision every time, except when a shorthand is needed, then I say 5.24, because it's very short to say and I agree that some Wizards endorsed shorthand would have been great, but it is probably too late now.  

Quote from Dindomir_Eagleshield >>

It just REALLLY gets on my nerves when people say that NOT calling it 5.5 is "marketing" like "marketing" is inherently a bad thing. OF COURSE it's marketing, calling it 5.5 would have been marketing too had they decided to play that angle, and Wizards did back in 2003 when 3.5 was coming out. Although as things stand right now, 3.0 vs 3.5 was a MUCH bigger change than this, just remember the rules for Small characters and weapon sizes (the Order of the Stick actually started with that exact joke). While I agree that Wizards PR was terrible last year, they have greatly improved since, and have been very clear that this is NOT 5.5, and it really is not, for more than a year. Whenever I see someone call the new rules 5.5, it is almost invariably followed by a dismissal of the 2024 changes on some grounds. Wizards made their bed last year with their slow reactions, but this year I find a whole different story, and in fact I find more people online who like the new rules than I find people who don't, or aggressively proselytize Pathfinder or DC20 or whatever. I make sure to call the rules 2024 revision every time, except when a shorthand is needed, then I say 5.24, because it's very short to say and I agree that some Wizards endorsed shorthand would have been great, but it is probably too late now.  

 It doesn't have to be referred to as 5.5 by official sources just the 24 rules vs 2014 rules is really big of an issue then calling it a new edition 

Quote from kenclary >>

Quote from Sillvva >>

But I have already made several 2024 characters with 2014 subclasses, like a Necromancer for example. The process to do so is very straightforward.

Someone on the "inside" saying that in public! Big news! ;)

Please don't infer that they are saying they did it on D&D Beyond.  All they said is that the mishmash is possible.  They never said they did it with D&D Beyond.

You can do anything you want on pen and paper. 

Quote from Dindomir_Eagleshield >>

It just REALLLY gets on my nerves when people say that NOT calling it 5.5 is "marketing" like "marketing" is inherently a bad thing. OF COURSE it's marketing, calling it 5.5 would have been marketing too had they decided to play that angle, and Wizards did back in 2003 when 3.5 was coming out. Although as things stand right now, 3.0 vs 3.5 was a MUCH bigger change than this, just remember the rules for Small characters and weapon sizes (the Order of the Stick actually started with that exact joke). While I agree that Wizards PR was terrible last year, they have greatly improved since, and have been very clear that this is NOT 5.5, and it really is not, for more than a year. Whenever I see someone call the new rules 5.5, it is almost invariably followed by a dismissal of the 2024 changes on some grounds. Wizards made their bed last year with their slow reactions, but this year I find a whole different story, and in fact I find more people online who like the new rules than I find people who don't, or aggressively proselytize Pathfinder or DC20 or whatever. I make sure to call the rules 2024 revision every time, except when a shorthand is needed, then I say 5.24, because it's very short to say and I agree that some Wizards endorsed shorthand would have been great, but it is probably too late now.  

 I really don't care what they call it, but I am not looking forward to all of the unesacary conflating and confusion calling it 5.5 would prevent.

im getting on the 5.24 boat.   saying it as five-two-four has a ring to it.   5.5 implies way more of a change than there actually are. 

of course still wanting 5F to catch on for my own satisfaction.