The Legacy label isn't a 5 vs 5.5 thing though, because there was content rendered legacy pre-5.5 (Volo's and Tome of Foes). So it doesn't make sense to change the label because then it'd be incorrect for that game content.
Edit: Unless your suggestion is to have two legacy tags? One for content entered into legacy pre-5.5e and one for content post?
The Legacy label isn't a 5 vs 5.5 thing though, because there was content rendered legacy pre-5.5 (Volo's and Tome of Foes). So it doesn't make sense to change the label because then it'd be incorrect for that game content.
Edit: Unless your suggestion is to have two legacy tags? One for content entered into legacy pre-5.5e and one for content post?
Yeah, in that situation, Legacy should be kept for actual legacy versions. 5e isn't Legacy, it's 5e. I can still buy the 5e Monster Manual, but I can't buy Volo's any more.
5e options that have 5.5e versions now are legacy by the definition of legacy as applies in this context:
denoting or relating to software or hardware that has been superseded but is difficult to replace because of its wide use.
5E hasn't been "superseded" if it's still for sale. They have to learn to cope with two active editions (no matter how much they say it's not an edition change).
If you're playing a 5E game, the monsters haven't been superseded. You're just at an earlier version. Your definition doesn't work if both versions are supported. And it's for raw software, not a TTRPG where they want to keep both versions alive and for sale.
WOTC is free to change the definition of what they call Legacy whenever they want. For an example, see the Changelog today.
5e options that have 5.5e versions now are legacy by the definition of legacy as applies in this context:
denoting or relating to software or hardware that has been superseded but is difficult to replace because of its wide use.
5E hasn't been "superseded" if it's still for sale. They have to learn to cope with two active editions (no matter how much they say it's not an edition change).
If you're playing a 5E game, the monsters haven't been superseded. You're just at an earlier version. Your definition doesn't work if both versions are supported. And it's for raw software, not a TTRPG where they want to keep both versions alive and for sale.
WOTC is free to change the definition of what they call Legacy whenever they want. For an example, see the Changelog today.
Yeah, this is one of the main problems with the way the word "legacy" is being used right now. It'll only get more complicated in the future as I'm sure that eventually there are going to be things in the 5.5e rules that get superseded by later 5.5e content the way (e.g.) Volo's Guide to Monsters did.
The other problem is that there are a bunch of things that are labeled in D&D Beyond as "legacy" despite not having been directly superseded by later content. This appears to be because at some point they applied the "Legacy" tag to everything coming from certain 5e books, regardless of whether it had been superseded or not. For instance, every single background and feat from the 2014 Player's Handbook is marked "Legacy" even if it doesn't have a direct "sequel" in the 2024 PHB. There are also a bunch of magic items from the 2024 Dungeon Master's Guide that are marked "Legacy" despite no 2024 version of them existing in D&D Beyond.
This inconsistency has caused a lot of confusion about what the term means already.
It seems like you don't know what "superseded" means—it means something has supplanted or taken its place, which is an entirely accurate description. Legacy doesn't intrinsically mean "no longer for sale" or anything like that, it just means "not the current version but still in use". Legacy as a label for superseded game options seems very appropriate
I agree 100% with wagnarokkr that legacy tagging non-superceded options based on them being in a legacy book is confusion. Necromancer (for the time being at least) shouldn't be legacy given there's no alternative.
It seems like you don't know what "superseded" means—it means something has supplanted or taken its place, which is an entirely accurate description. Legacy doesn't intrinsically mean "no longer for sale" or anything like that, it just means "not the current version but still in use". Legacy as a label for superseded game options seems very appropriate
Do you understand why it might be valuable for there to be a visual distinction between "This is 5e content that's been superseded by 5.5e content but is still the latest 5e version of this thing" and "This is 5e content that was superseded by newer 5e content before 5.5e even existed"?
That's what people want here. It is not necessary that the specific word "Legacy" be used for either of these things, but it shouldn't be used for both of them while both editions are being supported.
I think two different things are being conflated. The original post appeared to forget that the legacy tag wasn't just for 5e content. Then when I pointed out this wasn't the case (Volo's and Tome) it shifted to "5e isn't legacy because legacy means I can't buy it". I rebutted that with what legacy means in this context. Which then in return got a argument of "but it doesn't meet the definition"
I never at any point said there's no value, I just was responding to inaccuracies, but the goalposts do seem to be shifting. I even asked
Edit: Unless your suggestion is to have two legacy tags? One for content entered into legacy pre-5.5e and one for content post?
I can't say there would or wouldn't be value to it, I don't see any but my view isn't the only one. I was just trying to figure out what's being asked.
IMO two different legacy tags would be confusing, but eh
I can't say there would or wouldn't be value to it, I don't see any but my view isn't the only one. I was just trying to figure out what's being asked.
IMO two different legacy tags would be confusing, but eh
The value would be to show what is still current 2014 rules, and what has truly been replaced. That way the many people still using the 2014 ruleset know which versions to use. DDB have confirmed in the same changelog you linked that they intend to support both 5th Edition rulesets (in line with WotC's messaging that 2024 is not a new edition, just an alternative ruleset), so it seems weird to essentially have one of the current rulesets marked as obsolete.
I don't know why you think they'd mark them both legacy though, surely they could just tag 2014 rules with "2014" or "5e" and keep legacy for things like Volo's that have actually been retired. For clarity I'd prefer them to also tag 2024 rules as "2024" or "5.5e", but that's not strictly neccessary.
Actually, tagging items as 5e or 5.5e would be useful. And for things like the new spells in Heroes of Faerun or any subclasses not yet remade for 5.5e, they could carry both tags. The tags don't have to be exclusive.
I think two different things are being conflated. The original post appeared to forget that the legacy tag wasn't just for 5e content. Then when I pointed out this wasn't the case (Volo's and Tome) it shifted to "5e isn't legacy because legacy means I can't buy it". I rebutted that with what legacy means in this context. Which then in return got a argument of "but it doesn't meet the definition"
I never at any point said there's no value, I just was responding to inaccuracies, but the goalposts do seem to be shifting. I even asked
Edit: Unless your suggestion is to have two legacy tags? One for content entered into legacy pre-5.5e and one for content post?
I can't say there would or wouldn't be value to it, I don't see any but my view isn't the only one. I was just trying to figure out what's being asked.
IMO two different legacy tags would be confusing, but eh
You pointed out that some items are legitimately "Legacy", because they are no longer for sale and only accessible to people who already had the books. i.e. Legacy monsters.
You didn't "prove" that calling 5E "legacy" is in any way a sensible or realistic choice, unless the goal is to end support for 5e.
I write software for a living. Legacy in that sense is always stuff that's no longer sold or supported, and only maintained until it can be replaced (which is sometimes never). If you're saying that's what we should think about 5e as, you've really managed to put offside a big chunk of the player base.
But again, WOTC can call it whatever they want. It's not a legally protected term. They can call it "Out of Print" if they want. Labelling things that are "current 5e" as 5e would be a big improvement over "Legacy" which conflates things that are available with things that have been superseded within their own edition, for people who are playing 5e not 5.5e
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Now that you've gotten over the 2024/2014 naming, and accepted 5e and 5.5e, can we change the "Legacy" label?
Items that are only usable in 5E should be marked as 5e, instead of suggesting that 5e is a "Legacy edition".
The Legacy label isn't a 5 vs 5.5 thing though, because there was content rendered legacy pre-5.5 (Volo's and Tome of Foes). So it doesn't make sense to change the label because then it'd be incorrect for that game content.
Edit: Unless your suggestion is to have two legacy tags? One for content entered into legacy pre-5.5e and one for content post?
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
Where have they done this? I can't find any announcement on the front page or even anywhere on the forums.
Character sheet options and Library both have 5e and 5.5e categories now. Very recent, as in last couple of days.
It was announced in the changelog
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
Yeah, in that situation, Legacy should be kept for actual legacy versions. 5e isn't Legacy, it's 5e. I can still buy the 5e Monster Manual, but I can't buy Volo's any more.
5e options that have 5.5e versions now are legacy by the definition of legacy as applies in this context:
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
5E hasn't been "superseded" if it's still for sale. They have to learn to cope with two active editions (no matter how much they say it's not an edition change).
If you're playing a 5E game, the monsters haven't been superseded. You're just at an earlier version. Your definition doesn't work if both versions are supported. And it's for raw software, not a TTRPG where they want to keep both versions alive and for sale.
WOTC is free to change the definition of what they call Legacy whenever they want. For an example, see the Changelog today.
Yeah, this is one of the main problems with the way the word "legacy" is being used right now. It'll only get more complicated in the future as I'm sure that eventually there are going to be things in the 5.5e rules that get superseded by later 5.5e content the way (e.g.) Volo's Guide to Monsters did.
The other problem is that there are a bunch of things that are labeled in D&D Beyond as "legacy" despite not having been directly superseded by later content. This appears to be because at some point they applied the "Legacy" tag to everything coming from certain 5e books, regardless of whether it had been superseded or not. For instance, every single background and feat from the 2014 Player's Handbook is marked "Legacy" even if it doesn't have a direct "sequel" in the 2024 PHB. There are also a bunch of magic items from the 2024 Dungeon Master's Guide that are marked "Legacy" despite no 2024 version of them existing in D&D Beyond.
This inconsistency has caused a lot of confusion about what the term means already.
pronouns: he/she/they
It seems like you don't know what "superseded" means—it means something has supplanted or taken its place, which is an entirely accurate description. Legacy doesn't intrinsically mean "no longer for sale" or anything like that, it just means "not the current version but still in use". Legacy as a label for superseded game options seems very appropriate
I agree 100% with wagnarokkr that legacy tagging non-superceded options based on them being in a legacy book is confusion. Necromancer (for the time being at least) shouldn't be legacy given there's no alternative.
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
Do you understand why it might be valuable for there to be a visual distinction between "This is 5e content that's been superseded by 5.5e content but is still the latest 5e version of this thing" and "This is 5e content that was superseded by newer 5e content before 5.5e even existed"?
That's what people want here. It is not necessary that the specific word "Legacy" be used for either of these things, but it shouldn't be used for both of them while both editions are being supported.
pronouns: he/she/they
I think two different things are being conflated. The original post appeared to forget that the legacy tag wasn't just for 5e content. Then when I pointed out this wasn't the case (Volo's and Tome) it shifted to "5e isn't legacy because legacy means I can't buy it". I rebutted that with what legacy means in this context. Which then in return got a argument of "but it doesn't meet the definition"
I never at any point said there's no value, I just was responding to inaccuracies, but the goalposts do seem to be shifting. I even asked
I can't say there would or wouldn't be value to it, I don't see any but my view isn't the only one. I was just trying to figure out what's being asked.
IMO two different legacy tags would be confusing, but eh
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
The value would be to show what is still current 2014 rules, and what has truly been replaced. That way the many people still using the 2014 ruleset know which versions to use. DDB have confirmed in the same changelog you linked that they intend to support both 5th Edition rulesets (in line with WotC's messaging that 2024 is not a new edition, just an alternative ruleset), so it seems weird to essentially have one of the current rulesets marked as obsolete.
I don't know why you think they'd mark them both legacy though, surely they could just tag 2014 rules with "2014" or "5e" and keep legacy for things like Volo's that have actually been retired. For clarity I'd prefer them to also tag 2024 rules as "2024" or "5.5e", but that's not strictly neccessary.
Actually, tagging items as 5e or 5.5e would be useful. And for things like the new spells in Heroes of Faerun or any subclasses not yet remade for 5.5e, they could carry both tags. The tags don't have to be exclusive.
You pointed out that some items are legitimately "Legacy", because they are no longer for sale and only accessible to people who already had the books. i.e. Legacy monsters.
You didn't "prove" that calling 5E "legacy" is in any way a sensible or realistic choice, unless the goal is to end support for 5e.
I write software for a living. Legacy in that sense is always stuff that's no longer sold or supported, and only maintained until it can be replaced (which is sometimes never). If you're saying that's what we should think about 5e as, you've really managed to put offside a big chunk of the player base.
But again, WOTC can call it whatever they want. It's not a legally protected term. They can call it "Out of Print" if they want. Labelling things that are "current 5e" as 5e would be a big improvement over "Legacy" which conflates things that are available with things that have been superseded within their own edition, for people who are playing 5e not 5.5e