Since Pathfinder was mentioned, I personally like their “Remastered” label for PF2e. It seems to be exactly what WotC is doing for 5e, but ‘Remastered’ evokes a more positive reaction in my opinion. R5e or 5eR aren’t super complicated. What do you think about that?
I'd have been fine with 5e Remaster too!
I could get behind remaster. Or revised, because if there's one thing WotC hates its getting caught taking an idea from Paizo.
I also like it. R5E is a cold name, much more so than “One D&D.” (And yeah, I know that was just a working title. It was still a bad working title.)
Since Pathfinder was mentioned, I personally like their “Remastered” label for PF2e. It seems to be exactly what WotC is doing for 5e, but ‘Remastered’ evokes a more positive reaction in my opinion. R5e or 5eR aren’t super complicated. What do you think about that?
I'd have been fine with 5e Remaster too!
I could get behind remaster. Or revised, because if there's one thing WotC hates its getting caught taking an idea from Paizo.
I also like it. R5E is a cold name, much more so than “One D&D.” (And yeah, I know that was just a working title. It was still a bad working title.)
Is it any more cold than simply “5e” or “AD&D” or “3.5e” etc.? Shorthands are always a bit cold, and I think folks would get used to R5e or 5eR pretty quickly if it was consistently applied.
Personally, I think Revised 5e is the most accurate way to represent the update. Plus, Remastered is already used by Wizards in Magic, and it would be a bit weird to have them use branding that both a competitor uses and they use in a different context.
The fact their PR team completely bungled this messaging and gave fire to the “this is 6e, everything will be incomparable” trolls… just another example of how a non-issue has become a major source of contention and confusion due to Wizards’ truly awful PR department.
I suspect the reluctance to get behind the name is good old conservatism. They haven't picked a name and 100% decided to go with it just yet, and they know if they refer to it as 5.5e etc it'll stick and they'll have to keep with it. Personally, I'd prefer they just picked one and got on with it. It would help calm some down a bit too.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Well no matter what Hasbro wants to call it, the community will call it what they want to. Most of use are half way between 6.0 and 5.5, no one will call it D&D2024 as that is too wordy and not descriptive in a way that makes sense.
I completely agree with calling it 5.5e. I don't see the big deal with avoiding that term, and that's a criticism of WotC dancing around the issue too.
Same. And it's actively gonna be an unnecessary point of confusion when people say 5e due to Wizards' apparent hatred of accurate shorthand.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explainHERE.
So ... multi-quote isn't working today. So I'll just paraphrase.
No, I'm not conflating anything with anything, I'm just quoting the sources I've been able to find, which show steady growth for D&D since 15. And also, what AE Dorsay says seems to fit quite snugly into what I've been able to find.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
I suspect the reluctance to get behind the name is good old conservatism. They haven't picked a name and 100% decided to go with it just yet, and they know if they refer to it as 5.5e etc it'll stick and they'll have to keep with it. Personally, I'd prefer they just picked one and got on with it. It would help calm some down a bit too.
I think it’s this but mostly from a branding perspective. Most people are far, far more casual players than we board posters. Numbers like 5.5 could potentially scare off some new players, who might wonder if they have to play 5.0 first before they can get into 5.5. Then they find 5.0 is out of print and just kind of walk away altogether. Or existing players who will assume it’s not compatible with 5.0 and then not buy the new stuff. That’s what they’ve been saying since 2014 is they want to get off the edition treadmill.
Personally, I think Revised 5e is the most accurate way to represent the update. Plus, Remastered is already used by Wizards in Magic, and it would be a bit weird to have them use branding that both a competitor uses and they use in a different context.
I agree, that’s why I’ve been referring to it as Revised 5th edition (R5e) for a while now.
A lot of the reason I (and my players) didn't care that much about the whole mess is that... I didn't expect better of them, or of any other RPG company. They're companies, not friends. Paizo is no more your friend than WotC; CC/BY is a vastly superior license for downstream creators than ORC.
Tried telling them that during the upset, but they wouldn't have it. WotC is evil and everyone else are saints, y'see. I'm somewhat annoyed after having noticed that one of the better YTs that was released (not great, but better than some) carried on flooding my feed with videos saying D&D is doomed etc ever since...and I just realised that they sell a competitor product (not Paizo). Blatantly just smelt blood in the water and decided to do what they could to exacerbate it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
The OGL episode made the decision to unsubscribe easier, but I'd been meaning to anyway. I haven't resubbed since because I just don't think DDB has been good enough a product recently to justify it.
Personally, I've been using 5.5e to refer to it so far. WotC can call it 'The Dungeons and the Dragons: Tokyo Drift', and I'm still ultimately going to default to whatever shorthand the community consensus decides it is. Whether that is R5e, or 5.5e, or 6e, or anything else remains to be seen.
Who's really the one to put ogl at the feet of? DND team at WOTC? WOTC? Hasbro?
What have the done to reverse course other than lip service?
They put the 5e SRD in Creative Commons, remember? Unlike the OGL, this is a license that neither WotC nor Hasbro control, has been tested in court, is truly irrevocable, is much clearer in how it can be used, and gives both WotC and the smaller publishers using it stronger legal recourses and protections.
Personally, I've been using 5.5e to refer to it so far. WotC can call it 'The Dungeons and the Dragons: Tokyo Drift', and I'm still ultimately going to default to whatever shorthand the community consensus decides it is. Whether that is R5e, or 5.5e, or 6e, or anything else remains to be seen.
I alternate between 5.5e, 5R, 1DnD and One depending on whichever one I feel like typing that day. The one I never use for it is 6e.
Kind of reminds me of how when MicroSoft named the Xbox One, in hopes that the video gaming community would refer to it as "The One" (Similar to how the previous Xbox 360 was referred to as "The Three-Sixty"). Instead, everyone collectively agreed to call it "Xbone."
They backed down on the OGL thing, and releasing under Creative Commons was a nice gesture that showed that they wanted to reassure the community no further shenanigans like this would happen again in the future.
I do know one person who switched to DMing Pathfinder and hasn’t switched back, but that’s because they’ve decided they really like Pathfinder, not because they’re still upset over OGL.
I am warily keeping an eye on OneD&D now. I’m hoping they’ll listen to feedback and fix some of the more unpopular aspects of some of the playtest content. In particular, the mess they made of the Druid’s wildshape and the restricting Tiny size wildshapes to level 11. I’m optimistic that that was just playtest stuff and they will listen to feedback and change it. I know two people who really like druids, and they are both pretty concerned about the changes proposed in the playtest rules.
Thinking about doing a bad thing with OGL and then being convinced not to is not going to make me leave forever. And thinking about ruining druids but changing their minds and not doing it also wouldn’t make me leave. But if they actually go through with the planned changes to wildshape, then I would not use OneD&D in any game I run. Might still try it as a player, but when I’m the DM we’d be sticking to 5e or trying out other systems.
Given that 5e classes are still valid...why would 1D&D class screwups put you off? Just let players choose which they want to use. I really didn't like the proposed changes to Druids and it bothered me that they thought it was worth trying...but worst case scenario, I let Druids use 5e versions instead.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
In particular, the mess they made of the Druid’s wildshape and the restricting Tiny size wildshapes to level 11. I’m optimistic that that was just playtest stuff and they will listen to feedback and change it.
That was two druids ago, have you seen the most recent playtest?
In particular, the mess they made of the Druid’s wildshape and the restricting Tiny size wildshapes to level 11. I’m optimistic that that was just playtest stuff and they will listen to feedback and change it.
That was two druids ago, have you seen the most recent playtest?
Ooh, I had not - that looks much better!!
I’m glad to see they listened to feedback on that too.
What they almost did with OGL still leaves a bit of a bad taste in my mouth knowing that they’d even think of trying it. But the fact that they listened to complaints and didn’t go through with it does restore some respect there. As long as they never try to pull something like that again.
And the druid thing doesn’t leave a bad taste at all. It was playtest content, people didn’t like it, they changed it, problem solved. Exactly how playtesting is supposed to work.
At the local gaming cafe, I really don't know how many were even aware of the OGL, but I am confident to say that 5e has gone from 80% of all games played to more like 60%, even 50%. I know of a Warhammer Fantasy table, two PF2e, one PF1e table, plus my AD&D 1e table, all that run regularly, and there are likely more I don't know of. Pre-Covid there were no PF or AD&D games there. I would love to see even more games tried. My 1e table is trying out an OSE funnel on Sat, and there is someone in the local Discord trying to get a 3rd PF2e table up and running.
Oh, and of the 5e tables at the cafe, I know at least 2 that are NOT going anywhere near 6e when it comes out. Any of that material is being banned. But then, 6e is ultimately not going to be conducive to in-person sessions, as opposed to virtual sessions, so I don't think wotc really cares that much about that.
Has this been because of a loss of 5E tables or jsut an increase on the others?
p0ersonally i dont care about the OGL. In my opinion it was teh worst and best thing ever to happen to D&D. For 3rd edition it created a whole lot of junk to be published with a handful of gems. It also created a good amount of deferent genres that still survive today. I am a firm believer of "the owner of the product deserves to be paid something if others create of off their work"
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I also like it. R5E is a cold name, much more so than “One D&D.” (And yeah, I know that was just a working title. It was still a bad working title.)
Terra Lubridia archive:
The Bloody Barnacle | The Gut | The Athene Crusader | The Jewel of Atlantis
Is it any more cold than simply “5e” or “AD&D” or “3.5e” etc.? Shorthands are always a bit cold, and I think folks would get used to R5e or 5eR pretty quickly if it was consistently applied.
Personally, I think Revised 5e is the most accurate way to represent the update. Plus, Remastered is already used by Wizards in Magic, and it would be a bit weird to have them use branding that both a competitor uses and they use in a different context.
The fact their PR team completely bungled this messaging and gave fire to the “this is 6e, everything will be incomparable” trolls… just another example of how a non-issue has become a major source of contention and confusion due to Wizards’ truly awful PR department.
I suspect the reluctance to get behind the name is good old conservatism. They haven't picked a name and 100% decided to go with it just yet, and they know if they refer to it as 5.5e etc it'll stick and they'll have to keep with it. Personally, I'd prefer they just picked one and got on with it. It would help calm some down a bit too.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Same. And it's actively gonna be an unnecessary point of confusion when people say 5e due to Wizards' apparent hatred of accurate shorthand.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.So ... multi-quote isn't working today. So I'll just paraphrase.
No, I'm not conflating anything with anything, I'm just quoting the sources I've been able to find, which show steady growth for D&D since 15. And also, what AE Dorsay says seems to fit quite snugly into what I've been able to find.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
I think it’s this but mostly from a branding perspective. Most people are far, far more casual players than we board posters. Numbers like 5.5 could potentially scare off some new players, who might wonder if they have to play 5.0 first before they can get into 5.5. Then they find 5.0 is out of print and just kind of walk away altogether. Or existing players who will assume it’s not compatible with 5.0 and then not buy the new stuff.
That’s what they’ve been saying since 2014 is they want to get off the edition treadmill.
I agree, that’s why I’ve been referring to it as Revised 5th edition (R5e) for a while now.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
A lot of the reason I (and my players) didn't care that much about the whole mess is that... I didn't expect better of them, or of any other RPG company. They're companies, not friends. Paizo is no more your friend than WotC; CC/BY is a vastly superior license for downstream creators than ORC.
Tried telling them that during the upset, but they wouldn't have it. WotC is evil and everyone else are saints, y'see. I'm somewhat annoyed after having noticed that one of the better YTs that was released (not great, but better than some) carried on flooding my feed with videos saying D&D is doomed etc ever since...and I just realised that they sell a competitor product (not Paizo). Blatantly just smelt blood in the water and decided to do what they could to exacerbate it.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
The OGL episode made the decision to unsubscribe easier, but I'd been meaning to anyway. I haven't resubbed since because I just don't think DDB has been good enough a product recently to justify it.
Who's really the one to put ogl at the feet of? DND team at WOTC? WOTC? Hasbro?
What have the done to reverse course other than lip service?
Personally, I've been using 5.5e to refer to it so far. WotC can call it 'The Dungeons and the Dragons: Tokyo Drift', and I'm still ultimately going to default to whatever shorthand the community consensus decides it is. Whether that is R5e, or 5.5e, or 6e, or anything else remains to be seen.
Free Content: [Basic Rules],
[Phandelver],[Frozen Sick],[Acquisitions Inc.],[Vecna Dossier],[Radiant Citadel], [Spelljammer],[Dragonlance], [Prisoner 13],[Minecraft],[Star Forge], [Baldur’s Gate], [Lightning Keep], [Stormwreck Isle], [Pinebrook], [Caverns of Tsojcanth], [The Lost Horn], [Elemental Evil].Free Dice: [Frostmaiden],
[Flourishing], [Sanguine],[Themberchaud], [Baldur's Gate 3], [Lego].They put the 5e SRD in Creative Commons, remember? Unlike the OGL, this is a license that neither WotC nor Hasbro control, has been tested in court, is truly irrevocable, is much clearer in how it can be used, and gives both WotC and the smaller publishers using it stronger legal recourses and protections.
I alternate between 5.5e, 5R, 1DnD and One depending on whichever one I feel like typing that day. The one I never use for it is 6e.
Kind of reminds me of how when MicroSoft named the Xbox One, in hopes that the video gaming community would refer to it as "The One" (Similar to how the previous Xbox 360 was referred to as "The Three-Sixty"). Instead, everyone collectively agreed to call it "Xbone."
Free Content: [Basic Rules],
[Phandelver],[Frozen Sick],[Acquisitions Inc.],[Vecna Dossier],[Radiant Citadel], [Spelljammer],[Dragonlance], [Prisoner 13],[Minecraft],[Star Forge], [Baldur’s Gate], [Lightning Keep], [Stormwreck Isle], [Pinebrook], [Caverns of Tsojcanth], [The Lost Horn], [Elemental Evil].Free Dice: [Frostmaiden],
[Flourishing], [Sanguine],[Themberchaud], [Baldur's Gate 3], [Lego].They backed down on the OGL thing, and releasing under Creative Commons was a nice gesture that showed that they wanted to reassure the community no further shenanigans like this would happen again in the future.
I do know one person who switched to DMing Pathfinder and hasn’t switched back, but that’s because they’ve decided they really like Pathfinder, not because they’re still upset over OGL.
I am warily keeping an eye on OneD&D now. I’m hoping they’ll listen to feedback and fix some of the more unpopular aspects of some of the playtest content. In particular, the mess they made of the Druid’s wildshape and the restricting Tiny size wildshapes to level 11. I’m optimistic that that was just playtest stuff and they will listen to feedback and change it. I know two people who really like druids, and they are both pretty concerned about the changes proposed in the playtest rules.
Thinking about doing a bad thing with OGL and then being convinced not to is not going to make me leave forever. And thinking about ruining druids but changing their minds and not doing it also wouldn’t make me leave. But if they actually go through with the planned changes to wildshape, then I would not use OneD&D in any game I run. Might still try it as a player, but when I’m the DM we’d be sticking to 5e or trying out other systems.
Given that 5e classes are still valid...why would 1D&D class screwups put you off? Just let players choose which they want to use. I really didn't like the proposed changes to Druids and it bothered me that they thought it was worth trying...but worst case scenario, I let Druids use 5e versions instead.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
That was two druids ago, have you seen the most recent playtest?
Ooh, I had not - that looks much better!!
I’m glad to see they listened to feedback on that too.
What they almost did with OGL still leaves a bit of a bad taste in my mouth knowing that they’d even think of trying it. But the fact that they listened to complaints and didn’t go through with it does restore some respect there. As long as they never try to pull something like that again.
And the druid thing doesn’t leave a bad taste at all. It was playtest content, people didn’t like it, they changed it, problem solved. Exactly how playtesting is supposed to work.
Has this been because of a loss of 5E tables or jsut an increase on the others?
p0ersonally i dont care about the OGL. In my opinion it was teh worst and best thing ever to happen to D&D. For 3rd edition it created a whole lot of junk to be published with a handful of gems. It also created a good amount of deferent genres that still survive today. I am a firm believer of "the owner of the product deserves to be paid something if others create of off their work"