We're about to get #DungeonsAndDragons 5.5 and people are freaking out.

D&D #5thEdition has survived longer than most full editions, and we're getting a half edition from these new rulebooks.

It's a testament to D&D's design, or at least its popularity. However, I find it amusing that a bunch of people are nervous about this.

Every edition since #AdvancedDungeonsAndDragons(arguably, but definitely since 2nd edition) has had half and full editions. They have, 100% of the time, made the game better.

So, relax.

One of the things I find interesting about the differences in major editions is that their biggest difference is how they silently change the social contract, and yet players adapt to them.

Like, if you take the mindset from one edition and carry it to the next you'll end up with frustration.

However, much like wide straight roads, the rules implicitly create a different way of playing the game.

Before #4thEdition, and this is even stronger in #5thEdition, you wouldn't inherently think to reskin something. What was in the rulebook was what the thing was.

However, you in 5th edition you can make a #DrunkenMaster by reskinning some #barbarian levels into your character.

Likewise, #2ndEdition and earlier we much more focused on rulings over explicit rules.

Nowhere in the books does it say that wild GM adjudication was how you played earlier editions, but it was almost mandatory for the game to work.

Likewise, reskinning isn't explicitly suggested in later editions, but it was somehow divined by a significant number of players as the way to customize characters.

@AeonCypher people are always nervous about change. What's nice about the game is you can play whatever set of rules you want (even mismatch 'em if you'd like). It isn't like getting a patch on a computer game where you're forced to abandon a previous save game.

I guess for me I always wonder about how much value is actually added in the update and how much of it is just a money grab from Hasbro. Given the amount of time between versions I'd guess it was less of a money grab though (I just don't like Hasbro's leadership).

It'll be interesting to read people's feedback as they start getting into it.

@denniskoch

I don't even know what a money grab would mean. I mean, I'm sure they have a saturation problem with the current edition and would love to sell new books to all of them. On the other hand, isn't that how we got every full and half edition of D&D?

I agree though, no one has to buy the new books. I mean, I don't even prefer it as a system. I mostly play because other people want to.

@AeonCypher Yeah, I was riffing with the money grab. The books and supplements are expensive generally but that is a huge gap between versions (which is why I did walk it back a bit). Really I'm just bitter about Hasbro and WOTC with some of the funky decisions over the last couple of years and I need to calm down.

You're right, they have to make money on it somehow, just like TSR did. I just hope they add value with the new changes. Like I said, it'll be interesting to hear people's feedback as they start to use it.

@AeonCypher I genuinely didn't recall a 4.5, but that may be because I really didn't care for 4.
ETA - like, I*believe* you, I am just scratching my head

@stripey

It was called "D&D Essentials" and was probably the first time a half edition made the game less complex instead of more complex.