WotC has been insistent, insistent I say, that the new edition of D&D is not, in fact, a new edition. This is not D&D 6e! This is not even D&D 5.5e! This is …

Well, they call it 2024e, because that is not at all confusing with what 5e is being called now (2014e).

But, of course if it were not a new edition, why would we need to refer to it differently?

Or, to look at it another way, why not just call it D&D with new optional rules like have shown up in things like Tasha’s, etc.?

Because then they wouldn’t sell new books, amirite?

But we’re not to call it a new edition. It is simply rule changes that are completely compatible with the older, um, previous, er, differently-numbered-year edition not-an-edition set of numbers.

A Caveat

Note: the changes in rules from 2014e / 5e to 2024e are not necessarily bad. In fact, a lot of them sound kind of interesting. But are they backwards-compatible? Do they not imbalance encounters and conflicts in earlier modules? Will players in a given campaign be able to change to 2024e without making any difference? Will 5e characters be as good against new 2024e campaigns? If some players want to switch but others do not, will that work well? Will various Virtual Tabletops handle mixed parties and/or modules?

Two examples that got a fair amount of play in my reading today:

Surprise in 2024e

In 5e / 2014e, when a group or individuals are Surprised, they roll Initiative as normal, but are unable to take any Actions or Reactions or movement through their first turn, after which they can only React until their  next turn.

So that’s pretty harsh. Surprised foes (or friends) are at a serious deficit here. In an Action Economy,

In 2024e, Surprised individuals … roll Initiative at Disadvantage.

That’s a much simpler mechanic, but it’s also a lot easier mechanic.  Rather than missing out on an entire turn, you just tend to come late in a turn.

Either alternative is arguable. But are they the same? Can you have a mix of players choosing a different version, for themselves or their opponents? Can you seamlessly change the rule to match previous challenges? Does it just become another option?  Is it a significant enough change to actually alter how an encounter ends?

Inspiration in 2024e

Inspiration is an optional rule in 5e / 2014e. The DM (with input from the players) can give someone up to 1 point of Inspiration. That Inspiration can be turned in (in advance) for Advantage on an attack roll, saving throw, or ability check.

Okay, pretty straightforward. A D20 roll can be rolled with Advantage.

The 2024e version changes the mechanic and the name. It’s now “Heroic Inspiration,” and it allows instead a re-roll on any roll a player makes — an attack, a damage roll, a healing roll, whatever.

A key here, from the designers, was the sense that too much adds Advantage. That’s kind of ironic, as Advantage was intended as a way of simplifying the endless plusses/minuses of 3e, 3.5e, and 4e. But there was here a sense that too much was being simplified and rolled into a trinary Advantage/Disadvantage mechanic.

In addition to that rather significant change, there are now a variety of mechanical ways to gain “Heroic Inspiration,” including a Fighter subclass that just basically gets their point refreshed every turn.

It’s an interesting design choice, and I can see a lot behind it. It can make for more ways to leverage Inspiration (through broader dice rolls, and also by taking out of the unstackable Advantage bucket). It also makes, through its expanded Inspiration, a more reliable way of getting it.

On the other hand, it introduces Yet Another Mechanic. And it weakens that RP focus of the current Inspiration mechanic.

Good? Bad? I can see arguments either way. But it’s a very distinct choice, and something a table will need to decide One Way or The Other. Unlike the Surprise mechanic, I don’t think it changes balance — but does that make it Backwards Compatible?

Just call it a new edition, fergoshsakes

People who have bought 5e, will have three choices.

1. Change to 2024e, either mid-campaign, or next time there’s a module change (and upgrade any 5e-era modules to use the new rules).
2. Stick with 5e, and hope they can “backwards compatible” the mechanics of 2024e-era modules into those rules.
3. Mix and match — in existing campaigns or in new ones, evaluate the 2024e  rules that have changed and depending which ones to pull in and which to continue using (and where players can select different conclusions).

Option 1 is pretty standard for a new actual edition. Option 2 might be possible with an actual edition change, but it would be a bit of work.   Option 3 only is possible if that “backwards compatible” notion is real.

These sneak peaks (the first 2024e volume only comes out in September) make me think that WotC has tried to come up with something better enough and different enough to justify getting a new set of books (or virtual add-ins to the VTT … or both!) while pretending that it’s just a set of optional improvements.

I resent that.

I will almost certainly get the new edition of books and rules and use them in the future. I will remain resentful that WotC has been playing games with the whole thing to make money and pretend like they aren’t.