this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2026
50 points (96.3% liked)

Dungeons and Dragons

13399 readers
1 users here now

A community for discussion of all things Dungeons and Dragons! This is the catch all community for anything relating to Dungeons and Dragons, though we encourage you to see out our Networked Communities listed below!

/c/DnD Network Communities

Other DnD and related Communities to follow*

DnD/RPG Podcasts

*Please Follow the rules of these individual communities, not all of them are strictly DnD related, but may be of interest to DnD Fans

Rules (Subject to Change)

Format: [Source Name] Article Title

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Brunbrun6766@lemmy.world
owenfromcanada@lemmy.world
50
DndBeyond will now use "5.5e" as version label (dndbeyond-support.wizards.com)
submitted 1 week ago by Jeeve65@ttrpg.network to c/dnd@lemmy.world
11 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://ttrpg.network/post/33813206

On the dndbeyond website you can filter the content you are looking for. In these filters, they will now use 5.5e instead of "2024"

top 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] _NetNomad@fedia.io 8 points 6 days ago

1974 D&D (OD&D) 1977 Basic Set (Holmes Basic) 1978 Advanced
1981 B/X (Moldvay Basic) 1983 BECMI (Mentzer Basic) 1989 Advanced 2e 1991 New Easy to Master 1991 Rules Cyclopedia 1994 Classic 1995 Advanced 2e Revised 2000 3e 2003 3.5e 2008 4e 2014 5e 2024 5.5e

Congratulations to D&D 5.5e, the 15th edition of D&D!

(I'm not familiar with New Easy to Master and Classic so if those are just variations of Cyclopedia then it's 13. but also individual "rules editions" had different revised printings aside from 1995 2e- my copy of Holmes is the 3rd printing replacing Hobbits with Halflings- so if you include those who the hell knows)

[–] DoubleDongle@lemmy.world 33 points 1 week ago (1 children)

They should have done this from the start. If they had, and were clear about keeping to discrete editions, I wouldn't be learning Pathfinder.

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@slrpnk.net 6 points 6 days ago

I'm in a similar boat. I'm only planning on running Death in Space for the foreseeable future.

[–] Zonetrooper@lemmy.world 25 points 1 week ago (1 children)

"C'mooooon... play more ~~OneDND~~ ~~5e2024~~ 5.5e. It's totally a proper edition this time. Pleeeeeeease?"

In fairness this isn't the first time. 5e was "DnD Next" (terrible name as well) during its development.

[–] Aielman15@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago (3 children)

The difference is that "DnD Next" was just a placeholder name, they were very clear about that and never intended to use it officially, same as OneDnD.

DnD 2024 never made any sense in the first place. Of the first three core manuals, only one was released in 2024 proper. It was just dumb and led to unnecessary confusion.

[–] Jeeve65@ttrpg.network 5 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Nitpicky, but 2 out of 3 core rulebooks of the 2024 version were released in 2024, not just one.

Using year labeling of your product is generally a bad idea, imho, because it makes it appear outdated really quick.

[–] MaggiWuerze@feddit.org 2 points 6 days ago

Unless that's the idea with yearly releases

[–] Zoomboingding@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago

It got by on the fact that it's cross-compatible with all the older content (same as 3 and 3.5), so putting out the PHB was enough to play the game. But they really did dance around that for a long time, insisting that it was not a separate version, when clearly there were lots of balance changes to classes and spells.

[–] Zonetrooper@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago

Oh, I'm not arguing about placeholder names. This whole issue is placeholder names escaping into the wild.

To me personally though, "2024" felt like the last gasp of Hasbro trying to sell an infinitely-rolling, "DnD-as-a-service" dynamic. Fans broadly understand editions and expect them to come with a serious scope of updates, but "annuals" could be deliberately confusing and ephemeral. The hope was they'd seem "new and shiny" enough to still prompt fans to buy them.

Or maybe that's just over-conspiratorial thinking. I dunno.

[–] astropenguin5@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I don't know how to feel about this

[–] CluckN@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago

I do