D&D (2024) WotC Fireside Chat: Revised 2024 Player’s Handbook

In this video about the upcoming revised Player’s Handnook, WotC’s Jeremy Crawford and Chris Perkins reveal a few new tidbits.

• The books are near final and almost ready to go to print
• Psionic subclasses such as the Soulknife and Psi Warrior will appear in the core books
• Named spells have art depicting their creators.
• There are new species in the PHB.

​

 

[Kurotowa]

In a lot of ways, 2014 D&D was somewhat weak in that area. Certainly the DMs Guide was a mess when it comes to layout. Generally the art was fine, but I don't think it had the integrative qualities that they're talking bout here. This could be very different, in a good way.

With the 2014 core books on the way out, they're apparently now outside the "don't talk badly about your own product" statute of limitations. In one of these interview videos, Crawford talked pretty bluntly about how they were working with limited time and money on those books and the DMG absolutely got the short end of the stick. They just rushed it out after the other two books were done with what little resources they had left.

So yeah, not even the WotC devs are defending the quality of that book anymore.

 

[Alzrius]

With the 2014 core books on the way out, they're apparently now outside the "don't talk badly about your own product" statute of limitations. In one of these interview videos, Crawford talked pretty bluntly about how they were working with limited time and money on those books and the DMG absolutely got the short end of the stick. They just rushed it out after the other two books were done with what little resources they had left.

So yeah, not even the WotC devs are defending the quality of that book anymore.

That's true to a degree, but there's also a certain amount of "make the new stuff sound good by contrasting it favorably to the old stuff" that's part-and-parcel of pre-release marketing as well.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

I think Goblins should be in the new PHB, so they don't have to rewrite the Goblin PC entry every time they release a new campaign setting.

 

[Kurotowa]

I think Goblins should be in the new PHB, so they don't have to rewrite the Goblin PC entry every time they release a new campaign setting.

When they were discussing the addition of goliaths, they said they aim for two species covering a niche. So orcs and goliaths are the two "big and strong" species with the Powerful Build trait. That way players have a choice when going for a particular theme.

The unstated corollary, then, is that three species covering the same niche in the PHB would be overkill. It's okay to have redundancy in a supplement like MotM that covers a lot of species, but PHB real estate is limited so you have to divide it carefully.

By that logic, I think gnomes and halflings cover our two "small species" slots. If you want goblins to be promoted, one of them has to be demoted to make room. And while I'm not saying it would be the wrong move to remove one of them (gnomes, it's totally gnomes, 4e got that right), there will be people who kick up a fuss at it so you have to be pretty confident in the move.

 

[TrippyHippy]

When they were discussing the addition of goliaths, they said they aim for two species covering a niche. So orcs and goliaths are the two "big and strong" species with the Powerful Build trait. That way players have a choice when going for a particular theme.

Are Dragonborn not ‘big and strong’ or have they been ommitted?

 

[Seramus]

Alustriel Silverhand's Trunk of Magical Leftovers.

Alustriel Silverhand's Little Black Book of Everything.

 

[Azzy]

Are Dragonborn not ‘big and strong’ or have they been ommitted?

No, to both.

 

[Twiggly the Gnome]

Are Dragonborn not ‘big and strong’ or have they been ommitted?

The '24 edition doesn't have species based ASAs, so on average, they aren't any stronger.

 

[TrippyHippy]

No, to both.

Well, I’d consider them big and strong by their description.

Anyway, I think the changes in the ‘species’ is swings and roundabouts really. Half-Elves and Half-Orcs are being replaced as far as I am aware - and Half-Elves aren’t ‘big and strong’ particularly. There are dozens to choose from and the removal of Ability modifiers makes them less heavily consequential differentiations - secondary to Backgrounds at least.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

When they were discussing the addition of goliaths, they said they aim for two species covering a niche. So orcs and goliaths are the two "big and strong" species with the Powerful Build trait. That way players have a choice when going for a particular theme.

The unstated corollary, then, is that three species covering the same niche in the PHB would be overkill. It's okay to have redundancy in a supplement like MotM that covers a lot of species, but PHB real estate is limited so you have to divide it carefully.

By that logic, I think gnomes and halflings cover our two "small species" slots. If you want goblins to be promoted, one of them has to be demoted to make room. And while I'm not saying it would be the wrong move to remove one of them (gnomes, it's totally gnomes, 4e got that right), there will be people who kick up a fuss at it so you have to be pretty confident in the move.

The niche might not be size but Fey nature, even if there's already 2 fey species with Elf and Gnome.