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.

​

 

[Parmandur]

Is it?

How many people complain about neu-Vancian casting? Or the spellcasting ranger? I don't think D&D is modular enough to be the bucket of blocks because it still only is good at playing D&D with D&D assumptions. Try and model something like Earthsea or Lord of the Rings style with it and you quickly see how many necessary bricks you are missing.

Note, this isn't a critique of the 5e engine; it runs a variety of different types just fine, but you D&D Trinity is only good for running D&D despite being labeled as a toolbox.

I have never heard a person in real life bounce off of those things, oddly enough. I play with pretty casual people, friends and family, but honestly most people just roll wirh those things in my experience.

 

[Maxperson]

Cross breed species are pretty common in mythology. Where do you think the minotaur came from?

A cow was bread with a minnow?

 

[TwoSix]

I've never bought into this line of thinking. D&D has too much inherent lore to be a tool kit. Its modular, I give you that, but it's modular in the way buying a Lego set of a castle is; there is a clear model you are supposed to build, even if you can also use the parts to build a racecar as well. It's a far cry from the"bucket of blocks" people claim it is.

D&D is definitely a toolkit; it's just one that requires you to hammer in a nail with your wrench.

 

[Chaosmancer]

The Adventures, yeah, but the core books are basically buckets of bricks.

I'd have to disagree with you there.

The Monster Manual, at the very least, contains SO MUCH lore. Not only basics like the existence of undead, but the actual structures of the planes where demons and devils come from, the origins of things like Empyreans or Aboleths, the little things like hags giving birth by first eating a baby.

You can ignore or change all of it, but it is all THERE.

 

[Parmandur]

I'd have to disagree with you there.

The Monster Manual, at the very least, contains SO MUCH lore. Not only basics like the existence of undead, but the actual structures of the planes where demons and devils come from, the origins of things like Empyreans or Aboleths, the little things like hags giving birth by first eating a baby.

You can ignore or change all of it, but it is all THERE.

Sure, those are the bricks...?

 

[Chaosmancer]

Sure, those are the bricks...?

If we are sticking with a children's toy analogy, I'd say they are more like pre-made houses you place on one of those map mats with the roads on it. Bricks feel like they should be far far more generic.

 

[Parmandur]

If we are sticking with a children's toy analogy, I'd say they are more like pre-made houses you place on one of those map mats with the roads on it. Bricks feel like they should be far far more generic.

I mean, Lego bricks can be very interesting.

 

[SkidAce]

Note, this isn't a critique of the 5e engine; it runs a variety of different types just fine, but you D&D Trinity is only good for running D&D despite being labeled as a toolbox.

Yes, a toolbox for dnd.

 

[Remathilis]

Yes, a toolbox for dnd.

Which isn't really what people mean when they say "toolkit".

The Core Rulebook is a toolkit for Pathfinder. It still has a default assumption in Golarion. You can strip that out and use PF to run any setting you want (even D&D settings) but in absence of any specific setting, you default to Golarion. Everything in PF is written to fit in Golarion, regardless if you want to use it somewhere else as well.

What does D&D default to? Depends on the edition. Basic had the Known World/Mystara. 4e had Nerath. 3e (and to a degree, 1e) had Greyhawk. 5e used the Forgotten Realms for a while but claimed it was the Multiverse. 2e is the only one who used no specific setting and surprise surprise the core rulebooks are some of the worst for invoking the feel of D&D.

I keep hearing the 5.2 books will have a chapter with a default setting (odds are Greyhawk). I want that spread to the remainder of the core books. Use the Oerth elf lore as the PHB elf lore (and imply other elves are different). Use the Greyhawk Gods as the example pantheon. Every piece of lore in the core should be ready to go in a Greyhawk game without adaptation and if you want to run a different setting, you rely on that book to make the changes.

(And if Oerth isn't the DMG default, replace all above with whatever setting is there).

The Core books should allow you to play a complete D&D game with no additional world building or campaign setting books needed. The fact that D&D charges nearly $200 for its core rules and still requires the DM to buy or do world building is a crime. Give a single example and let that lore be the default unless the DM wants to change it.

 

[mamba]

What does D&D default to? Depends on the edition. Basic had the Known World/Mystara. 4e had Nerath. 3e (and to a degree, 1e) had Greyhawk. 5e used the Forgotten Realms for a while but claimed it was the Multiverse. 2e is the only one who used no specific setting and surprise surprise the core rulebooks are some of the worst for invoking the feel of D&D.

I don’t know, FR is just generic high fantasy, you can fit pretty much anything in there or take anything from it, refluff it (give it different lore) and drop it into your own world if you wanted to.

I don’t think there is much / anything in the PHB or MM that is so specific to the FR that you cannot use it anywhere else

I keep hearing the 5.2 books will have a chapter with a default setting (odds are Greyhawk).

example of how to create a setting, not a default setting