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.

​

 

[Oofta]

And yet Class and cross Class Skills were there in the PHB, and along with the point buy system really got in the way of achieving character concepts in my experience. Generalizing Skills slightly (like a third of the 3E Skills are Tool Proficiencies in 5E instead, so it is not one to one there even) hasn't gotten in the way of anything in a decade.

A divine Nexromancer is easy, since Divine and Arcane are flavor and not rules in D&D now: make a Necromancer Wizard, take Acolyte as the Background. In the new rules, that gives a free Feat, so Magic Initaye Divine for some Cleric flavoring.

How close you get to some ideal is always going to be personal preference. Take the following two images

Both are considered art. The Van Gogh self portrait of course requires you to "fill in the blanks". The second one is a line drawing and close to photo realistic, the third could be be confused for a photo at first glance.

Which one is "better"? Depends on who you ask. There is no right answer.

 

[Parmandur]

How close you get to some ideal is always going to be personal preference. Take the following two images
View attachment 361228View attachment 361229View attachment 361231

Both are considered art. The Van Gogh self portrait of course requires you to "fill in the blanks". The second one is a line drawing and close to photo realistic, the third could be be confused for a photo at first glance.

Which one is "better"? Depends on who you ask. There is no right answer.

True, but I just never would describe 3E as being helpful for meeting a character concept, especially compared to 5E.

 

[Maxperson]

And yet Class and cross Class Skills were there in the PHB, and along with the point buy system really got in the way of achieving character concepts in my experience.

As I said above, that wasn't an issue of the skills, but rather the number of given points at the bottom end and class/cross class. Get rid of those and the skill system blossomed.

I'm also not sure that it "really" got in the way of achieving concepts. It did get in the way, though, by slowing down part(s) of the concept.

Generalizing Skills slightly (like a third of the 3E Skills are Tool Proficiencies in 5E instead, so it is not one to one there even) hasn't gotten in the way of anything in a decade.

Slightly? Pushing literally every physical skill into a single skill so that it's impossible to be better at one over another through the skill system isn't a slight generalization. It's a gross overgeneralization. Same with putting all the senses into one skill. Combing hide and move silent. And so on.

And it gets in the way of my concepts big time. And unlike 3e, I can't eventually overcome it and get to the concept. I'm stuck with it for the entire time I'm playing the PC.

A divine Nexromancer is easy, since Divine and Arcane are flavor and not rules in D&D now: make a Necromancer Wizard, take Acolyte as the Background. In the new rules, that gives a free Feat, so Magic Initaye Divine for some Cleric flavoring.

It's not flavor. Wizards are arcane. Clerics are divine. You can't mix them without a house rule. Besides, if I have to house rule/change/ignore/etc. parts of my character or character creation, the game system has failed to provide a way for me to achieve my concept. Having to do what you describe there = a failure of the system to allow for a divine necromancer concept.

 

[Maxperson]

How close you get to some ideal is always going to be personal preference. Take the following two images
View attachment 361228View attachment 361229View attachment 361231

Both are considered art. The Van Gogh self portrait of course requires you to "fill in the blanks". The second one is a line drawing and close to photo realistic, the third could be be confused for a photo at first glance.

Which one is "better"? Depends on who you ask. There is no right answer.

Yep, but objectively 3e provides a hell of a lot more ways for us to get to close our preferences than 5e does.

 

[Parmandur]

Pushing literally every physical skill into a single skill so that it's impossible to be better at one over another through the skill system isn't a slight generalization. It's a gross overgeneralization. Same with putting all the senses into one skill. Combing hide and move silent. And so on.

It serves well for generic purposes of tracking the activities of Hugh Fantasy Action Heroes *who are gross overgeneralizations as s rule), not a universal simulation of human ability.

It's not flavor. Wizards are arcane. Clerics are divine. You can't mix them without a house rule.

Of course it is juat flavor, there ia no mwchanical contentto "Arcane" or "Divine" magiv. And I just showed how a Wizard can get enough Cleric stuff, in the rules as written, to make the concept work.

At any rate, it is abundantly clear from tge context of the video that Perkins was comparing Class options available in the PHB very specifically, and it is true that the new 2024 PHB has more Class options, 48, than any prior PHB iteration.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Yep, but objectively 3e provides a hell of a lot more ways for us to get to close our preferences than 5e does.

It might objectively help YOU get closer to your preferences, and that's great. It would not help ME get anywhere near my preferences. 3.x was by far my least favorite edition. I like it enough that I enjoyed playing it, but I would rather play any other edition, given a choice.

 

[Maxperson]

It serves well for generic purposes of tracking the activities of Hugh Fantasy Action Heroes *who are gross overgeneralizations as s rule), not a universal simulation of human ability.

That's a False Dichotomy. There is a world of space between gross overgeneralization and simulation of humanity. It's not as if the 3e skills are accurate to the real world simulations.

Of course it is juat flavor, there ia no mwchanical contentto "Arcane" or "Divine" magiv. And I just showed how a Wizard can get enough Cleric stuff, in the rules as written, to make the concept work.

There is literally no difference in flavor between...

Human Wizard/Necromancer - Arcane
Level 5

5th level wizard/necromancer abilities

Cantrips: Chill Touch, Mage Hand, Poison Spray, Light
1st: Ray of Sickness, False Life, Magic Missile
2nd: Mirror Image, Ray of Enfeeblement, Cloud of Daggers
3rd: Animate Dead, Fear

And...

Human Wizard/Necromancer - Divine
Level 5

5th level wizard/necromancer abilities

Cantrips: Chill Touch, Mage Hand, Poison Spray, Light
1st: Ray of Sickness, False Life, Magic Missile
2nd: Mirror Image, Ray of Enfeeblement, Cloud of Daggers
3rd: Animate Dead, Fear

Your miniscule amount of real divine magic through the Divine Initiate feat 1) doesn't create the feel of a divine necromancer, 2) doesn't create the feel of even a divine caster, 3) has nothing to do with being a necromancer.

So basically you forced a square peg into a round hole in order to create a failed divine necromancer concept since it fails to be actually divine(clerical).

That you would be forced to push that square peg into a round hole to make a divine necromancer automatically means 5e failed to provide you with the concept. Unlike 3e which gives me several different truly divine necromancers to pick from.

One one edition provides us with the divine necromancer concept, and it's not 5e.

At any rate, it is abundantly clear from tge context of the video that Perkins was comparing Class options available in the PHB very specifically, and it is true that the new 2024 PHB has more Class options, 48, than any prior PHB iteration.

That's a white room comparison, though. Concepts and options are not simply class and subclass/prestige class alone. Feats and skills are also a part of the character options. For example, Great Weapon Master and Sentinal aren't class options for an evoker wizard. Those are warrior(not fighter) class feats. War Caster is a caster class feat. Sure you could take Great Weapon Master as an evoker or War Caster as a champion fighter, but why would you? Feats are gated by what they do for certain classes and subclasses.

 

[Maxperson]

It might objectively help YOU get closer to your preferences, and that's great. It would not help ME get anywhere near my preferences. 3.x was by far my least favorite edition. I like it enough that I enjoyed playing it, but I would rather play any other edition, given a choice.

A lot of people felt/were overwhelmed by the magnitude of the options available and for those people, the system was a hindrance. For people who weren't, though, and who could and would dig through a dozen or more books looking for the perfect class/prestige class/skills/feats/spells, etc. to achieve a concept, there isn't a better edition out there for reaching the vision.

 

[Parmandur]

That's a white room comparison, though. Concepts and options are not simply class and subclass/prestige class alone. Feats and skills are also a part of the character options. For example, Great Weapon Master and Sentinal aren't class options for an evoker wizard. Those are warrior(not fighter) class feats. War Caster is a caster class feat. Sure you could take Great Weapon Master as an evoker or War Caster as a champion fighter, but why would you? Feats are gated by what they do for certain classes and subclasses.

No, Class and Subclass are both significantly more important than either Skills or Feats, and both by a large margin. It is not at all white room, since both Class and Subclass are, literally, big far packages of character concept.

 

[Parmandur]

A lot of people felt/were overwhelmed by the magnitude of the options available and for those people, the system was a hindrance. For people who weren't, though, and who could and would dig through a dozen or more books looking for the perfect class/prestige class/skills/feats/spells, etc. to achieve a concept, there isn't a better edition out there for reaching the vision.

It is less the number of options, but rather the number of small options like in the Skills system.