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.

​

 

[Steampunkette]

That’s a perfectly fine thing to want, but you can’t really have PC wizards casting meteor swarm in that kind of game, unless you’re willing to completely throw any semblance of gameplay balance out the window. This whole tangent started from a quote about high level fighters being Achilles and high level wizards being Zeus. That’s just not a teneble situation for a cooperative game. Either wizards need to stop at being Tiresias, or fighters need to be able to become Heracles. Either is a valid choice, but it doesn’t work to have both.

Tiresias the man or Tiresias the woman?

... 'cause she accomplished WAY MORE. >.>

 

[Remathilis]

The conclusion of an argument isn't circular, only the entire argument.
Also, the argument isn't circular.

1.) anything that exists is "natural"
2.) magic exists
C.) magic is natural.

The point is that natural vs. supernatural only has arbitrary distinctions. If I could do magic in real life, WHY would you call that supernatural? The answer to that question is going to yield a better distinction than just saying "supernatural".

You're right, it's Aristoltian logic. Still doesn't explain why a druid can turn into a dinosaur but not a dragon. Nor would it counter the argument that the sorcerer is as mundane in fantasy as the fighter. All we've done is change "everything is magic" to "nothing is".

 

[Raiztt]

That’s a perfectly fine thing to want, but you can’t really have PC wizards casting meteor swarm in that kind of game, unless you’re willing to completely throw any semblance of gameplay balance out the window. This whole tangent started from a quote about high level fighters being Achilles and high level wizards being Zeus. That’s just not a teneble situation for a cooperative game. Either wizards need to stop at being Tiresias, or fighters need to be able to become Heracles. Either is a valid choice, but it doesn’t work to have both.

1.) I'm ok with magic being, fundamentally, a power/source that is beyond that of mundane/mortal beings. That makes sense to me. If something is not bound by the physical laws, it's going to be more powerful than those laws.
2.) Barring the above, I'm already on the record saying the game should cap out at 10. A 9th level spell should only be something you find on a scroll, that is one of a kind, crumbling into dust.

 

[Charlaquin]

I use they/them frequently to refer to anyone, every day of my life in every situation.

That’s a perfectly acceptable default in leiu of knowing someone’s preference. But I don’t want to be referred to as they/them, which is why I made my preference easily accessible public information. Again, if you didn’t notice that in my title, I would rather you have asked. What’s done is done, and it was an understandable mistake to make, so I won’t hold it against you. But I was informing you so you don’t make the same mistake again.

 

[Remathilis]

Because the writers say so!

But. Like. From a "Real World" standpoint, it's not supernatural at all. It's totally normal for characters in that world to wish and have something actually happen rather than wishing just being a thing that gets nothing done.

So I'll ask you: if magic is not supernatural, is the sorcerer a mundane character like a fighter?

Also, why can a druid change into a dinosaur but not a dragon if they are both natural creatures of the druids world?

 

[Charlaquin]

So were Pecos Bill and Paul Bunyan. Doesn't mean I want a PC wrasslin' a twister into submission or carving out the great lakes so my ox can have a drink.

That sounds so cool though!

 

[Oofta]

YESSSSSSSSSSSSSS

Magic exists in D&D so it's not Supernatural. It's Natural. It's part of the world. How do Wizards use it? Science! They learn it from trial and error and doing various tests and making it work. Which is why Owlbears and other monsters exist because Wizard Experiments went awry!

Magic is totally normal and natural in a D&D Campaign Setting. Nothing supernatural about it!

... unless it -is- supernatural. Kind of a thing I plan to write into Sunset Riders. Magic, the arcane in particular, is -unnatural-. Not because it's supernatural compared to our baseline reality, but because it comes from another reality. From -beyond- the Prime Material Plane.

But on the plane it comes from? That's just how physics works, my dude. Y'know? THAT plane has really weird physics where wiggling your fingers and saying special words makes an explosion... And you're invoking those physics and placing them onto the Prime Material Plane, temporarily, because of reality-bleed between different existences.

Diving and Nature magic, though... those are natural.

If something actually exists in a world means it's not supernatural then supernatural loses all meaning. Ghosts? Totally normal! Why even bother having the word supernatural as part of your vocabulary?

 

[Micah Sweet]

An in-universe perspective is all that matters when it comes to setting the parameters of martial characters’ capabilities. If you want to say a Barbarian’s rage is “magic” from a real-world perspective… ok, so what? It doesn’t have to be Magic from an in-character perspective, so it shouldn’t be off-limits for a non-magical character. That’s all this argument has ever been about.

That is your perspective, not mine. Of course the PC isn't going to see it the same way as the player. But the player is the real person using the rules and trying to understand how the setting works, so their perspective IMO simply matters more.

There's also the issue @Remathilis mentioned above: by your definition, everything is innately magical (but no one cares because that's just the way the world works), so every class is magical AND none of them are. When you say you don't like the word 'magical, are you talking about spells; as in, do only creatures who use spells count as magical?

 

[Raiztt]

Still doesn't explain why a druid can turn into a dinosaur but not a dragon.

Barring an explanation, a druid SHOULD be able to turn into a dragon. There would need to be some sort of metaphysical law (rather than a physical law) that explains why druid's have this limitation.

Nor would it counter the argument that the sorcerer is as mundane in fantasy as the fighter. All we've done is change "everything is magic" to "nothing is".

What I was talking about is completely beside the issue of D&D. There is a very real and very interesting debate within the study of ontology regarding the natural/supernatural divide.

 

[Raiztt]

If something actually exists in a world means it's not supernatural then supernatural loses all meaning. Ghosts? Totally normal! Why even bother having the word supernatural as part of your vocabulary?

Agreed, "supernatural" doesn't pick out anything discrete.