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.

​

 

[Pedantic]

So for me personally I was loving the concept that your talents and disciplines were closer to cantrips that as you gained in level you learned how to spend psi points to adjust and enhance. They only had like 20 some powers but each power had numerous wys of enhancing and modifying it however you only ended up getting like 7 powers over all

Have you looked at Paranormal Power by our own @Steampunkette? That's exactly what her Esper does.

 

[Kurotowa]

I don't agree. Very few people are engineers with a good, realistic understanding of how the actual physical real world works on a fundamental, mechanical level. I've watched big giant tough dudes not be able to loosen a lug nut for example, even though they know they are big and strong. That is to say, people don't see the DCs.

It's true that characters don't see the DCs. But subject matter experts know their subject, and experienced professionals have a well honed sense for the tasks that come up regularly in their line of work. So if an adventurer looks at a door they can probably estimate how hard it would be to kick it down, and if they look at a locked chest they should have an idea what it would take to bust it open.

And questions of verisimilitude and immersion aside, the players can darn well see DCs. They see the DCs for all sorts of things, and it's a good thing they can because the game mechanics like DC numbers are how they understand information about the game world. The DM can spout purple prose, but that's incredibly subjective and often highly unclear. It's like the local guide warning adventurers that "None who venture into the Tomb of Ivranix return alive!" and the players not knowing if that means "It's 10 CR above you and this is a sandbox, it's on you if you TPK" or "But of course you'll be the first because you're the heroes, please go inside because it's full of fresh loot and I didn't prepare anything else this week".

Hiding basic game mechanics like "How hard is it to kick down the door?" from player view is one of those old Gygaxian moves I don't endorse in any way. Some traditions need to die.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Hold on a second.

In D&D, the order of operations is that the DM describes the situation, the player declares an action, and the DM adjudicates the action using their judgement and the rules.

What in that makes it seem correct that the rules for destroying a wall, for example, should be in the PHB?

It is difficult to make an informed decision in a game where procedure matters a great deal, but you know nothing of the procedures involved. Knowing the procedures means you do not have to guess about whether your efforts are even worthwhile in the first place. Even if the actual adjudication differs from that listed procedure, it is something, rather than nothing. Moreover, there's value purely in having the context of knowing an offered way to do something. It allows contrast, maybe even a position to critique or respond to DM choices, as opposed to simply being a passive receiver.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

That seems emblematic of the issue.

Many (most?) psionics fans can look at what WotC has tried and say "that ain't it," but 10 years on, no one in the fan community has come up with a version that many or most psionics fans can agree is a much better choice.

I do hope that someone manages it, though, for all the fans still hoping for a psion/mystic class. Silly X-shaped helmet not necessarily included.

I argue there is no such thing, and never will be. No option will appease the whole psionics fandom, because as long as it falls short of being perfect for them, they have every reason to fight for making it so.

The only way to get psionics is to actually publish something, despite it not achieving 70%+ approval. Because as long as what you've made is pretty good, then the psi-fandom is no longer given the option of the hypothetical perfect. They must give the thing they've gotten an actual shake. Some will learn to like it; others will never change. But you'll only even potentially be able to clear that 70%+ hurdle once you've laid down the law and said, "No, this IS how psionics will be in 5e."

Unless and until that happens, you'll always be able to find 31%+ of psi-fans willing and ready to tear down whatever was proposed, because it isn't their specific vision of psionics.

 

[Clint_L]

I tell the player the DC of most checks, unless there’s an important reason they can’t know if they are successful or not (eg deception checks a lot of the time). I find that knowing the DC of, say, a lock makes the dice roll much more exciting.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

For what it's worth, I believe they've said the Aberrant Mind Sorcerer is going to be rebranded as the "Psionic Soul" Sorcerer in the '24PHB, so chances are pretty good that the Far Realm/Aberration flavoring of the subclass is going to be significantly more optional than it was as portrayed in Tasha's.

When they proposed to change it to the psionic soul back in some UA before it appeared in Tasha's, I rejected it because I felt it was really boring compared to Aberrant Mind. In fact most people admitted that they felt psionic soul was really boring compared to Aberrant Mind, so they went back to Aberrant Mind when releasing the subclass in Tasha's.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Yes! My entire beef with this whole concept is that they could have added a ton of new material, and yet chose not to.

This would be the wrong approach for a revised core.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I think some of this thread's posters have not understood what a revised core book should have and what not.

You want a new standard for the next 10 years that does not invalidate all old products (like 1e to 2e).
A cleaner representation of the current rules.

Of course there are things in 5e that could be done better if you had a clean start. But at this point they are trapped by 5e's general success and acceptance by the fanbase.

So the idoms: "never change a running system" or "don't fix what is not broken" are fitting.

 

[DEFCON 1]

The one thing I know is that if a goodly amount of players choose not to move onto 5E24 from 5E14, then the revised books have done their job.

Not every players needs or wants the revisions that other players have been clamoring a decade for (and now are going to get). If (general) you have been perfectly fine with how the 4 Elements Monk has played, never had a problem adjudicating stealth, and don't design encounters via formula and challenge rating... there might be nothing in these revisions worth getting. And that's great! WotC is happy for you! It means their first swing of the bat was a home run. Why would they have an issue with you sticking with what works?

But they also acknowledge that they had a swing and a miss for a lot of players for a lot of different things with regards to their rules. So the fact they are choosing to clean those up is a lovely bonus. It is by no means necessary... most of us could and would continue to play 5E and its derivatives for another decade if we wanted... but I'm sure these revisions were as much for the designers at WotC to shave off the rough edges they were tired of seeing just as much as they were trying to please all the fans.

And at the end of the day... they hope to make as many of both groups happy. By making rules that allow one to take some from both products and mix and match. They do that, then the job was definitely the best they could do.

 

[Minigiant]

As I've said before, I hold the fanbase responsible for this.

Once they made the decision to be consultative with the public (in theory, a good thing), they became trapped by a fundamentally conservative bunch who didn't want or were afraid of change. They offered us lots, and most of it was rejected, time and again, by the majority.

More accurately

Old subclasses would need updates. Updates that any smart DM could make until waiting for the official one.

The community demanded the official updates of the most popular subclasses in lieu of new subclasses.

All hail Backwards compatibility!