D&D 5E Mike Mearls did an interview for Escapist Magazine and reveals PHB classes, races, and much more

Eladrin had the same stat modifiers as Grey Elves in 2e. In the Forgotten Realms, it said that people referred to Eladrin in that world as Moon Elves. In 2e it said that Moon Elves were just another name for Grey Elves.

Moon Elves=Grey Elves=Eladrin. They are the same race.

There's always been a split between the Dex elves and the Int elves. 4e just gave a bigger reason why there was a split and said that the Eladrin actively came from another plane more recently.

So if they're doing 4e + 3e, we'll have Wood Elves (4e elves), Moon/Gray Elves (4e eladrin), Drow, High/Sun Elves? (3e elves), plus half-elves (and perhaps the same subraces for them? Half wood, half moon, half drow...).

For me, the bigger question is: will 5e eladrin teleport? Probably yes, since it's iconic for them, but it was a point of wahoo that not every DM was a fan of.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Eladrin had the same stat modifiers as Grey Elves in 2e. In the Forgotten Realms, it said that people referred to Eladrin in that world as Moon Elves. In 2e it said that Moon Elves were just another name for Grey Elves.

Moon Elves=Grey Elves=Eladrin. They are the same race.

There's always been a split between the Dex elves and the Int elves. 4e just gave a bigger reason why there was a split and said that the Eladrin actively came from another plane more recently.

They actually appeared pre-4th edition as race options in the 3rd edition 'Savage Species' book and one of the last books done by TSR. I don't know the details, but suspect they were related to the monsters called 'eladrin' in 2e Planescape. 4e is the only edition to use eladrin as the name for high/grey/moon Int-boosted elves. Now that 'high elf' looks to be back for the Int elves, the term 'eladrin' appears, from my perspective, to be free again.

Grey Elf and Moon Elf are both setting-based descriptors (Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms respectively). Eladrin isn't - except for Nentir Vale, perhaps. It's really only a type of elf in 4th Edition games. We don't yet know what 5e will do with them.
 

Very good news on the PHB races, I think. This way absolutely everyone is covered, which is in-tune with the "D&D for everyone" deal WotC have pushed re: 5E.

Interesting too that it seems most races have at least two "kinds" to choose from - this could also really help out, providing us with, say, a 2E-style Tiefling and a 4E-style one. I think four kinds of elf would really cover everything - High, Wood, Tricksy/Eladrin/Moon (there are plenty of other settings which have a "Tricksy" kind of elf known for vanishing into nowhere - Taladas, for one), and Drow. I'll be interested to see if the PHB defaults to the FR descriptors or more generic descriptors (presuming the latter).

Like Kamikaze, I'm intrigued by the class building guidelines, that could be one of the most interesting, or, of course, most entirely useless, parts of the book (2E's class building was a horrible mess, but did at least let you build the Kai/Magna-Kai if you were willing to spend 3000xp to reach level 1!).

In general the information seems very positive. I'm skeptical of some elements of 5E, but the overall thought put into the design and release seems to be very solid, perhaps more solid than any previous edition.

[MENTION=98772]Ichneumon[/MENTION] - I very much doubt that we'll see anything like Battlesystem, or that a smaller number of high-level monsters means we'll be fighting large groups of them (if that's what you meant). More likely, we'll be looking at a 2E kind of scenario, more often than not, with one or a small number of really serious monsters, and a between a handful and a few dozen henchmonsters of much, much lower level, but who are still a threat in large numbers because of the flatter math. 2E never needed special rules to deal with that.

The only worry there is that, in 2E, to deal with that kind of scenario, you generally needed a caster capable of putting out a lot of AE damage (unless the monsters were less than 1HD, in which case a Fighter was fine if a little dice-intensive!), and I don't think it's really viable to hard-require that in this day and age, especially when they're providing a such a wide variety of classes, and so few of them can deal with AE situations well. So if that's the default they will probably need some "cutting a bloody swathe"-type rules for classes with multiple attacks hitting blocks of enemies with sufficient level difference.
 

Mostly good stuff that I'm very excited about. I'm gonna talk about the stuff that I don't like, though, because hey, this is an RPG forum.

I don't like Drow in the PHB. Evil races don't belong in the PHB. If they're retconning the Drow so that they're not generally evil, that's dumb. And Drizzt is extra dumb.

I don't particularly like how all-in they're going on this Forgotten Realms thing. I know Forgotten Realms wasn't the default setting in 3e or 4e, but damn, it sure feels like it was. It was used in organized play, it always seems to be the first setting published. Eh. I suppose it's not really any worse than just not having a default setting. Filing serial numbers off adventures isn't very hard.

We tried whenever possible that within the stat block we give you everything you need to run the monster. So when you're referring to it you don't have to do much flipping back and forth. There are some spells for monsters, but we tried to make those fairly straightforward spells like fireball that you wouldn't necessarily have to check the Player's Handbook or basic D&D to use.

Whenever possible though we tried to give creatures unique abilities. When you look back at 3rd Edition it tried to default to spells. I don't want to say we're doing the opposite, but when it's a unique ability it's faster for us to say "This creature can hurl an area attack that is a burst of fire" instead of saying "This creature can cast fireball." So for instance the Beholder has eye rays, and it says "Here's what happens when when it zots you with its eye rays now make a save" instead of referring to a spell. We tried to use spells only when it's clear that the monster is a spellcaster - like here's an NPC Wizard. There's an appendix on quick-building NPCs. Those creatures will typically use spells. There's a sample acolyte - a divine spellcaster - with a few quick spells.

This is little disconcerting. Despite assurances that they "tried whenever possible that within the stat block we give you everything you need to run the monster," we are apparently back to NPC spellcasters having laundry lists of spells that you will then have to look up in the rules if you don't have them completely memorized. Nothing could disappoint me more than for them to take one of the few areas in which 4e is flat-out objectively superior to 3e and then backpedal on it. I wish like hell the monster and NPC statblocks really did have everything you need detailed right there.
 

What I found most interesting was that he states that this time the whole team is working on the same book (PHB). Which more or less states that they had different teams on each of the books in the past. No wonder the math between monsters and characters didn't align in 4e...

I find this a bit disturbing when it comes to digital tools:

It doesn't sound like they have anybody working on digital tools for D&D. I looks to me like they are going to miss out on a huge opportunity to set a new standard for digital support.
They probably have a contractor on it, and it's just as well. WotC's track record with digital tools is lousy. They're a tabletop game company, not a tech company.
 

I don't like Drow in the PHB. Evil races don't belong in the PHB. If they're retconning the Drow so that they're not generally evil, that's dumb. And Drizzt is extra dumb.

I don't particularly like how all-in they're going on this Forgotten Realms thing. I know Forgotten Realms wasn't the default setting in 3e or 4e, but damn, it sure feels like it was. It was used in organized play, it always seems to be the first setting published. Eh. I suppose it's not really any worse than just not having a default setting. Filing serial numbers off adventures isn't very hard.

In 2014, this seems kind of like being pissed because Donald Duck is a big face at Disney World or something.
 

One thing I found interesting in regards to the elves in Forgotten Realms is that if you take a look at Ghosts of Dragonspear Castle, they identify the high elf subtype as a "gold elf", and the wood elf subtype as a "moon elf".

Which is a bit odd, in several ways. First, simply because they use two different FR elven naming conventions: gold elf and moon elf as opposed to using gold elf and silver elf or sun elf and moon elf. Then even more odd is the fact that in 3E the sun *and* moon elf were both considered the INT-based magical elf subtype... and it was the wood elf and wild elf that were the DEX-based nature elf subtype.

Which makes me wonder what (if anything) has advanced since this module was made last fall... if indeed they've condensed the FR subtypes down to just gold/sun and silver/moon (and maintaining the high elf / wood elf split to both of them)... or if they've reintroduced the wood and wild elves back into the core of the FR game to cover the wood elf subtype.

Speaking personally... I know that I'm going to use the high elf subtype for both Sun Elves and Moon Elves, and the wood elf subtype for the Wood Elves and Wild Elves. And then the dark elf subtype for the Drow of the Realms.
 

They probably have a contractor on it, and it's just as well. WotC's track record with digital tools is lousy. They're a tabletop game company, not a tech company.
I kind of agree with you here, but they do need a "owner" of the project, even if they have a contractor on it. You can't just say: make some software. You need someone with very good knowledge of the game working with the software guys to get a product that isn't lousy.
 

Mostly good stuff that I'm very excited about. I'm gonna talk about the stuff that I don't like...

I don't like Drow in the PHB. ...And Drizzt is extra dumb...I don't particularly like how all-in they're going on this Forgotten Realms thing. I .....

100% agree. Including the "mostly good stuff".

In 2014, this seems kind of like being pissed because Donald Duck is a big face at Disney World or something.

Its OK to be pissed at Disney.
 

C) Fifteen people working on an RPG of D&D's stature seems low to me. I hope their playtest department is at least 50 fulltime testers.
170.000 playtesters! ;)

I find this a bit disturbing when it comes to digital tools:

It doesn't sound like they have anybody working on digital tools for D&D. I looks to me like they are going to miss out on a huge opportunity to set a new standard for digital support.
Licensed out to another compagny. They just had an add out for hiring an editor(?) who would have as part of his job to work with the licensee of digital tools.
 

Remove ads

Top