D&D (2024) Take A Closer Look At The 2024 Dungeon Master’s Guide

Wizards of the Coast has just shared a video delving into the upcoming One D&D Dungeon Master’s Guide, due for release in 2024.

​

Scroll down to post #4, below, for a more detailed text summary!

• Chapter 1 -- basic concepts
• Chapter 2 -- Advice, common issues
• Chapter 3 -- Rules cyclopedia
• Chapter 4 -- Adventure building
• Chapter 5 -- Campaign building
• Chapter 6 -- Cosmology
• Chapter 7 -- Magic items
• Chapter 8 -- 'A surprise'
• Appendices -- maps, lore glossary

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Man, if only WotC had called 3.5 "3rd Edition Revised". We would never have had this problem with "Is it a 6e, a 5.5 or just a 5e revision?" I hate this argument sooo much.

It's a rules revision.

Can we all just agree on that and keep whether that makes it a "full edition" or a "half edition" or "the same edition" to ourselves? The distinction is utterly meaningless, and I'm getting very tired of everyone trying to bang it into shape.

It's a revision. That can mean whatever numbers you want it to mean. Move on.

 

[Clint_L]

Respectfully, look at Kobold Press's recent release to see why the distinction matters. They are specifically using the confusion as the heart of their marketing for an upcoming release, by strongly implying that WotC is abandoning 5e (and print media) while they, KP, are the place to go if you really love 5e (and books).

 

[Echohawk]

yes, for the playtest material, what a surprise

Sure, I get that. The contrast with One D&D is interesting though. There were a bunch of actual products released that were labelled as "Playable with the D&D Next rules". The same is not true of One D&D; as far as I know, that label hasn't appeared on anything WotC has released (which, to be fair, is only four UA articles so far).

 

[Dire Bare]

Respectfully, look at Kobold Press's recent release to see why the distinction matters. They are specifically using the confusion as the heart of their marketing for an upcoming release, by strongly implying that WotC is abandoning 5e (and print media) while they, KP, are the place to go if you really love 5e (and books).

I think that is more about the OGL fiasco mid-winter than the upcoming revision to the rules.

 

[mamba]

Respectfully, look at Kobold Press's recent release to see why the distinction matters. They are specifically using the confusion as the heart of their marketing for an upcoming release, by strongly implying that WotC is abandoning 5e (and print media) while they, KP, are the place to go if you really love 5e (and books).

Yeah, KP overreached a bit there, that is marketing. They are not wrong at the core though

1) 5e 2014 books are going away, so if you get a new set of books, why not consider theirs

2) WotC is focused on moving everyone onto their VTT, Kobold’s TTRPG will be supported by a wide range of VTTs and have printed books

The rest is marketing

 

[DarkCrisis]

More and more info releases and people who want to say it’s backwards compatible are just fooling themselves. Sure it sort of is but you massively benefit from just using the newer core.

“We readjusted all the monsters”. IE using the old MM monsters is outdated and subpar but sure you can use them.

 

[Hurin70]

D&D Next was always meant to be a new edition, One D&D was always meant to be a revision of the same edition.

Exactly. So, when you are announcing a new edition, you can coin and use words like 'Next'. But when you're just announcing revisions to an existing edition -- revisions which are allegedly minor enough that there is full backwards compatibility, and revisions which are so minor that you are specifically asking people NOT to call it 5.5e -- then you should not be branding it with a new name (indeed, one that has a number in it!), and then blaming people when they try to understand it in the numerical terms they've always used to define editions.

That is just marketing bulls#!t, and trying to have it both ways.

If you enjoy that crap, all power to you. But I'll continue to call it out.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Respectfully, look at Kobold Press's recent release to see why the distinction matters. They are specifically using the confusion as the heart of their marketing for an upcoming release, by strongly implying that WotC is abandoning 5e (and print media) while they, KP, are the place to go if you really love 5e (and books).

That doesn't make it matter, though. That just makes it something that someone can exploit, which has been the case all along. Much of the honest confusion comes from deliberate manipulation.

But... it has occurred to me that by trying to end this discussion, all I've done is get involved in it. I'm going to put my money where my mouth is and stop talking about it now. I will happily talk to you about something else!

 

[mamba]

Sure, I get that. The contrast with One D&D is interesting though. There were a bunch of actual products released that were labelled as "Playable with the D&D Next rules". The same is not true of One D&D; as far as I know, that label hasn't appeared on anything WotC has released (which, to be fair, is only four UA articles so far).

just more proof that One D&D is not a new edition, and maybe that is what you meant originally and I missed it.

With D&D Next being a new edition, the playtest needed adventures to test with. One D&D is a revision of and compatible with 5e, so they can release changes to test piecemeal and do not need to also provide adventures to test those changes with

 

[mamba]

More and more info releases and people who want to say it’s backwards compatible are just fooling themselves. Sure it sort of is but you massively benefit from just using the newer core

it being an improvement over 5e does not mean it is not compatible. If anything it being an improvement is the whole point of a revision