D&D (2024) 2024 Player's Handbook Reveal #1: "Everything You Need To Know!"

Each day this week, Wizards of the Coast will be releasing a new live-streamed preview video based on the upcoming Player's Handbook. The first is entitled Everything You Need To Know and you can watch it live below (or, if you missed it, you should be able to watch it from the start afterwards). The video focuses on weapon mastery and character origins.

​

There will be new videos on Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday this week, focusing on the Fighter, the Paladin, and the Barbarian, with (presumably) more in the coming weeks.

 

[MNblockhead]

Have you considered playing another game that doesn’t have these problems?

No need. Just house rule it. But if he has this problem with his expectations and preferences versus his players, a different system isn't going to solve it. I think the better advice is to consider finding different players, but that's not always easy or desirable either. I think that this is an issue that is more of a social issue that game mechanics are not going to solve.

 

[KYRON45]

I am not sure that is what character-concept focused means…

All of this labeling just seems very odd to me.

 

[mamba]

Setting aside how nobody needs to justify their character choices to some random guy on the internet who doesn't like them, you mean?

I was not asking for a justification, I was asking for an explanation.

To me you select the class based on its archetype, and the Warlock has a patron as part and parcel of that, otherwise they are just a wizard or sorcerer.

And setting aside how, "If you aren't going to do it MY WAY, why do it at all?" is many things, but open-minded about playstyle isn't one of them?

none of which I even implied

Then, the most basic reason is that, while you don't like it, the archetype as presented is sufficient for many.

except that you are removing the archetype and are keeping the mechanics only

Mostly because, in the end, this is about the relationship with the patron, and historically D&D has a weak history with mechanics for relationships.

so nothing then, just a condescending non-answer…

I guess my ‘I want the mechanics, I do not care about the rest’ will have to do as an explanation then

 

[MNblockhead]

No. That's not why you don't owe anything.

You don't owe anything because WotC wants to make a game that pretty much works out of the box. Balance that relies on GM-implementation of consequences in long term play does not provide that.

Additionally, "I chose this class, so everyone in the party is going to be forced into my personal plot every time my patron wants something" is something some parties may be okay with, but you can't rely on it broadly.

^ This. But there are ways to make faith and allegiance to otherworldly patrons be mechanically meaningful without fully relying on DM fiat. Warhammer Fantasy strikes a good balance, I think, with its strictures and penances. I like the flavor and story-potential it adds while not leaving it entirely up to me as a DM to decide whether the character has pleased or upset its patron or god.

 

[mamba]

Isn't this really more of a DM issue than a player issue? Whatever game I'm running, of whatever complexity, I'll step players through the character creation process.

it’s a bit of both, I do expect the DM to help a new player but even so this is the first time the player tries this.

To me it is akin to juggling for the first time and being asked to start out with five plates, the novice will gladly pare it down to three plates instead when given the chance. One of these dropped plates is coming up with a custom background

 

[Micah Sweet]

^ This. But there are ways to make faith and allegiance to otherworldly patrons be mechanically meaningful without fully relying on DM fiat. Warhammer Fantasy strikes a good balance, I think, with its strictures and penances. I like the flavor and story-potential it adds while not leaving it entirely up to me as a DM to decide whether the character has pleased or upset its patron or god.

Yup. Warhammer has a good system for this.

 

[Chaosmancer]

My point is that if a player just wants kewl powers from their pact with no downsides at all, the game as written supports that mechanically where it does not not support any other way of looking at the relationship. I see this, personally, as a problem stemming from designing for simplicity and a player base that refuses to accept penalties or negatives in their power fantasy.

So... literally the exact same as getting "kewl" powers from their birth, or getting "kewl" powers of a druid from studying with the fey or getting "kewl" powers from surviving being attacked by a mindflayer or "kewl" powers from being trained by the king's guard.

You know, there is no mechanical support for my fighter who was trained by the Kingdom and fought in the army, it is all just "kewl powers" with no regards to how a powerful warrior would be pressed into military service.

Or, put another way, yeah... personal relationships between PCs and NPCs don't have mechanical representation. Unless you want to use the Piety rules, or the Honor Rules. Which are rules in the game which can be utilized for this if you really and truly need mechanical rules for this.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Cure Wounds, same as the playtest (which is a GOOD change btw!)

Tasha's Bubbling Cauldron: 6th level
Creates up to ability mod (basically 5 for all of us!), potions of either common or uncommon type. Potions last until used or the duration of the spell (10 minutes).

I think that's a cool spell, gives a lot of "mass options" to the group. Can have a bunch of reserve healing potiosn for the next fight, mass climbing potions, a bevy of resistance potions is great, etc.


That's the kind of spell I like. NO CONCENTRATION! Good duration, creative and flexible, but doesn't seem to be a bulldozer of power kind of spell.

Ooh, that does sound cool

 

[Chaosmancer]

You also should be able to use the original Swashbuckler.

Yep, but you will be missing the support for the Cunning Strikes that the UA swashbuckler had. But either works.

 

[Umbran]

I like the flavor and story-potential it adds while not leaving it entirely up to me as a DM to decide whether the character has pleased or upset its patron or god.

Cool. I'm glad you like it. I can't really speak to it, as I haven't looked at WFRP, much less played it extensively.

I suppose I can ask, though - is that mechanic specific to one character type? How much power comes to the characters to whom it applies? And what kind of penalties apply if you fail to please?

Because, for a D&D Warlock (or Cleric or Druid), there's the issue that if the character really displeases the patron, you'd expect them to lose pretty much all their power, and become pretty much unplayable. While that's a gamestyle choice one can make, I am not sure it would be a great choice to make core for D&D.