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.

 

[Scribe]

Posting Bambi surely counts. And you've used that term before for newer D&D art.

In response to someone else bringing it up, I surely did. Thanks.

 

[Scribe]

No. that's not what happened.

It's absolutely happened.

 

[Staffan]

Very funny, but you know he was being mind-warped at the time, right?

Well, yes. But it's still hilarious. But the point is that you kinda need to have things like this:

and this:

in order to appreciate times like this:

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

In response to someone else bringing it up, I surely did. Thanks.

Because it's a common term that you and people who agree with you use to disparage the newer trend in D&D art and people that enjoy it. You have used it before. Whether or not you were the first to mention it in this thread is irrelevant.

 

[Hussar]

In response to someone else bringing it up, I surely did. Thanks.

Oh please. I brought up the term as an example of people condescendingly decrying the "changes" in the art and direction of the game.

Which is pretty much exactly what you're doing here.

 

[Scribe]

Oh please. I brought up the term as an example of people condescendingly decrying the "changes" in the art and direction of the game.

Which is pretty much exactly what you're doing here.

I'm not condescending anything. Its exactly what it is.

Because it's a common term that you and people who agree with you use to disparage the newer trend in D&D art and people that enjoy it. You have used it before. Whether or not you were the first to mention it in this thread is irrelevant.

I have used the term, would you care to provide a single word term that we can use instead? Twee doesnt seem to be as offensive to enjoyers of the current trend.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I have used the term, would you care to provide a single word term that we can use instead? Twee doesnt seem to be as offensive to enjoyers of the current trend.

No. It's your attitude towards newer art styles that's offensive, which bleeds into whichever terminology you would use. A euphemism that is used the same way as a purposefully offensive term expresses the same meaning.

I reject the premise that older D&D art was uniformly "serious, tough, manly, gritty, and cool" and that newer post-Tasha's D&D art is uniformly "cute, childish, Disney/Marvel, twee, and unserious."

These sorts of discussions are filled with tons of older art that is "twee" and newer art that is "cool/gritty/serious." However, your "side" always rejects or outright ignores these examples and hides behind "it's just my opinion, opinions can't be wrong" whenever it's proven that your view is wrong. We've done this dance before. I'm sick of it.

I think your perception of this trend is a rose-tinted nostalgic view of D&D art that's divorced from the reality of the situation. Older D&D had cute or silly art work and newer D&D has serious and cool art work. There is a diversity in the style and content of art in both forms of D&D. This is demonstrable.

The trend of gatekeepers that label newer art as overwhelmingly "cute" reeks of an immature urge to put down newer art styles in order to try and give themselves a personal justification for why it's "cool" to play a make-believe fantasy game. This is just a theory, but my opinion is that some people haven't gotten over the Satanic Panic and the bullying they faced as a teenager decades ago for playing the game and need to use "gritty" art work and grimdark playstyles to make up for their adolescent insecurity over liking an elfgame.

 

[Scribe]

I reject the premise that older D&D art was uniformly "serious, tough, manly, gritty, and cool" and that newer post-Tasha's D&D art is uniformly "cute, childish, Disney/Marvel, twee, and unserious."

Whatever do you mean?

 

[Chaosmancer]

Sure. But that even happens in fairly edgy fantasy.

No. I've literally never seen that happen in any D&D game ever in the last 35 years, not even ones in a podcast or written Actual Play or the like. To hear that suggested as something that happens "often" is wild to me. The closest I can think of is in 2E when you gained followers, but nobody was treating them like that.

It has happened in.... I'd say 4 games in the last 8 years I can think of quickly. And it isn't about whether or not raising eggs happens in edgy fantasy, it is a question of what that art looks like. Playing with a baby dragon is not going to look like a death metal album cover.

The trouble is that this makes for a poor RPG campaign with a game like D&D (there are systems it could work for, mostly specifically designed for such), but as you say, I think D&D isn't going for that.

It makes for a poor DnD campaign maybe, and I never said it would be a full campaign. But it does work as PART of a campaign.

What I am a bit concerned about though is excessive twee. There is a limit. Cozy fantasy isn't the sole cause of twee, but when things get too twee, they usually generationally doom themselves, and I'm concerned might do that. The bronze dragon or whatever with all the baby dragons (including chromatic ones and a random unicorn and so on) was, for example just utterly twee. It's not a terrible piece of art (though the adult dragon is drawn a hell of a lot better than the babies, which seem... unobserved... like why not look at some baby animals for inspiration, instead of just going for generic cutesy?), but it's mega-twee. If there are a handful of pieces like that, it's no big deal, especially if there a similar amount of edgy or scary pieces.

But if that starts to move towards the predominant art style, I really strongly suspect that will be a key sign D&D is about to die again, because whilst that kind of art works pretty well with little kids and some younger teens, it usually utterly repulses older teenagers and early twenties types. And if you get a bunch of people quitting D&D when they're like 14 because it's uncool, that's going to cause a big player gap.

You've gotta keep some edge in there. Never go full edgelord, but never go full tweemaster either. 5E looks to be more in danger of the latter than the former right now.

Right, I'm not sure what your definition of Twee is, other than insulting whatever art it is you don't like. But I can say, it sounds like cutesy... and there may have been a handful of those pictures.

Like, if you think 5e seems in danger of having too much cutesy kid art... you either have an incredibly low bar for what kid art is, or you are ignoring the majority of the art we have been shown.

 

[Chaosmancer]

No, it brings into question whether or not it's a product you should buy. I'm not talking about the community, I'm talking about you. If you don't want something, then maybe you shouldn't buy it. That's what I do, and neither of us represent anyone other than ourselves.

Right, if you don't care about convincing anyone that the product YOU want is something that other people will want... then no one is going to go "Oh yes, we should have a 400 page manual detailing the politics, personalities, goals, and desires of every CR 10 creature in the game" Because many of us, don't see a point in that.

You do. Fine. But don't expect anyone to give your idea the time of day if you are just going to say "But I want it, and that should be enough for it to be made."