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.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Aren't the characters part of the setting?

Yes? Not sure what you're getting at.

 

[Remathilis]

Then why bother with classes based on narrative concepts at all? Why not just have a laundry list of cool powers with point costs to choose from?

Because maybe I want to play a healer and D&D decided healers are all God Toadies?Get back to me when wizards get healing magic.

Also: Enworld daily reminds me classes were a mistake.

 

[KYRON45]

Yes? Not sure what you're getting at.

"To me, the setting should be the focus, and how the players interact with it and each other through their PCs the play."

The players interacting with the setting is the point of the game; as such what they are doing is changing the setting.

 

[Raiztt]

That's it. As far as I've seen for the past many videos and UAs and posts they've made, they've only ever said it would be Backwards Compatible. I've never once seen them say it would be Forwards Compatible or that you could run a new class in the old system without referencing the new system, or mix and match everything without referencing the new system. I've never once seen them say or imply they would errata the old system to accommodate you running a new class in the old system by adding new system rules to the old system like Weapon Mastery rules.

If you've seen different, I'd like to see what you're referring to.

It came from me knowing how the world works and that what you were expecting was conceptually incoherent.

How would I "run a new class" without refering to the new classes rules and text?

Also, I'm not even sure what you mean by "new system" - D&D2024 uses a d20, the same proficiency scaling, etc. It's the same system.

What you are describing as "forward compatability" is a splat book.

 

[Wolfpack48]

Well what do you think they promised, and where did that belief come from?

To me, there are different types of compatibility, and they only promised one type:

Backwards Compatibility: You can use your old books with the new system. You can play an old class with the new system, and run an old adventure with the new system.
Forwards Compatibility: You can use the new books with the old system. You can play a new class with the old system, and run a new adventure with the old system, without referencing the new system, and with errata to the old system to include any references from a new class or other new element not found in the old system.

What WOTC Promised: Backwards Compatibility.

That's it. As far as I've seen for the past many videos and UAs and posts they've made, they've only ever said it would be Backwards Compatible. I've never once seen them say it would be Forwards Compatible or that you could run a new class in the old system without referencing the new system, or mix and match everything without referencing the new system. I've never once seen them say or imply they would errata the old system to accommodate you running a new class in the old system by adding new system rules to the old system like Weapon Mastery rules.

If you've seen different, I'd like to see what you're referring to.

There's a thread for this.

D&D (2024) - The 2014 vs 2024 PHB Compatibility Thread

Will 2014 characters work with 2024 rules? Will 2024 characters work in a 2014 rules campaign? Will chocolate ever work with peanut butter? Bring your compatibility questions here!

www.enworld.org

 

[Mistwell]

It came from me knowing how the world works and that what you were expecting was conceptually incoherent.

There is confusion here which is my fault. You and I completely agree on this topic. I had mistakenly thought you had said "I also feel like the compatibility they promised was not what they delivered."

You, of course, said the opposite of that.

If you go back and re-read my response in that context, you will see I was agreeing with what you had actually written. That they had only ever promised backwards compatibility, and not forwards compatibility. And that's what they delivered.

 

[TwoSix]

Yeah, to be honest all of that is a problem for me. But then, I'm not very enthusiastic about character concept-focused play. To me, the setting should be the focus, and how the players interact with it and each other through their PCs the play.

And that's a fine playstyle; it's simply not where modern D&D is.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Because maybe I want to play a healer and D&D decided healers are all God Toadies?Get back to me when wizards get healing magic.

Also: Enworld daily reminds me classes were a mistake.

It sounds like you're against class-based systems then. Why muck about with D&D and it's relatives then? Seems you'd be happier with a point-based system for character creation. I know a bunch of games from the 90s and back that would suit.

 

[Micah Sweet]

"To me, the setting should be the focus, and how the players interact with it and each other through their PCs the play."

The players interacting with the setting is the point of the game; as such what they are doing is changing the setting.

Sure, through the actions of whatever PC or PCs they are controlling at the time. That doesn't make the game "character concept-focused".

 

[Micah Sweet]

And that's a fine playstyle; it's simply not where modern D&D is.

Makes me a little sad every day.