D&D 5E (2014) Full preview unlocked!

[Parmandur]

The Cyclopedia is probably the better comparison, formatting wise. And you will notice that the 5e DMG ToC does mention siege weapons...

 

[steeldragons]

The Cyclopedia is probably the better comparison, formatting wise. And you will notice that the 5e DMG ToC does mention siege weapons...

Between this, the 6 pages of "Downtime Activities" [really, probably only 5 after taking out 1 for the following chapter's full page opener image], and Hirelings under the NPC stuff...I'm banking on, at the very least, Stronghold building and Siege combat guidelines. Which gets a big "woohoo" from me.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Sorry, I reserve the right to feel as disappointed as I choose. We'll see how much technology infiltrates into the standard game.

The 3e DMG had rules for almost the exact same weapon technologies, and spent more word count on them. So nothing new here.

I do not ever remember him mentioning gestalt characters. Do you have a link to that?

Yes!

http://www.enworld.org/forum/conten...rls-Magazines-Settings-and-More!#.VEv9sVdZjzo

The whole interview is worth reading, but here is the relevant line:

"Most of the optional systems will show up in the Dungeon Master’s Guide. They focus on options that people can use to more closely mimic a specific edition or optional rules that people like having available. For instance, stuff like detailed rules for combat, gestalt characters, lingering wounds, and so forth. It feels kind of like a mash up of Unearthed Arcana for 3e and a traditional DMG."

This was from back in August, but hopefully it is all still valid.

Firearms, my thoughts.

It's also worth noting that Spelljammer (and 2e in general, I believe) treated gunpowder as the magical "smoke powder," it was rather expensive, and it didn't work in every crystal sphere. As I recall, it worked in the Forgotten Realms, but not Dragonlance or Greyhawk.

I think calling it an alchemical substance (that someone trained in alchemist's tools can make) is appropriate to recapture that feel, especially since herbalist kits allow the creation of explicitly magical potions of healing.

In my personal setting, it is only found in a certain isolate region where magic doesn't work as well. I'll probably make smoke powder not work on the rest of the world, or at least have a chance of not working.

Although in general I prefer to keep firearms out of my D&D, there are places and times where I really like having access to simple rules for renaissance firearms, so I'm glad they are there.

 

[michael513]

For those disappointed by how few pages in the DMG are dedicated to optional rules/modules, I think a little perspective is in order. The Dungeon Master's Workshop chapter has 26 pages (25 if you assume a full art page at the front of the chapter). If you look at the PHB, the ENTIRE rules of the game (chapters 7-9) is covered in 27 pages (24 if you don't count the full art pages at the front of each chapter). So there are more pages in the DMG dedicated to rules options than there are pages in the PHB dedicated to the actual rules of the game. And this doesn't even factor in the possibility that there are sidebars with optional rules in other sections of the DMG. For someone craving rules options/modules, I for one am not disappointed in the least.

 

[The Grand User]

Wow, that is actually a good catch. Ok, it's looking less disappointing now.

Edit: And now they've put up a more up-to-date ToC

 

[Parmandur]

For those disappointed by how few pages in the DMG are dedicated to optional rules/modules, I think a little perspective is in order. The Dungeon Master's Workshop chapter has 26 pages (25 if you assume a full art page at the front of the chapter). If you look at the PHB, the ENTIRE rules of the game (chapters 7-9) is covered in 27 pages (24 if you don't count the full art pages at the front of each chapter). So there are more pages in the DMG dedicated to rules options than there are pages in the PHB dedicated to the actual rules of the game. And this doesn't even factor in the possibility that there are sidebars with optional rules in other sections of the DMG. For someone craving rules options/modules, I for one am not disappointed in the least.

QFT, good point!

 

[Grainger]

I took a quick look at the battlesystem rules in AD&D. I really don't think you'll see anything similar in the DMG.

With that said, there is another set of rules that appeared in the BECMI rule set called War Machine (X10). That set of rules took about 3-4 pages in one of the modules. We might see something like that, but it would have to be a little more scaled down.

We discussed this upthread; at first, I thought the same thing as you, but someone linked to a Mearls article where he said the mass combat system would use a grid and minis (boo!). That said, he didn't definitively say there wouldn't be a non-mini based one too, but I think that's unlikely, even though IMO it's far more in-keeping with 5e's "non-grid combat as the default" setup.

Presumably, a minis system would need quite a bit of space in the rulebook, so perhaps it will appear in a supplement for the game somewhere down the line.

 

[Morrus]

Wow, that is actually a good catch. Ok, it's looking less disappointing now.

Edit: And now they've put up a more up-to-date ToC

Yup! Here it is!

 

[Sammael]

This is not looking good for the modules. Oh well, not like I was going to abandon running my own d20 variant any time soon, but I was hoping to see some more depth added to 5e for when I get the chance to play it.

I am confused about the amount of planar stuff present - I am a huge fan of the planes, and Planescape, but I don't see the reason to dedicate so much of the DMG to it. I know the 3.5 one had a similar amount, it just baffles me. I don't think the vast majority of new DMs (for whom this book is important) will want to run planar campaigns, and experienced DMs already have their own cosmologies or use established ones.

 

[thalmin]

So the new TOC includes a 6-page Appendix C: Maps. Making maps? Sample maps? How to read them?