D&D (2024) Summary for the uninitiated?

[Yora]

So I heard that there's a new edition of D&D in the work and that people are already getting peeks at the proposed changes.

For the completely uninitiated, who haven't been following any of that, what's the main differences that there appear to be to the default 5th edition rules? Do they seem like improvements or fixes, or more different for the sake of being different? Anything that might make the game more appealing to people who haven't been huge fans of the system already?

 

[Morrus]

There’s only the one playtest document so far, which showcases three character classes. You can grab that at D&D Beyond. Other than that, lots of speculation, but no solid information.

 

[tetrasodium]

Lots of good yes

One D&D

We're building the next generation of Dungeons & Dragons—and we need your help refining it! Download One D&D playtest materials, give them a read or try them out in your home game, and then provide feedback here.

www.dndbeyond.com

 

[DEFCON 1]

Anything that might make the game more appealing to people who haven't been huge fans of the system already?

If a person did not like 5E due to its standard mechanical expressions, I would seriously doubt anything that gets done for the new books will make that person think it is worth playing. While a lot of feature adjustments, rules tweaks, and new categorization will occur... the actual foundation of the game for character creation/improvement and monster combat will not be changed enough to make it seem like a different game, in my opinion.

 

[Blue]

There have been two playtest documents, one on races, backgrounds, and level 1 feats, and the second on the Expert classes (rogue, ranger and bard) plus more feats (mostly level 4 with some level 1). Both have also included a Rules Glossary that has tried various things, like changes to crits and exhaustion.

They have said that this isn't a "here's the rules we like and we're going to be iterating towards better", but at times they will be throwing a lot of different things out to check how they work, a bit like A/B testing. For example in playtest 1 they gave out Inspiration (now called Heroic Inspiration) on any 20 rolled. In playtest 2 they changed that to on any 1 rolled. Just trying to get feedback.

So far it looks like a 3.0 to 3.5 shift to me personally - that they will end up tweaking a whole bunch of small things but leave the bones mostly in place. Enough to have to republish everything but not enough to feel like a shift to a whole new editions with new paradigms like 3.5ed -> 4e or 4e -> 5e.

@Yora if your problems with 5e have been in the details, this may very well solve them. If they are more foundational this will likely not address them.

But it definitely will be changing. Backgrounds right now have become the freeform bonus granters (ability score, skills, feat, etc.) Races with less need to carry those have lost subraces as a mechanic. Both ranger and bard aren't spells known classes, instead having preparing from the whole list a larger number of spells, but pre-defiied what level those spells are. Videos have said that is going to all spellcasters.

Many of the changes of the more recent 5e books don't seem to be replicated in the playtests. Changes to races in MP:MM, moving away from short rests, and the like aren't replicated in this. Like while I don't believe it actually true, it feels like these playtest documents could have been written in 2019 instead of 2022.

 

[Blue]

There’s only the one playtest document so far, which showcases three character classes. You can grab that at D&D Beyond. Other than that, lots of speculation, but no solid information.

We had the races, backgrounds, and 1st level feats document as well in terms of playtest, and we have videos from Wizards telling us some things upcoming - I'd label those as stronger then speculation.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Many of the changes of the more recent 5e books don't seem to be replicated in the playtests. Changes to races in MP:MM, moving away from short rests, and the like aren't replicated in this. Like while I don't believe it actually true, it feels like these playtest documents could have been written in 2019 instead of 2022.

In prts it looks like that. And maybe some of them have been floating around for some time. And maybe some things are still in the flux and actual tests if we are actually aware of the more recent changes. And if we care about them...

 

[Benjamin Olson]

Do they seem like improvements or fixes, or more different for the sake of being different? Anything that might make the game more appealing to people who haven't been huge fans of the system already?

My judgment is that it mostly boils down to different for the sake of different and lots of "fixes" for things that weren't actually broken, but the consensus view around here seems to run more positive. We'll see what we get in 2024.

I find it hard to imagine any person who is lukewarm on 5e loving the playtest we're seeing. Firstly if you have foundational problems with 5e, this really isn't making foundational changes (well not intentionally anyway). If you just are put off by certain details of 5e there might (in fact, probably will) be elements you prefer, but I think you have to go in with a certain degree of WotC boosterism or faith that they will get it right by the end of the process to really get behind the playtest materials as a whole, and if you weren't particularly happy with 5e, you probably don't have that relationship with WotC. But who knows, maybe the stars have aligned and the random rule generating algorithm that seems to make half the playtest decisions will happen to get your number. Or maybe the OneD&D is actually better and I just can't see it because I'm too stuck in my 5e ways.

 

[Bill Zebub]

So I heard that there's a new edition of D&D in the work and that people are already getting peeks at the proposed changes.

For the completely uninitiated, who haven't been following any of that, what's the main differences that there appear to be to the default 5th edition rules? Do they seem like improvements or fixes, or more different for the sake of being different? Anything that might make the game more appealing to people who haven't been huge fans of the system already?

It’s super exciting: WotC is releasing troves of new options for players to argue about on the forums. If you are looking for an Internet hill on which to die (metaphorically) and you are tired of arguing about racial ASIs and whether orcs are racist, you can now argue about whether monsters should get critical hits, if WotC is forcing us to use inspiration, if rogues should get off-turn Sneak Attack, whether spamming guidance is fun, and many other vitally important issues that will distract you from thinking about Ukraine. Which leads one to wonder if Elon Musk bought Hasbro when we weren’t looking. The whole Twitter thing might have been a head feint.

Anyway, look for many more options for angry armchair game designers in the coming months.

 

[OB1]

My judgment is that it mostly boils down to different for the sake of different and lots of "fixes" for things that weren't actually broken, but the consensus view around here seems to run more positive. We'll see what we get in 2024.

I started to get that same feeling of change for change sake with the second document, although I also feel like there is a thread of changes meant to make the game more approachable for new players.

If I had to guess, WotC is primarily interested in ways to make D&D more approachable/appealing to the masses, increasing the likelihood that when you have your first experience with the game, you want to keep playing (and buying). At the same time, they are experimenting with a lot of other changes to see what might stick and those are the 'different for the sake of different' feeling bits.