D&D (2024) Where should optional rules go and why?

[James Gasik]

Something that just hit me while following a related discussion is why some optional rules are in the PHB and others in the DMG. At first I was like "well, it's probably best to discuss options at the same time you're presenting a rule"; for example, the PHB starts right in on optional systems to generate ability scores beyond rolling dice right on page 13. Most of the other PHB options follow this line, but not all.

For example, optional rules on how long it takes for a short or long rest is in the DMG. Options for proficiency dice are in the DMG, not when discussing the proficiency bonus and how ability checks can be made; ditto with automatic success. Healing variants aren't in the PHB when it discusses healing, nor are initiative variants in the PHB when it discusses the topic. Spell points aren't in the magic section of the PHB, but in the DMG.

On the other hand, the PHB talks about playing on a grid, but concepts like facing, miniatures, and diagonals are in the PHB.

Some things make sense; if magic items are DM controlled, then the rules for them should be in the DMG. Multiclassing and Feats are player-facing content if allowed, might be simpler to put that in the PHB (but then you have things like Eladrin and Oathbreaker Paladins in the DMG?).

It just seems like the placement is a bit unusual in several cases.

EDIT: I found a breakdown online here: Optional Rules

 

[DEFCON 1]

I think it doesn't matter which book they are in.

Any variant rules that appear in either the PHB or the DMG will need to be discussed with both DM and players beforehand and agreed upon their incorporation and use. And there is no rule that says variants that appear in the PHB are more "valid" for Players to force their views on the Dungeon Masters, nor variants in the DMG are under the DM's lock and key and they only get to decide, while the Players are just forced to suck it up. Regardless of the book... everyone should be agreeing on what variant rules they will choose to use.

And if people from either side play with someone who thinks they DO get more of a say of which variants get incorporated into the game because of which book it appeared in... then those people should find new players to play with. Ones who actually know about compromise and not forcing their feelings on others without discussion. And WotC is under no obligation to change how they choose to print their books just because some players are jerks in that way and others expect WotC to "protect" them from those jerks. That's not WotC's problem.

 

[tetrasodium]

Something that just hit me while following a related discussion is why some optional rules are in the PHB and others in the DMG. At first I was like "well, it's probably best to discuss options at the same time you're presenting a rule"; for example, the PHB starts right in on optional systems to generate ability scores beyond rolling dice right on page 13. Most of the other PHB options follow this line, but not all.

For example, optional rules on how long it takes for a short or long rest is in the DMG. Options for proficiency dice are in the DMG, not when discussing the proficiency bonus and how ability checks can be made; ditto with automatic success. Healing variants aren't in the PHB when it discusses healing, nor are initiative variants in the PHB when it discusses the topic. Spell points aren't in the magic section of the PHB, but in the DMG.

On the other hand, the PHB talks about playing on a grid, but concepts like facing, miniatures, and diagonals are in the PHB.

Some things make sense; if magic items are DM controlled, then the rules for them should be in the DMG. Multiclassing and Feats are player-facing content if allowed, might be simpler to put that in the PHB (but then you have things like Eladrin and Oathbreaker Paladins in the DMG?).

It just seems like the placement is a bit unusual in several cases.

EDIT: I found a breakdown online here: Optional Rules

I think that it depends really applies but 5e generally gets it wrong. It does that for players by presenting the most beneficial thing as default and expectable with little more than an asterisk to hint it might change (ie feats) or by presenting a default and a slightly more optimal but perfectly ok thing(ie stand elite array and point buy). For the GM it does that by presenting hints at things that could have been default but now need to be finished after going off to consider complications (ie the various rest & recovery things) or not really optional "optional" subsystems like magic items where the game provides an expectation without room for it to fit

 

[mamba]

What I consider to be player facing rules should be in the PHB, all others can be in the DMG.

Player facing to me means something the player needs to read / look up, so races, classes, subclasses, spells, feats, … on the other side we have things like the duration of short and long rest. They should go to the DMG

It’s bad enough that druids need to look up stat blocks in the MM, no need to drag the DMG into this too. Everything the player needs should be in the PHB, add some comments that all of this is optional content and subject to DM approval, done

 

[Kobold Stew]

I think they tried to distinguish variant rules from optional ones, though admittedly it's not as clear as it might have been and I'm not sure it's consistent.

In 2014 feats were optional in that some tables wouldn't use them, and apparently such tables exist. The presumption is shifting with 2024, where feats are now the presumptive standard. Similarly, they are always going to provide options for stat generation in the PHB because they know the traditional 4d6 method leads to imbalance in a way that point buy does not, and that greatly affects some people's enjoyment of the game. I'd out rules for playing on grid and multiclassing in this category too.

Variant encumbrance, though, or spell points, rest duration, etc. are matters of tuning. Those, in my opinion, belong in the DMG as fun ways a given game can be customized.

In opther words, the split between PHB and DMG options makes sense, and I am sure the current practice is consistent in someone's eyes. U'd make some changes byt keep the split.

 

[Mistwell]

5e has been a jumble and it worked. Some of the most common optional rules, like feats, multiclassing, and custom backgrounds, were put in the PHB. Some of the more obscure one were put in the DMG like flanking and differing rest and healing rules. Some were put in the expansion books, like alternative tool and skill proficiency activities.

Though my instincts are to have everything more orderly and in one place, I've enjoyed this spread from common to obscure, from player-faced to DM-faced. So I think that should continue.

 

[Scott Christian]

Though my instincts are to have everything more orderly and in one place, I've enjoyed this spread from common to obscure, from player-faced to DM-faced. So I think that should continue.

I am with you. Even though everything in my brain tells me it shouldn't be this way, the evidence points to it working better. It's kind of like people finding easter eggs through multiple books. They are surprised or delighted when they find one, be it a new feat that will work well with their character or a new species that they had never thought of. Same from the DM side, such as finding a new rule and trying it out.

 

[Scott Christian]

On a different note: For many newer players, it doesn't matter where the rules or information is. They learn from friends or look stuff up online. Most, from my experience, don't even have the books.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

5e has been a jumble and it worked. Some of the most common optional rules, like feats, multiclassing, and custom backgrounds, were put in the PHB. Some of the more obscure one were put in the DMG like flanking and differing rest and healing rules. Some were put in the expansion books, like alternative tool and skill proficiency activities.

Though my instincts are to have everything more orderly and in one place, I've enjoyed this spread from common to obscure, from player-faced to DM-faced. So I think that should continue.

This.

I want players to know about player facing optional rules. IME, they are things that groups decide whether to use or not, via social dynamics.

I do think that the special actions in combat should have been in the combat chapter of the phb. I see no reason to ban any of them, and they could underpin a page or two about improvising actions.

 

[tetrasodium]

I think they tried to distinguish variant rules from optional ones, though admittedly it's not as clear as it might have been and I'm not sure it's consistent.

In 2014 feats were optional in that some tables wouldn't use them, and apparently such tables exist. The presumption is shifting with 2024, where feats are now the presumptive standard. Similarly, they are always going to provide options for stat generation in the PHB because they know the traditional 4d6 method leads to imbalance in a way that point buy does not, and that greatly affects some people's enjoyment of the game. I'd out rules for playing on grid and multiclassing in this category too.

Variant encumbrance, though, or spell points, rest duration, etc. are matters of tuning. Those, in my opinion, belong in the DMG as fun ways a given game can be customized.

In opther words, the split between PHB and DMG options makes sense, and I am sure the current practice is consistent in someone's eyes. U'd make some changes byt keep the split.

WRT that "they are always going to provide options for stat generation" I'm not sure 5e actually meets that bar of providing options or providing them to the GM. In the PHB it says

Spoiler: this

You generate your character's six ability scores randomly. Roll four 6-sided dice and record the total of
the highest three dice on a piece of scratch paper. Do this five more times, so that you have six numbers. If you want to save time or don’t like the idea of randomly determining ability scores, you can use the following scores instead: 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8.

It almost presents the roll stats as a curiosity that should be avoided then presents the "variant customizing" pointbuy showing how the default array is generated. In 4e you had pretty much the same three clearly differentiated as method 1 2 & 3, but there still aren't really options or variants that are going to meaningfully change the game or table dynamics all that much.

The last time the GM had options more meaningful than choosing between 1+2=3 1+1+1=3 & 1.5*2=3 was in 3.5 where the PHB said

Spoiler: this

ability gives you a disadvantage on other die rolls. When creating
your character, you roll your scores randomly, assign them to the
abilities as you like, and raise and lower them according to the
character’s race. Later, you can increase them as your character
advances in experience.



ABILITY SCORES
To create an ability score for your character, roll four six-sided dice (4d6). Disregard the lowest die roll and total the three highest ones. The result is a number between 3 (horrible) and 18 (tremendous). The average ability score for the typical commoner is 10 or 11, but your character is not typical. The most common ability scores for player characters (PCs) are 12 and 13. (That’s right, the average player character is above average.)
Make this roll six times, recording each result on a piece of paper. Once you have six scores, assign each score to one of the six abilities. At this step, you need to know what kind of person your character is going to be, including his or her race and class, in order to know

Added the anydice link showing the math is basically true on paper if not in practice but the DMG provided. By the PHB presenting the player with only an option that is likely to generate a lot of abilities in the 12-13 range it allowed the GM to present almost any of the other attribute generation options they want to allow from the DMG as a thing with at least some benefit a player can have warm fuzzies over when it's presented.

Spoiler: these actual options

ABILITY SCORES
In addition to the standard method for generating ability scores presented in the Player’s Handbook (roll 4d6, discard the lowest die, and arrange as desired), here are eight options you might want to consider using in your campaign.
1. Standard Point Buy: All ability scores start at 8. Take 25 points to spread out among all abilities. For ability scores of 14 or lower, you buy additional points on a 1-for-1 basis. For ability scores higher than 14, it costs a little more (see the table below). This method allows for maximum customization, but you should expect each PC to have at least one really good score.

Ability Score Point Costs
Ability Point Ability Point
Score Cost Score Cost
9 1 14 6
10 2 15 8
11 3 16 10
12 4 17 13
13 5 18 16
2. Nonstandard Point Buy: Use the standard point buy method, except that the player has fewer or more points for buying scores, as shown on the table below.
Type of Campaign Points Allowed
Low-powered campaign 15 points
Challenging campaign 22 points
Tougher campaign 28 points
High-powered campaign 32 points
3. Elite Array: Use the following scores, arranged as desired: 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, and 8. These numbers (assuming they’re assigned to abilities in an appropriate way) produce characters with at least a decent score in every ability that’s important to the character’s class. This method is faster than the standard point buy method and is good for creating characters quickly. In fact, it’s the method we used to generate ability scores for the sample NPCs in Chapter 4 of this book.
4. The Floating Reroll: Roll 4d6 six times, discarding the lowest die each time. Once during this process, the player can reroll the lowest die instead. Arrange scores as desired. This method results in slightly better characters than the standard Player’s Handbook method does, allowing players to either improve a particularly bad score or try to get a very good score. For example, if the player rolled 4d6 and got resultsof 1, 2, 6, and 6 for a score of 14, she might choose toreroll the 1 to see if she could improve the score(and possibly even get an 18 if the reroll came up 6).
5. Organic Characters: Roll 4d6 six times, discarding the lowest die each time. Place in order (Str, Dex,Con, Int, Wis, Cha) as rolled. Reroll any one abilityscore of your choice, taking the new roll if it’shigher. Then switch any two ability scores. This method allows some choice but doesn’t let a player have all her ability scores exactly where she wants them. A character might have to learn to cope with unwanted clumsiness (just as in real life), or she may have a personal talent that isn’t usual for a member of her class (such as a high Strength score for a sorcerer).
6. Customized Average Characters: Roll 3d6 six times and arrange scores as desired. This method produces characters more like average people but still allows customization. The player may reroll all scores if his ability modifiers total –3 or lower, or if he doesn’t have any score of 12 or higher.
7. Random Average Characters: Roll 3d6 six times and place in order (Str, Dex, Con, Int, Wis, Cha). This is the strictest method. It frequently generates virtually unplayable characters, but it makes high scores very special. The player may reroll all scores if her ability modifiers total –3 or lower, or if she doesn’t have any score of 12 or higher.
8. High-Powered Characters: Roll 5d6 six times, discarding the two lowest dice each time. Arrange as desired. This is just right for a high-powered game where the characters need to be really good just to survive. The player may reroll all scores if his ability modifiers don’t total at least +2 or if he doesn’t have at least one score of 15 or higher.

Those various options had a meaningful impact on how playing the game felt & how much room the GM was provided to provide bonuses (ie magic items) without needing to rebalance to the desired feel they were going for. I'm not sure if 4e had actual options somewhere but the 4ephb & 4edmg seem to match 5e here where almost any change from the GM is almost certain to either break the game somehow from overly strong PCs or be an obvious nerf that faces strong resistance.

I think that is a good example because it's so foundational and purely mechanical that it avoids getting bogged down in details of play that complicate other examples like the rest variants in the dmg where the gm had a high hurdle and players are given every reason to resist.