D&D (2024) WotC Fireside Chat: Revised 2024 Player’s Handbook

In this video about the upcoming revised Player’s Handnook, WotC’s Jeremy Crawford and Chris Perkins reveal a few new tidbits.

• The books are near final and almost ready to go to print
• Psionic subclasses such as the Soulknife and Psi Warrior will appear in the core books
• Named spells have art depicting their creators.
• There are new species in the PHB.

​

 

[Remathilis]

Oh, fair enough. Sorry for the "come at me, bro" attitude there. I'm often keyed up for people to go after my opinions.

I can certainly see both sides on this one. You are very aware I dislike curation when it comes to limiting my ideas, but I acknowledge some limits need to be placed. For example, I would certainly not allow a PC lich! But I think the idea that D&D should only have a handful of options and that cramming everything into a half-dozen classes is folly. I use 3pp stuff in my Ravenloft game. I made my own subclass for a player. I feel every monster book is fair game. And while I don't do carte blanche, I don't discard out of hand.

I do state though that the appeal of limitations is the de-escalation of the arms race between PCs and DMs trying to challenge them. Even now, my Ravenloft party punches above their weight. So I use the two-dragon solution when applicable and accept sometimes the vampire gets curb stomped. I'd rather that than have everyone stuck playing only BECMI options for the rest of their lives.

 

[Staffan]

45 skills in 3e PHB vs. 18 skills in 5e. In 3e I can make someone who can swim, but can't climb. In 5e I can't. In 3e I can make someone who has both skills but is better at one than the other. In 5e I can't.

To me, and I reckon most people, having climbing, jumping, and swimming as separate skills just means that making someone athletic costs three times as much. Plus, having skills that are that granular means you're leaving other holes: what about throwing? Running? Digging? Tackling down doors? Having a catch-all Athletics reduces the number of cracks in the system. Or, you could go the Rolemaster or GURPS route and fill in each of those cracks with a new skill, leading to hundreds of different skills.

 

[DarkCrisis]

To me, and I reckon most people, having climbing, jumping, and swimming as separate skills just means that making someone athletic costs three times as much. Plus, having skills that are that granular means you're leaving other holes: what about throwing? Running? Digging? Tackling down doors? Having a catch-all Athletics reduces the number of cracks in the system. Or, you could go the Rolemaster or GURPS route and fill in each of those cracks with a new skill, leading to hundreds of different skills.

I wonder if D&D would improve by having a "specialization" system. Kind of like Shadowrun.

Base skill is Athletics. Then have a system where you can add +2 to Swim checks, or whatever.

Probably not though. 5E is complicated enough I don't think WotC wants to make it any harder. Players already forget the several feats and magics and specials and whatever, why complicate things more?

 

[Maxperson]

To me, and I reckon most people, having climbing, jumping, and swimming as separate skills just means that making someone athletic costs three times as much. Plus, having skills that are that granular means you're leaving other holes: what about throwing? Running? Digging? Tackling down doors? Having a catch-all Athletics reduces the number of cracks in the system. Or, you could go the Rolemaster or GURPS route and fill in each of those cracks with a new skill, leading to hundreds of different skills.

That's a False Dichotomy. You don't need to be able to do every single thing athletic just as good as every other thing or else have every possible athletic skill be individualized.

There were no holes in 3e physical skills. You had climbing, which left no holes in climbing ability. You had swimming, which left no holes in swimming ability. And you had jumping, which left no holes in jumping ability. There was no general athletics skill that applied to some and not other skills and would therefore have holes in it.

If you prefer to have gaping character flaws in a PC that is supposed to be good at one aspect(climbing), but not another aspect(swimming), yet is great at both, then the 5e skill system is for you. Or maybe you just avoid making characters that aren't good at everything in broad categories, which itself is a character flaw. People aren't good at everything in a related skill.

I was an amazingly fast sprinter and at one point was training for the Olympics. I was also a fairly good climber. Thing is, I sucked at long distance running and jumping, and was an average at best swimmer.

 

[Staffan]

I wonder if D&D would improve by having a "specialization" system. Kind of like Shadowrun.

Base skill is Athletics. Then have a system where you can add +2 to Swim checks, or whatever.

Probably not though. 5E is complicated enough I don't think WotC wants to make it any harder. Players already forget the several feats and magics and specials and whatever, why complicated things more?

I don't think it would be right for D&D, but I like the way skills work in the Troubleshooters. There's a list of about 30 skills, and that includes things that in D&D would be ability scores (like Strength). You also have Abilities, which are sort of like feats, which often give you bonuses to skills – sometimes in specific circumstances (and in those cases they often apply to multiple skills), and sometimes more general. These generally also come with a name and description that tell you what the Ability is about. For example, Been Everywhere means you're extremely well-traveled, and lets you spend points to either know someone where you are, get a bonus on Contacts or Red Tape checks when abroad, or to Languages checks for modern languages.

 

[DarkCrisis]

I don't think it would be right for D&D, but I like the way skills work in the Troubleshooters. There's a list of about 30 skills, and that includes things that in D&D would be ability scores (like Strength). You also have Abilities, which are sort of like feats, which often give you bonuses to skills – sometimes in specific circumstances (and in those cases they often apply to multiple skills), and sometimes more general. These generally also come with a name and description that tell you what the Ability is about. For example, Been Everywhere means you're extremely well-traveled, and lets you spend points to either know someone where you are, get a bonus on Contacts or Red Tape checks when abroad, or to Languages checks for modern languages.

Honestly, I'd strip out skills completely and just have it as ability checks based on "Would your race/class/background know this?" Arcana check? Obviously the wizard would know this. Roll vs INT. Hunt for food? Obviously the Ranger or Elf or Hermit would know this. Roll vs Wis. Etc. Simple.

 

[Micah Sweet]

To me, and I reckon most people, having climbing, jumping, and swimming as separate skills just means that making someone athletic costs three times as much. Plus, having skills that are that granular means you're leaving other holes: what about throwing? Running? Digging? Tackling down doors? Having a catch-all Athletics reduces the number of cracks in the system. Or, you could go the Rolemaster or GURPS route and fill in each of those cracks with a new skill, leading to hundreds of different skills.

It's a matter of preference, of course. I think both sides have laid out their case.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I wonder if D&D would improve by having a "specialization" system. Kind of like Shadowrun.

Base skill is Athletics. Then have a system where you can add +2 to Swim checks, or whatever.

Probably not though. 5E is complicated enough I don't think WotC wants to make it any harder. Players already forget the several feats and magics and specials and whatever, why complicate things more?

Level Up has just such a specialization system, and it works great! Of course, I'm one of those who simply doesn't agree with WotC's stance on complexity, and thinks 5e benefits from more nuance than the IP holder is willing to provide.

 

[Staffan]

There were no holes in 3e physical skills. You had climbing, which left no holes in climbing ability. You had swimming, which left no holes in swimming ability. And you had jumping, which left no holes in jumping ability. There was no general athletics skill that applied to some and not other skills and would therefore have holes in it.

So what skill would you use for a foot race in 3e? Just compare base speeds? Or to see who can throw the farthest? Or slalom? Or ski-jumping?

And at the same time, you have Spellcraft which includes everything there is to know about the practical application of magic. Why is that a single skill? Should it not be split into arcane spellcraft and divine spellcraft? Or a different skill for each school of magic? And why is there a single Knowledge (History)? Shouldn't each period and region be its own skill? Just because someone has studied the US Civil War in great detail it doesn't mean they know anything about the Italian Renaissance. But in 3e, that's all Knowledge (History).

At some point you need to combine fields of knowledge/skill that exist in reality to make for a reasonable in-game skill. Having Climb, Jump, and Swim as different skills, particularly in a system where most classes only get 2 effing skill points per level, is a travesty. And let's not even get into having Listen, Search, and Spot as different skills, or their counterparts Hide and Move Silently.

 

[Staffan]

Honestly, I'd strip out skills completely and just have it as ability checks based on "Would your race/class/background know this?" Arcana check? Obviously the wizard would know this. Roll vs INT. Hunt for food? Obviously the Ranger or Elf or Hermit would know this. Roll vs Wis. Etc. Simple.

That, or a more permissive version of that, is how 13th age does it. 13th Age uses ability checks for all that kind of stuff, and each PC has a number of points to spend on "backgrounds". If you can make a case that your background should help with something, you can add it to your check.