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.

​

 

[Micah Sweet]

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.

The aforementioned skill specialization system, as seen in Level Up and elsewhere, deals with that issue.

 

[Maxperson]

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?

I would make something up. A foot race against something naturally faster would be a losing proposition from the get go, and a winning one against something slower. It would only matter if speeds were the same. Feats would matter. If you had the run feat and could by RAW sprint faster, you'd win unless your opponent also had that feat. If it was a marathon, then the person with endurance would have a significant advantage. And so on.

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?

It's not. It only identifies what spell, not anything else. If you want to know about the practical applications of magic, you'd use knowledge arcana.

Should it not be split into arcane spellcraft and divine spellcraft?

Possibly.

Or a different skill for each school of magic?

No.

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).

No. Knowledge history is a general skill, which is why DCs go way up for esoteric pieces of information. Someone who is highly specialized in one narrow aspect of history wouldn't have DCs that high for the same piece of information. For knowledge that deep, you go to a sage.

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.

Agreed. That was a points issue, though, not a skill issue. And one that is easily solved by simply giving a 4 point minimum per level, and further solved by getting rid of the bogus notion of class and cross class skills.

And let's not even get into having Listen, Search, and Spot as different skills, or their counterparts Hide and Move Silently.

No. That all made sense as well. A lot of people can hide much better than they can move silently, and searching and spotting things are very different skills. One is perceptual(spot), and the other(search) is more about the method than perception. And listening isn't even related to the rest of those. Grouping them all together is nonsensical.

I've known folks who were so oblivious that they wouldn't notice a bull if it was standing in front of them, couldn't find lost keys because they just sort of randomly walked places in the house and half assed looked, yet had hearing so sharp a mouse would have trouble sneaking up on them.

The skills you describe above are not related to one another and don't belong in a group.

 

[Stormonu]

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?

I would very much like to see this, it reminds me of the WEG system with fairly broad skills and then you could further specialize in subskills under those skills.

I've been working on reworking 5E's Expertise to do this. I've really been dissatisfied how much of a detailed subsystem is for the likes of combat, but the skill system is so superficial.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

For broad skills like Athletics you could allow for a number of sub-skills equal to one's proficiency bonus.

 

[Chaosmancer]

If the company wants to make smarter business choices, that's their prerogative. But that has nothing to do with my lack in belief in bloat as a real problem for a game, from the consumer point of view I am taking. TSR made a ton of product that defied business sense and led to their demise, but I'm very happy from a consumer perspective that they did.

You realize DnD and Level Up wouldn't even exist, because of those decisions TSR made, if WoTC hadn't bought the game, right?

Are you just... assuming that will happen again? That even if WoTC drove DnD into the ground with bloat, that the game would continue because someone else would buy and revive it... only to drive it into the ground with bloat? That... isn't how you get things to last for decades. That is the opposite of how you do that.

 

[Chaosmancer]

For broad skills like Athletics you could allow for a number of sub-skills equal to one's proficiency bonus.

I guess, but... how often would that be useful?

Like, I really struggle with how often a player is going to be happy to get their profiency to swimming (which normally does not require a roll) but not have it for lifting a gate.

And, it seems weird to me to want to break these skills up, but not the knowledge skills, or the dexterity skills, or the wisdom skills. I mean, animal handling on a horse is different than a dog is different than a snake, is different than a orange-spotted snuffleupagus, but I don't think anyone is really going to be fighting to split that skill into the animal kingdoms, let only in size, genus, or anything else. The skill is barely useful as is.

 

[Micah Sweet]

You realize DnD and Level Up wouldn't even exist, because of those decisions TSR made, if WoTC hadn't bought the game, right?

Are you just... assuming that will happen again? That even if WoTC drove DnD into the ground with bloat, that the game would continue because someone else would buy and revive it... only to drive it into the ground with bloat? That... isn't how you get things to last for decades. That is the opposite of how you do that.

TSR lasted for decades before it blew up, to be fair. And left an amazing legacy of product. Those two things, in their case, seemed to be mutually exclusive.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I guess, but... how often would that be useful?

Like, I really struggle with how often a player is going to be happy to get their profiency to swimming (which normally does not require a roll) but not have it for lifting a gate.

And, it seems weird to me to want to break these skills up, but not the knowledge skills, or the dexterity skills, or the wisdom skills. I mean, animal handling on a horse is different than a dog is different than a snake, is different than a orange-spotted snuffleupagus, but I don't think anyone is really going to be fighting to split that skill into the animal kingdoms, let only in size, genus, or anything else. The skill is barely useful as is.

Break up all the skills. I'm not playing favorites.

 

[Oofta]

Break up all the skills. I'm not playing favorites.

But no matter how granular you make it, there will always be things that aren't covered. No game can predict every possibility, there will always be some cases wher the DM decides training should apply but there's not a specific skill for it.

So you're not really solving anything, it just adds to the list of numbers you need to track and adding complexity. It's the same for ability scores, you could add dozens of new abilities and still not accurately model all the variations.

 

[Clint_L]

Consolidate the skills. 5e needs fewer skills, not more.

If WotC can track skill checks made on DnDBeyond, they should be able to get a rough sense of how useful each skill is, in terms of how frequently it gets used In games. Then bundle skills as needed so that they are of roughly equal value. Or at least somewhat closer than they are right now.

For example, bundling history, religion and arcana into one skill, "lore," would make for a skill worth considering, instead of just taking perception or insight.