D&D (2024) YOU are in charge of the next PHB! What do you change?

[Remathilis]

I disagree, maybe to you there isn't a difference, but there is.

In the end, let's remember that sorcerers have been in the game for 21 years already. That is nearly half of the game's lifespan. Remove the sorcerers and you are telling a lot of players that they aren't welcome anymore.

Half the suggestions in this thread have no problem telling 35+ year old classes that have been there since OD&D to hit the bricks.

 

[Mind of tempest]

Half the suggestions in this thread have no problem telling 35+ year old classes that have been there since OD&D to hit the bricks.

tradition is not itself a reason for something to be good thus being willing to burn anything is not wrong.

 

[Remathilis]

tradition is not itself a reason for something to be good thus being willing to burn anything is not wrong.

.It's funny what people will burn though. There are calls to remove druids or dragonborn, but I'm not seeing calls to remove the Tolkien races (elf/dwarf/halfling) from the PHB, or people suggesting we move away from the d20 as the primary resolution die.

 

[The Annihilargh]

I know that the thread didn't explicitly acknowledge this, but what if we a Basic and an Advanced version for the new PHB?
Both versions would have super-concise rules so everyone is clear on what may happen (still subject to DM judgement/discretion),
The Basic version would have slightly simpler rules for those who are D&D-curious,
And the Advanced version could have more intricate and (maybe) creativity-rewarding mechanics.

 

[Parmandur]

I know that the thread didn't explicitly acknowledge this, but what if we a Basic and an Advanced version for the new PHB?
Both versions would have super-concise rules so everyone is clear on what may happen (still subject to DM judgement/discretion),
The Basic version would have slightly simpler rules for those who are D&D-curious,
And the Advanced version could have more intricate and (maybe) creativity-rewarding mechanics.

We already have that for 5E, the Basic rules have been our for 7 years. WotC were going to reuse "Advanced Dungeons & Dragons" for the Core books, but WotC marketing research determined that this confused people and would be counterproductive.

 

[The Annihilargh]

We already have that for 5E, the Basic rules have been our for 7 years. WotC were going to reuse "Advanced Dungeons & Dragons" for the Core books, but WotC marketing research determined that this confused people and would be counterproductive.

Wait, we do? I never saw anything like that
And—genuinely curious—how would it be counterproductive?

 

[Parmandur]

Wait, we do? I never saw anything like that
And—genuinely curious—how would it be counterproductive?

Counterproductive in the only way that matters to WotC, impacting sales. Creates brand confusion, introduces analysis paralysis, that sort of thing. Basic D&D is here:

Dungeons & Dragons | The World's Greatest Roleplaying Game

The official home and digital toolset for Dungeons & Dragons. Dive into D&D books, create a character, and more!

dnd.wizards.com

 

[The Annihilargh]

Ah, alright.

 

[Remathilis]

Wait, we do? I never saw anything like that
And—genuinely curious—how would it be counterproductive?

@Parmandur already covered it, but I think it's worth a little more discussion.

The Basic book (which is the common four races, the core four classes + one sub each, a few backgrounds and enough monsters to run simple modules) was more-or-less a "free-to-play" version of the game. It's not that much less complicated than what the PHB offers, save for a lot less choices and no feats/multi-classing.

When people speak of wanting a Basic/Advanced system similar to the 80's D&D/AD&D split, they effectively asking for two versions of D&D to be made; one that doesn't have all the bells and whistles and one that that has deep customization and rules support. TIMHO, that would be the worst possible setup for WotC as they would either focus support on the Basic version (and ignoring the advanced options) or towards the Advanced one (and thus be incompatible with the basic one). So, if the advanced system uses tactical combat rules but modules are written with simpler "I attack" style rules, the tactical rules are going to feel superfluous and needlessly complex or worse, break what balance the module was trying to accomplish.

 

[Mind of tempest]

.It's funny what people will burn though. There are calls to remove druids or dragonborn, but I'm not seeing calls to remove the Tolkien races (elf/dwarf/halfling) from the PHB, or people suggesting we move away from the d20 as the primary resolution die.

I see no reason to not be willing to consider other options, if it is 50/50 then no need to really change but even d20 could be changed.