DreamLyrics™ Play-by-Post Forums Front of House Our Community Review Role-Playing Games ONE Dungeons & Dragons

Anyone else interested in the newest changes taking place?

From one site I saw, you choose your Class before your Species (Race as a term is gone). And the background system is going to be greatly expanded and revamped. A few of the tradition "main" classes and a bunch of subclasses for each.


From Wargamer.com here is some interesting bits. Not sure how I feel about Half-Elves though, to be honest.


I am curious to what everyone's thoughts are. I am intrigued, and a bit worried to be honest. But, will I buy it? The two core books (Players and DMs), definitely.

I just don't trust Hasbro's overall monetization plan. I expect that things they are leaving out, theoretically for ethical reasons, will be available to offer "traditional" options for an upcharge. But they'll try to capitalize on the controversy.

5th Ed was already supposed to be an answer to the complexities of 3/3.5/Pathfinder and they were theoretically not going to have rules/options creep but it did a lot. This time they're just going to try the same thing with likely a subscription model where you can't play with just a rulebook, pencil, dice, and imagination.

Yeah, we probably won't transition to it.

Might try dagger heart when it comes out to see hwo that is

Well, Hasbro have stated quite openly that they want to increase profits by 50% in the short term and that D&D is "under monetized" to use their own words.

So I think it's safe to say that One D&D will herald a more exploitative business model that is more expensive for the customer. As customers, we'll have to decide where we stand and whether it's good value for us, just like with modern "live service" computer games, loot boxes, season passes, etc..

As a gamer, what do I think of One D&D so far? I'm underwhelmed tbh. Wizards have said it will essentially be a tweaked version of 5e, compatible with the previous version, and that's similar to the revisions we've seen in Tasha's Cauldron of Everything.

So far I haven't seen the justification for this new edition. Sure, they've said they're removing problematic content like "races", the discrimatory "half-elves" and "half-orcs" but this political correctness looks like virtue signalling to me. On it's own, it's not justification for a new version. It's moralistic slight of hand. The only practical justification I've seen so far is simply that they want to make D&D more profitable.

That involves discontinuing usage of the Open Gaming Licence ver 1.0 for D&D and designing it so it relies on their proprietary VTT.

I expect we'll see more aura abilities in One D&D, for example. Radial effects that emanate from a character, overlap with other auras and are hard to track without a VTT. Since Roll20 and other third parties won't be able to use One D&D (my assumption, not officially announced afaik), gamers will be forced onto Wizards' VTT.

TL;DR? So far the only reason to buy One D&D is so I'm not exposed to upsetting concepts like race and prejudice... but I'm a grown-up, I live in the real world. I can handle those things!

Nem, I agree with your points. What I am hoping is that this version pulls together in one place the major updates through 5e and Tasha's. One is supposed to b e fully compatible with 5e, so I don't think there will be a ton of big changes.

Except no Orcs and no 1/2 Elves. Oh, and Warlocks are supposed to get a bit of a change as well to put them more in line with the other spellcasters, no short rest recharge time. They will need a longer rest to regain their magic.

It will be interesting to see how that change for Warlocks go. The trade-off they had for getting their spells back after a short rest was they had far fewer spells than other casters. If they now bump it back up to make it equal, and they also need a long rest to get them back, they lose much of their flavor.

I think every system has some level of creep if they put out splat books. Publishers need to put out books to make money. There are newer methods, VTTs for example, but in the end...

I have been playing D&D since it was Chainmail, so I have seen a few editions. Some I liked more than others. There are aspects to 5e that I enjoy. Stranger and I still play AD&D, he doesn't want to learn a new edition. But One feels like a money grab, especially after Wizards "give all the money to us" adjustment of their license. I know it was walked back, but the idea that D&D is under capitalized, while it might be true, is not an idea I will support.

I get to vote with my money. I vote for less BS, namby, pamby, politic-ing junk. I agree with Nem, I am adult and can choose what to have in my games or not, Half-EVERYTHING, if I want.

Mostly though after a few years of doing this, I find that the mechanics have to be interesting to merit application at the table. If they get in the way, then I am not going to put forth the energy, money, and whatever it might take.

Call me an old **** but I get to choose.

[[ Call me an old **** but I get to choose. ]]

You don't have to be old to 'choose' what you want from a game! That is one of the reasons that there are so =very- many games out there <weg>

Find the ones you like and enjoy the heck out of them!! That is what it is all about!!

Aye. Summing up my opinion, I think One D&D's future will hinge on whether its monetization interferes with its game design.

As soon as you change a mechanic to better suit your VTT, you're probably doomed.


Mina and you make a really interesting point about warlock and classes balanced around the short rest. I've played quite a few 1st level beginner games in D&D 5e and found those classes balanced around short rest are really flawed. 5e adventures just don't seem to incorporate short rests. The chapters/sections tend to be short, self-contained encounters, suited to getting in and out fast and then having a long rest. (Lost Mines of Phandelver is a great example of this.)

So warlocks end up recharging after a long rest, making them extremely limited compared to classes balanced around a long rest.

Yes, Nem, agree. That is why Nep and I instituted a house rule in our games that short rests are 10 mins long, rather than the 1 hour suggested in the PHB. Much more playable mid-dungeon.

Nice. It's like short rest as a tea break rather than a lunch break.

In fact, I checked the Cambridge Dictionary and it says "Tea Break. A short rest from working."

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/tea-break

So it's official, a tea break is a short rest! (In the UK, a tea break is 10-15 minutes long.)

LOL, I am so adopting this!

Love that info, thanks Nem!

Diving Deeper into info about this new product from Wizards. It sounds like everyone is considering this basically edition 5.5

You will get one Feat at first level to help highlight your background.

Sounds like political correctness drifting into the game.

Zeim it does, but I like the idea of a Feat at first to tie into background. And the chance to change the size of certain races (tiefling etc.) from medium to small, or vice versa. I am also intrigued by the Goliath race and what goes with that

I also like the fact that so much from other books will be pulled together in the Player's manual. After a few moves over the years I have lost my 5th edition books, so having all the info in one place will be cheaper for me than replacing the set.

I suppose I am mostly a traditionalist. Forex, the idea of a huge, brutish Elf with terrible Dexterity, low Intelligence, and low Charisma, but great strength just seems like too much of a stretch. Just create an Orc or human Barbarian and be done. You lose the flavor of the race by making everyone the same. The idea you can have anti-archetypes (to me) is pointless. But then I am not a player who is in the game to role play angst and such.

I have no trouble with the Feat based on background, but letting every race pick and choose which stats they get bumps to dilutes the racial stereotypes (and, BTW, was the main benefit of choosing a human pc). While some may think racial stereotyping is bad, I don't. D&D is not intended to be a melting pot where every race ends up with the same cross-section of stats.

Half-orcs are strong, Elves are graceful and smart, Dwarves have great constitution, Halflings are small, etc. Tradition. A 6'5" Halfling? No thank you.

Zeim I doubt all races will have the ability to swap sizes, but some, yes. I can also see an elven warrior who is graceful and strong, a dwarf who is shrewd, etc. I do see your point though.

Personally, if I was GMing with a point-buy system, I would have a few stats for the race that require at least a 14 in them or you don't qualify for that race. Considering you pick your race, in this new iteration, after deciding class etc, that seems fair.

Like I said I will buy it simply because I want all the base rules plus expansion rules, like Tasha's all in one place. That way I can either stop borrowing books from friends and family and have my own again Hmmm now that I think about it, I wonder if there is a conversion somewhere to do a Dresden game using the D&D rules? I will have to look into that!

Seems like genericizing and filing off the interesting fiddly bits.

Well if it is allowing for adjustments, I think other game systems do it better. Savage Worlds for example.

But like Zeim, I prefer certain flavors with my DnD. Not that I can't create them in another system. But sometimes I just want that 10th level dwarf fighter with enough hp that he can walk up to a Symbol of Death and turn his head sideways and say "I don't know what it is." Walk back up the stairs and say to the wizard "there is some sort of magical symbol down there." Wizard walks down and doesn't walk back up. Totally happened in a game, and totally hilarious!

Pande, my favorite moment in a D&D game... I was miffed (okay I was more than miffed) that the other players were ignoring some decent ideas and lost in their bickering. We had come to a room with blood on the floor and music instruments on pedestles. *I* knew not to play the instruments, so of course I did. I was the only player to make the saving throw vs paralysis. I failed my notice roll. Played another instrument. Made my saving throw (no one else did) and failed a notice roll. On to the next instrument. Ditto results. By the time I made a successful notice check, one character was dead, one nearly dead, and the others in hardly any better condition. Made my little dark heart happy.

The GM was laughing SO hard, he was kind of fed up with the player party at that point.

Lol nice!

What's the latest news on One D&D, anyone know? I haven't seen or heard owt pop up in ages but I know they've clarified they aren't making a new edition of the game, only a new edition of the books--- effectively Revised 5th Edition.

Nem, I've been reading the same thing. This is not a new version, this is just a revised version of the current edition.

They are taking all of the existing stuff the players like from 5e and supplements and putting them together. Making sure everything is in fewer places and that it is all working together, but they are also expanding some of the options.

Release date(s)
Players Manual September 17, 2024
Dungeon Master's Guide November 12, 2024
The Monster Manual February 18, 2025

Thanks Mina. And would you know it, revised editions officially announced this week. WotC must've heard us talking! IGN have done a good overview:

https://www.ign.com/articles/dungeons-dragons-2024-core-rulebooks-are-up-for-preorder

Thanks Nem!

Thanks for the preorder link! And yes, I have long suspected that publishers, television and movie studios lurk DreamLyrics. I hear ideas for games or characters, and poof... suddenly a few months later they arrive on the screen. Timing? Or.. is it espionage?

I did see the eversion is $29 a bit cheaper than the hardback version. However there is a discount if you buy both, $10 for the electronic version if you preorder both of them.

Preorder Link

The new Dungeons & Dragons 2024 Digital bundle is $89.97

I've got to look into what or whether being a D&D Beyond Master Tier subscriber gives me.

I've gotta wonder what is worth spending beer money on compared to the version I have already <weg>

No beer ever lasted 10 years for me.

Most of the beers I drink I have been drinking for more than 10 years. Every once in a while, I find a new one to add to the rotation <vbg>

Mike you rent beer, not buy it. It just doesn't stay long.

Tell that to the liquor store <weg>

Online shops are now showing the UK release dates for the books. 17 Sep for PHB, 12 Nov for DMG and 18 Feb 2025 for MM in the UK. I generally buy from the Magic Madhouse in Enfield as they're amongst the cheapest and they have each book listed for £28.99, cheaper than Amazon.

https://magicmadhouse.co.uk/tabletop-games/dungeon-dragons/dungeons-and-dragons-2024

On a tangent, still no sign of print versions of either Shadow of the Weird Wizard or 13th Age Second Edition, both being highly anticipated D&D knock-offs.

I backed the 13th Age Second edition Kickstarter. It is still in testing. I have the Gamma play test draft. They anticipate next year for actual printing, though it might be late this fall.

I also own the PDF of both The Secrets of the Weird Wizard and The player book. Reading slowly. It happens when your reading shelf looks like the Titanic going down!

Pande, do you know if you have the latest version of the Weird Wizard documents with the improved layouts and pro artwork?

I looked at the first version that was a bit shoddy in those regards.

They are a little bit better, but yes, they are still rough draftish. I am hoping by purchasing on Drivethru, that when things get to a more final layout, I will get the updated version. Though they are still better than most any White Wolf book I have ever owned.

Not difficult

Exactly!

After watching many of the promo videos and reviews of D&D 2024 I've become increasingly dissatisfied with the whole direction of 5th Edition tbh.

I don't feel like tactical complexity is being added to the game yet I don't feel like it's getting more streamlined either. It feels like it's just getting denser. More crud to fill up your character sheet and pick through at the table.

So I bought Five Torches Deep and I think I'll use that for my next mini-campaign. It's mechanical a lightened 5e with an OSR pitch, so less races, lower hit points all-round, etc. This should mesh nicely with the adventure I'm using, X1: The Isle of Dread.

The downside with Five Torches Deep is that it's so terse that the GM often needs familiarity with D&D to know what the designers are talking about at times. There is no "What is Role-Playing?" chapter, for example.

Another downside is the brand new book smells like old socks!

Do you ever feel like much of it is "change for the sake of change, OR how can we sell more of those expensive books?"

I'd say both <weg>

I agree with both of you guys. When I'm at the table, I already intentionally don't invoke a lot of rules to speed play or blur restrictive rules so as not to curtail creative ideas. Players look so downhearted sifting through the crud on their character sheets. It frustrates me.

I think one of the top goals of D&D's owners is to push players onto D&D Beyond, by making the rules so dense that it needs a character creator or digital tabletop to run. In essence, I think they see the future as the GM sitting at the table with a laptop and the players running characters off of their smartphones or tablets.

Not the future, Neil. That is the present. AFAIK those who play with paper, pencil, and real dice are a tiny, and shrinking, minority.

nem, this is very much what is happening. And there are analogue (but not analog) pursuits with other systems like Pathfinder 2e (using HeroLab or other tools). For "broadcast style" gaming and remote gaming, some people find this as a timesaver. I honestly like the tools for character creation for Pathfinder and D&D because it does all the hard stuff for you, when it works of course. And I am very much someone who is a bit OCD about the weeds of the rules and getting things "right" vs just kicking back. But if I'm sitting down to play, I just like pencil and paper.

I wanted to mention before when you were talking Five Torches Deep, that the "what is an RPG?" usual opening chapter I usually skip. But I read what they did with Pathfinder 2e and found it pretty thoughtfully done.

Aye, I concur. Sometimes you do get a good "What is Role-playing?" chapter but usually I start then quickly skip.

Five Torches Deep is a bit disingenuous though. It is an ultra-lite version of 5e with an OSR twist but only achieves its tiny word count by assuming you know 5e and OSR games already. So in fact, it's not really a standalone game.

That's fine for me; it's aimed squarely at me. A GM who wants to unburden their 5e games and play more in an OSR style. But I couldn't recommend it to someone instead of 5e.

I must admit, I do love a good character generator too! As long as it has a print feature.

I was very against signing up for the subscription for Hero Lab Online. I have a legacy version for my first edition Pathfinder campaign that's so absolutely invaluable, when I got this new computer built, that was the main thing I was making sure was still functional with the hardware guy.

BUT I did just take the plunge because I was getting frustrated with the other Pathfinder 2e stuff out there (and don't get me started on @&@@^!!# D&D Beyond) and the Hero Lab Online is pretty great. Good interface if you want to keep electronic, where you can trigger conditions etc and see the effects across the sheet immediately, but the pdfs generated are good too. I don't know if they have yet to have anyone test a PDF out of D&D Beyond. All the choices as to what gets how much space, etc, they make are garbage.

Vryx, I disagree with your blanket hatred of DnDBeyond. There is some crap but there's lots of good and I say this as someone that runs games through there.

What is going on with DnD2024 may irritate some but not me and I know, from the way my (much) younger players react to it, they are all bought in on the type of stuff that is pissing off many of my contemporaries (folks at or near retirement age). The loudest boos that I hear are about the potential to monetize the game in the new 3D VTT that will be part of DnDBeyond. I'm signed up for the Beta test and I'll report back.

Another thing, please elaborate by what you mean when you say "I don't know if they have yet to have anyone test a PDF out of D&D Beyond." No games are run, per se, from PDFs on DnDBeyond (yet). It's more of a resource library at this point. And when I run my FTF game, PCs are created in DnDBeyond. I create monsters, magic items, spells and such over there and import the data into the VTT that I use (Foundry hosted on Forge).

I do have a lot of questions about what the DnD landscape will look like in 2025 but for now I can say that DnDBeyond is not an issue for me.

BTW 1: my SKT game here (which I co-DM with Aquadyne now) uses DnDBeyond character sheets. You can find them along the masthead.

BTW 2: I am also signed up with a Master Tier subscription and I have the 2024 Player's handbook. Note that there's also a free SRD for those who want to play without paying a dime. How can you beat that?

I would not describe my feelings as "blanket hatred" to DnD Beyond. I get it. It's there as a revenue generator for Wizards more than broadening access to players. I've used it to make characters and then had to nickel and dime to pay extra to get what I needed from the players handbook basic options. Then, printing a PDF, it doesn't have any of the useful details of spells other than things that can fit in a columnar format like ranges. It has huge areas for things that aren't that necessary like a list of organizations or a physical description, that just dump text.

Compare that to something like HeroLab that has everything you need to know without opening another resource, specified to your character.

It used to be that you could join someone's campaign and be able to make a character for it with all the source material for the campaign but then they changed it so each player also needs to buy all the source material for the campaign.

Hey, I'm glad it works for you! Are you managing the players' characters yourself? That's what I do with HeroLab so they don't need to each buy it themselves.

You are wrong about the "used to". My players update their PCs on my campaign without paying a dime. So maybe something changed after you experienced some pain? Anyhow, with my subscription I had access to all the things you say you didn't have access to. I suppose you resisted paying anything ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I'm also not sure about the PDF thing. For instance, I just was granted access to the 2024 Player's Handbook online. It's not paper or PDF, it's a web page with links. I would be curious about how you were trying to use DnDBeyond. The one thing it didn't have was a VTT. But that's changing and it's something I'm more than curious about.

My experience with the current batch of VTTs is that the basic environment is "ok" but money gets you options. For instance, in Roll20, you needed to buy monster tokens. That pissed me off. I made my own with Token Maker. But then I needed to be a programmer (which I was before I retired) to do anything fancy. My brother decided to try the Foundry route (via Forge) and that's cool too - better IMO than Roll20. But there too, in order to get what I want, I needed to patronize module authors. These modules are bolt-on tools do cool things so I shelled out a buck or two. But as Foundry upgraded their systems, module authors fell behind and now every few months or so my brother and I need to do QA regression testing to make sure everything still works. We are way behind in upgrades. But now with DnDBeyond coming out with a (fully integrated) VTT it may make Foundry and Roll20 obsolete. And when will they pull the plug on those 3rd parties and try to monopolize the VTT market?

So this is an inflection point. The results of the Sigil beta and the rollout of Dnd2024 will likely impact my play for the next decade.

Yes, Vryx, not sure where the "players now have to buy all the source material for the campaign to use it" comes from? I had to buy a basic Beyond license years and years ago but I have access to all the game material, including specific campaign stuff that my DM purchased and is using, for no extra charge. Maybe we're talking about two different things?

Well I thank you Nem for the suggestion. I am going to give FTD a read.

Oh Nem you should check out M20 Adamantine edition. It is a rules light the compatible rpg. The only thing I would say is it doesn't have the OSR vine if you specifically want that. It is also available free on the web under the creative commons rules.

Already checked M20 Fifth Adamantine Edition out, Pande! It's a neat package, and the 3rd Ed styling was nostalgic. Very pickupable.

My problem is I ran this newbie group through Dragon of Icespire Peak using standard 5e, but they were floundering with all the rules by 3rd level. So I've been looking for a hack of 5e that scales back the rules and makes combat quicker but doesn't contradict any fundamentals the players have already learned.

So for example, introducing roll-under and THAC0 would be a no-no.

The DM let his monthly expire but he had bought all the additional source material. He was angry that if he didn't keep up the monthly that he didn't get to keep what were the one-time purchases. So to get the elements back on my character sheet, I had to make a lot of microtransactions for each feat and class feature, etc. to show back up on the sheet.

Well I can certainly see how that would be annoying.

Yeah that would be annoying. No-one likes being nickle and dimed.

Ah I get it now. I totally understand and for me combat length is probably the most annoying stumbling block.

I am reading and like FTD. I just wanted to highlight the minimalist nature of M20.

Aye, I should have started this new group on something like M20 instead of 5e tbh. It's just they requested D&D specifically; as you'd expect given the brand recognition.

So far they've enjoyed their RPG experience but only so much as playing a board game, I reckon. They haven't fallen in love with it yet and that might be because the rules are distracting them from the freedom of role-playing.

You could always go "old school" and do all of the rolling and adjustments for them yourself 'behind the DM screen' so to speak. They just tell you what they want to do and not worry about details. Or, if they enjoy rolling dice, let them do that but you apply modifiers yourself. You could even go full 'theatre of the mind' and not use any sort of maps or worry about distances/ranges etc. Just have them say "I run up and attack", you say "OK, roll the D20", they do and you decide what happens and where they moved to.

Yes I think more of those techniques are a good idea, Zeim, crucial probably. I'll let you know how I get on. In essence I want them to stop reading their character sheets when they play. In a counter-intuitive way there shouldn't be anything worth reading on the sheet. It's for quick reference only.

Vryx, that is annoying but it sounds like your DM sabotaged you.

Pande, In a 3 hour session a week ago, my party (6 level 10 PCs + companions) fought over a dozen duergar and 3 Umber Hulks in a challenging environment. We got in 13 rounds in 3 hours. Everyone was impressed. Once players get used to their characters and if the DM is on the ball, combat can move quickly.

I hear what you are saying. But having grown up in the old world 5e 4e 3e all are so much more crunchy that they take longer.

Note I am not advocating one roll. I get the back and forth. I am also not saying low ho is the answer either. I just look at how long things take and say that is too much.

Maybe it is my past. Maybe it is my current. Regardless it is my desire. There we go.

Honestly the more I explore other systems, the more I think Cypher might be the way to introduce most newbies to gaming. It allows for effort on rolls, it is cinematic (pulpy) without being terribly mechanical.

Yes and Numenara's a high quality book too, Pande, so if you put it in front of RPG newbies I think they'd be impressed by it.

I'll buy a copy of D&D 2024's PHB anyway; I'm interested in seeing how they've made it more accessible.

One of the big differences between 5e and OSR-style games is how many column inches devoted to race. In 5e it's a major decision point considering what little mechanical effect it has, taking up many many pages in the core books and supplements. In OSR-style games it's often covered in a paragraph with a choice of human, elf, dwarf or halfling.

Data from D&D Beyond and Baldur's Gate 3 suggests humans, elves, dragonborn and tieflings are the most popular races in that order. If you guys were joining a new game, would just human, elf, dwarf and halfling be sufficient for you?

Yes. I usually like Tieflings and Elves as I lean towards magic using classes but in this new system it seems that benefits are no longer attached to race but rather to background so race seems to have become nothing more than RPing flavor? If the game was interesting (and especially if race had no bearing on benefits) The 4 basic races would suffice for me.

If the races don't have much mechanical differences then it doesn't matter if there are 4 or 40. You can in OSR fashion reskin and add flavor text. That is what we always did.

Personally I play weird races. I like variety and want to bring something different to the table and the group. In the olden days we had Arduin which offered a bunch of different races that we just incorporated into our game. We also used mana rather than memorization as our magical mechanic.

But four is fine to start. We know they will make more and sell supplements.

5TD only offers four and there isn't really a difference between them. Race only changes what dice you roll for stats, so it changes the probability of rolling high or low on certain stats. There's no standard array so it should work as intended.

Neither elves or dwarves can see in the dark either, which is a step away all versions of D&D. This is the only change I'm not sure about but it's also pretty easy to re-implement. I could re-implement darkvision for elves and dwarves, re-rolling 1s for halflings... there aren't any feats in 5TD so what could I give humans?

How about one extra die to roll for stats for one stat of their choice (so instead of rolling 4d6 and keeping top 3 you would roll 5d6 and still only keep top three)? Or some sort of Skill bonus?

Yes, a bit like the Skilled feat in 5e. I like that. It gives humans a versatility vibe.

Well I have pre-ordered the physical and online versions of the Player's Handbook. I hope it lives up to promises, and I fear that it will be a failure... so maybe it will b e somewhere in between? I just want all the rules in one place for Chargen, and see what they have got

My copy of the 2024 PHB has arrived but I'm saving it for my birthday.

Nice! Mine is on the way.

Has yours arrived yet, Mina? What do you make of it?

I got mine yesterday, and I am reserving complete judgment until I have time to go through it thoroughly. I can say it is not as 'complete' as I would have liked it since they were touting it as various rules now in one book. A lot of potential player races are not there, and I assume they will be in supplements down the line which I find frustrating.

Also, Half Elf and Half Orc are now gone. The "half/quasi races" are just... no more. I did a dive and they are considered 'problematic' as they feature children that are unlike either parent. For me that is silly, they are a combination of two different species! Of course they will be different. But... you can still play characters of mixed heritages, but you choose one of the parents to take after for aspects. So if you play a half elf, you choose either human with a few cosmetic choices in looks to hint at a less than pure human lineage, or you are playing an elf with with a few cosmetic choices in looks to hint at a less than pure elf lineage.

I find that disappointing.

I don't have my 5th edition books anymore, lost in a move or just bounced out of my inventory along the way possibly. So this is a nice dip back into the rulebooks, but first glance it feels a bit of a bait and switch (not as inclusive as it was touted to be).

Have you dipped into yours Nem?

...it is political correctness taking over I suspect. They are downplaying race in general from what I have been hearing, using backgrounds for bonuses instead forex.

Mine's still in its Jiffy bag, Mina. I quickly checked it over to make sure it's not damaged but I'm waiting until my birthday to open it.

I'm surprised half-elf is gone from the PHB. From D&D Beyond's own data half-elf was the fifth most popular race of all!

Half-orc have never been popular though. Personally I like 'em, they come with an inbuilt traumatic back story--- it's unlikely they were born from a happy union!

Weeeeellllll ... their 'purpose' is to sell more <sigh>

.... and I suspect that is also part of the problem, Nem. Both half-orc and half-elf have a good chance of coming from a less than consensual arrangement. Not politically correct to "support" that by encouraging those races being pcs.

Heh, sounds like I am better off not getting them. As much as I love new rule books to read, doesn't sound like it is a big enough step in the direction I want to go. I had suspected, but it is nice to confirm.

That's what boggles my mind. If you take out anything scary, disturbing, unpleasant, or evil from D&D, what the Nine Hells are the player characters fighting against??

It'd be like remaking Alien but replacing Giger's penis/vagina-inspired, face-raping alien with Tribbles!

...yes, a slightly annoyed Tribble is the new Tarrasque in politically correct D&D..... <sigh>

OK, I opened my copy of the 5.24 D&D PHB this morning.

Rather than compare it to 5.14 and pick through the rules, what's it like as a standalone product at face value?

First impression, it's well constructed but remarkably lightweight for a book of its size. I was reading about this initiative in publishing the other day, using lighter, lower GSM paper to decrease the carbon footprint. Not only good for the environment but a win for the role-playing gamer too since the rule books are less of a burden. Feeling the paper I think it's still high enough quality to survive use at the table. So well done there, Wizards.

The artwork is very colourful and I approve of how it's more closely tied to the text on the page. Makes sense. The style of the artwork is quite varied. You have some highly resolved art, some sketchy, almost impressionistic, some comic book style. Stylistic variety is OK but it means the tone varies too, giving the book a very generic feel.

Layout and accessibility, this is a vast improvement over every previous edition of D&D except perhaps BECMI edition. A daring choice is to punt all rules definitions to a glossary at the back of the book. So for example, "darkvision" might be mentioned all through the book but if you want to know what it is/does, you have to look it up in the glossary at the back. Although inconvenient for your first read-through, subsequent referencing of a rule is much easier. What do you guys think?

Overall, I must admit my immediate reaction to the new PHB was "Gosh, this is a lot like Tales of the Valiant!!"

Tales of the Valiant is Kobold Press's attempt to make a more accessible 5e. One of Wizards' main aims with 5.24 was to make 5e more accessible. So maybe it's convergent evolution!

Reading through things, it is obvious that there is a huge shift from choosing your species as the basis for character creation. Species now gives you a few 'perks' but not ability modifiers. It also puts the emphasis on Backgrounds, which is where Ability Modifiers come in. It does give a bit more flexibility to create the Elven warriors or Orc Druids etc. that you are envisioning.

Some things about this new edition I really like, some (like the dismissal of the half-elf etc.) not so much.

I did a search on why the half-elf was removed from D&D and here is the answer I received. It is as we suspected. Political correctness run amok:

"The half-elf race was removed from the core rulebook of Dungeons & Dragons (D&D) in 2024 because game designers are uncomfortable with the term "half" and concerns about inherent racism. Players who want to create a mixed character are now advised to choose one race and draw their traits from it. The company has also committed to replacing the word "race" with "species".

How sad.

If anyone decides to run a game using the new rules I suggest every single pc be 1/2 of any two combination of races (as a form of protests). Since you draw whatever few benefits remain from only one of your races it really doesn't matter what the other one is. Half halfling and half Orc. Half Elf and Half Dwarf. Sounds like great RPing potential!

I do not mind the switch from Race to Species- but dropping the progeny of two separate species from being rather unique in their own right is a disappointment.

I think the changes generally continue the trend towards races and classes/subclasses being less distinct. Or should I say, if you have a strong vision of your character in mind, there are likely many ways to create that character.

The risk of having too sprawling an à la carte menu is the customer eventually realises everything tastes the same anyway. Let's call it the "takeaway paradox"!

Turning D&D into a buffet---a raceless/classless system---would be a mistake too, I think. There are plenty of other games that offer that already, it's probably not want long-time D&D fans want.

I'm about halfway through the book and so far what I hate the most is the artwork. Thematically it's far too fun and happy. It rarely portrays characters in peril and when it does they often look like they're having a great time, like a ride on a banana boat. Beaming smiles everywhere, it's almost creepy.

It doesn't feel like it's aimed at adults, to be honest! But then I guess... is D&D aimed at adults??

[[ It doesn't feel like it's aimed at adults, to be honest! But then I guess... is D&D aimed at adults?? ]]

Or it =could= be that it is aimed at people that don't want too much 'cast in stone' <shrug>

The fewer 'detailed rules' there are, the more 'the group' can make the game their own.

Well that is certainly the trend in modern game design. Each table can make the game their own. While I appreciate the sentiment, part of why I pick a game system is for the inherent elements baked in. But I am weird, so there is that.

I hate to tell ya ... all gamers are weird <shrug>

All people are weird, MikeD!

But yeah, Pande, I think my misgivings are similarly inspired to yours. I choose to play D&D for its, well, D&D-ness. If it loses its traditional D&D flavour I suspect we'll simply see another Pathfinder spring up, followed by a course correction from Wizards in a subsequent edition.

Yeah ... but since we are here ... with =ton= of gamers ... <weg>

That's a fair point, MikeD. And even amongst the weird there are the weirder still.

I'll probably flip my new PHB on ebay. It seems like stock of the first printing might've run out already in the UK because the retail price has spiked. Amazon are now selling for £41.45!

Wow.

Session 0 of Fives Torches Deep went well today, btw. Rolling your attributes in order on a 3d6 is brutal though!!

The results weren't widely distributed, which bothered me. One character has a 3,6,8,8,11,12, for example. The highest stat we had amongst four characters was one 16, followed by one 14!

You guys are D&D vets, how have you dealt with this issue in the past?

I never play in a game with straight 3D6. For the past many years we used the points distribution system where everything starts at a 10 in every stat and then you have points you can distribute among your stats, max of 16 in any stat. Typical spread is 16, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8.

When we did use rolling, years and years ago, it was ALWAYS 4D6 drop the lowest.

The problem with 3D6 is what you just listed. That pc you showed is not only unplayable, but in reality they would NEVER have moved on from being a farm hand to an adventurer. There is not only nothing exceptional about them, they are well below average.

So why do we want to discourage players by having them play below average PCs, have the character die, then have them roll up a new one (rinse and repeat until they actually get a playable pc)?

I want my players excited to play their characters, not frustrated by them.

Zeim mentions one way us old schoolers would do it. 4d6 take the best 3. Another option is to roll 7 or even 8 stats at 3d6 and pick the 6 that work for you, and of course put them in the order you want, to get the class you want. Lastly Stranger, I and other friends at our tables used a 2 for 1 exchange. If after all the rolling you still couldn't quite make the class you want. That 17 for Charisma can be a bear to reach for a Paladin who needs Strength and Con for example. We allowed take 2 points from one attribute and put 1 in the one you want. This leads to some difficult low attributes in some but getting the class you want. Which in the olden days was more important than it is with say 5e.

Yes. The problem with the point distribution system is everyone has the same stats, for the most part, just arranged a little differently to align with their class. I liked 4D6 drop lowest. The idea of rolling stats in order rather than just rolling up 6 stats and placing them where you want is that you basically have to play the class your stats work for rather than the class you want to play.

Again, the goal of the game should be, IMO, to have happy players who are excited to play. I had my heart set on playing a Paladin, but my stats work for nothing except a Rogue. Now I hate my pc. Where is the fun in that? And how does that bring players back to the game to play again and again?