I think they just skipped the gods section because so many games don't take place in the Forgotten Realms&multiverse and have completely different gods anyway - those of Theros for example.
Hopefully the list of inspirational reading sources will make it to the new DMG because the 2014 list was a riff or update to the first edition DMG's appendix M with inspiration reading but which obviously only mentioned sources up to that period of time (1979)
Being without internet can be great for some things, like forcing you to get out and put your phone down, but there are things that you just forget you use it for, it's so integral to our lives now.
It's very ingrained! It's frustrating how many ordinary things now get impeded with the lack of internet. But it was a good excuse to pull out the Star Trek dvds 😂
Just to be clear subclasses aren't lost, they are only spiced up or nerfed a little , if reprinted in PHB 2024. If the subclasses arent listed in the new PHB 2024, use the the most recently reprinted players sourcebook. Also, SCAG is still viable as SCAG wasn't reprinted.
I wonder if they used dndbeyond stats to see what folks added or used in their character sheets, and it wasn't big for things like the trade goods/merchants.
Okay one more thing 😂 we lost Necromancer?! I think for subclasses wizard would have kept a wide variety. It's kinds what they do. Am I missing something?
It seems to me that, with the recent focus on inclusivity and representation, the Giant Weasel may have been included in an effort to make WOTC executives feel like they’re represented in the game.
Good question. I'll have to really dig through and find out for sure. Some things aspects of the game they try to explain more or better, but I've noticed there are some things that feel more glossed over
@@apjapki so, if there was an issue between having different text in different areas of the book, you think that WotC would get a pass for that? Also, if they had to charge more for a larger book to cover all the repeats of text do you think they'd get a pass for that too?
@@BLynn I get the thing about book space. I know that's why they did it. It's just weird. Nobody hides rules in glossaries. That's not what a glossary is. Definitionally. A normal glossary just gives you the thing and the page number that thing is on. This is more like they did a detailed rules and alphabetically sorted rules but they only included half the material in each (and yes, most of the glossary DOES repeat the earlier paragraphs). And the idea that they can't employ an editor to check that a book is consistent from one page to another is laughable. You are making big excuses for them to suggest that isn't possible. When a board game makes quick start rules and detailed rules OF COURSE they need to match the core rules. WOTC has made and published simplified rules on D&D beyond already and yes, they need to match. They are not an indie project. They are a multimillion dollar company that buys ridiculous amounts of ad space and licenses films and video games. They can afford a continuity editor on this multi year project.
@@apjapki if they had called them specifications no one would have known what they were talking about & engineers would have been looking for separate documents.
Imo this book is unnecessary, a lot of this new stuff could have been put in a pdf and posted on D&D Beyond because the changes are not significant in many parts of the book. If it weren't for the fact my players wanted to try the new rules, I would not have even bothered with it. Also this book does not have as much character as the old one imo. It's more formulaic. I am still going to call it race. Species is weird and clinical sounding. Also boo to the change in wild magic table, if the bulk of effects are beneficial then why bother? The fun was it being random. They should have improved that instead of nerfing it, it is not as though player characters don't have enough boons and perks with feats and other mechanics.
Glam rocker bard LOL.
Poor giant eagle. Maybe they will be in the new MM.
Hopefully so!
I think they just skipped the gods section because so many games don't take place in the Forgotten Realms&multiverse and have completely different gods anyway - those of Theros for example.
I hope the things missing will show up in the DMG.
Me too! It'd kind of be crazy not to
@@misfitadventurers Still iffy about dealings with WoTC. When I get time, I want to post a list of games for you to check out.
Also Celestial patron for Warlock is a great/curious add and I'm very interested in breaking the mold of everyone playing the same archetype there.
I think it's so interesting that a warlock, cleric, and paladin could all potentially have the same deity now
Great coverage! Loved all the images you used, the art is usually my favorite part of D&D official books.
Same here!
Just found your channel, now for the deep dive 😁
Shatter was removed from the warlock.
Yea for Session 0! Miss the totem Barbarian. Great breakdown as usual.
Hopefully the list of inspirational reading sources will make it to the new DMG because the 2014 list was a riff or update to the first edition DMG's appendix M with inspiration reading but which obviously only mentioned sources up to that period of time (1979)
Being without internet can be great for some things, like forcing you to get out and put your phone down, but there are things that you just forget you use it for, it's so integral to our lives now.
It's very ingrained! It's frustrating how many ordinary things now get impeded with the lack of internet. But it was a good excuse to pull out the Star Trek dvds 😂
This was a great video, the right level of information needed to get a head start!
Thank you!
This was a great review, thank you. Excellent observations and insights, especially on effective structure of a reference work.
Glad you enjoyed it!
I also think some rules only appearing in the glossary as weird.
EDIT: Yes and no page numbers! What?!
Good stuff, as always.
Since they renamed Mobile you can now take both Speedy & Mobile, not certain you'd want to but you could.
Just to be clear subclasses aren't lost, they are only spiced up or nerfed a little , if reprinted in PHB 2024. If the subclasses arent listed in the new PHB 2024, use the the most recently reprinted players sourcebook. Also, SCAG is still viable as SCAG wasn't reprinted.
I wonder if they used dndbeyond stats to see what folks added or used in their character sheets, and it wasn't big for things like the trade goods/merchants.
Okay one more thing 😂 we lost Necromancer?! I think for subclasses wizard would have kept a wide variety. It's kinds what they do. Am I missing something?
😍😍😍
10:08 Remember Steve 🍗
It seems to me that, with the recent focus on inclusivity and representation, the Giant Weasel may have been included in an effort to make WOTC executives feel like they’re represented in the game.
Is it me or did they forget to put in a way to craft holy water? There's no tools, class or spell that does it....unless I'm missing it.
Good question. I'll have to really dig through and find out for sure. Some things aspects of the game they try to explain more or better, but I've noticed there are some things that feel more glossed over
The art work on page 48 clearly has not been reviewed. The guy’s arm is at a wrong angle and is in the wrong outfit.
You don't double up on explaining things because then there is a potential to have those two or more areas out of synch.
@@BLynn Oh come on! That's really not what glossaries usually are.
@@apjapki so, if there was an issue between having different text in different areas of the book, you think that WotC would get a pass for that? Also, if they had to charge more for a larger book to cover all the repeats of text do you think they'd get a pass for that too?
@@BLynn I get the thing about book space. I know that's why they did it. It's just weird. Nobody hides rules in glossaries. That's not what a glossary is. Definitionally. A normal glossary just gives you the thing and the page number that thing is on. This is more like they did a detailed rules and alphabetically sorted rules but they only included half the material in each (and yes, most of the glossary DOES repeat the earlier paragraphs).
And the idea that they can't employ an editor to check that a book is consistent from one page to another is laughable. You are making big excuses for them to suggest that isn't possible.
When a board game makes quick start rules and detailed rules OF COURSE they need to match the core rules. WOTC has made and published simplified rules on D&D beyond already and yes, they need to match. They are not an indie project. They are a multimillion dollar company that buys ridiculous amounts of ad space and licenses films and video games. They can afford a continuity editor on this multi year project.
@@apjapki if they had called them specifications no one would have known what they were talking about & engineers would have been looking for separate documents.
@@BLynn It would still be two incomplete overlapping versions of the rules twice.
Imo this book is unnecessary, a lot of this new stuff could have been put in a pdf and posted on D&D Beyond because the changes are not significant in many parts of the book. If it weren't for the fact my players wanted to try the new rules, I would not have even bothered with it. Also this book does not have as much character as the old one imo. It's more formulaic. I am still going to call it race. Species is weird and clinical sounding. Also boo to the change in wild magic table, if the bulk of effects are beneficial then why bother? The fun was it being random. They should have improved that instead of nerfing it, it is not as though player characters don't have enough boons and perks with feats and other mechanics.
I have an extreme dislike of the books overall look, the artwork seems like everyone is having a party. There’s no dread, no sense of danger.
Species is right, but awfully clinical 🫤
Yeah. I've never seen anyone actually object to 'race', apart from WotC's HR department