D&D (2024) D&D 2024 Player's Handbook Reviews

On Thursday August 1st, the review embargo is lifted for those who were sent an early copy of the new Dungeons & Dragons Player's Handbook. In this post I intend to compile a handy list of those reviews as they arrive. If you know of a review, please let me know in the comments so that I can add it! I'll be updating this list as new reviews arrive, so do check back later to see what's been added!

---

Review List

• The official EN World review -- "Make no mistake, this is a new edition."
• ComicBook.com -- "Dungeons & Dragons has improved upon its current ruleset, but the ruleset still feels very familiar to 5E veterans."
• Comic Book Resources -- "From magic upgrades to easier character building, D&D's 2024 Player's Handbook is the upgrade players and DMs didn't know they needed."
• Wargamer.com -- "The 2024 Player’s Handbook is bigger and more beginner-friendly than ever before. It still feels and plays like D&D fifth edition, but numerous quality-of-life tweaks have made the game more approachable and its player options more powerful. Its execution disappoints in a handful of places, and it’s too early to tell how the new rules will impact encounter balance, but this is an optimistic start to the new Dungeons and Dragons era."
• RPGBOT -- "A lot has changed in the 2024 DnD 5e rules. In this horrendously long article, we’ve dug into everything that has changed in excruciating detail. There’s a lot here."

Video Reviews
Note, a couple of these videos have been redacted or taken down following copyright claims by WotC.

• 2024 PHB Rules Changes D&D 5.24 (Treantmonk's Temple)
• Dungeons & Dragons Players Handbook 2024 Preview & Review | Key Takeaways and Comparisons with 2014 (Awesome Black)
• 10 Unexpected Changes in the D&D 5E 2024 Player's Handbook (This Effin' GM Games)
• Every Class and Subclass Change for 2024 (d4: Deep Dive)
• D&D Player's Handbook 2024 Winners & Losers! (The Character Sheet on ComicBook.com)
• 2024 Player's Handbook First Look Review (Dungeon Dudes)
• The 2024 Player's Handbook: Full Spoilers Review (DnD Shorts)
• Full Early Review! D&D 2024 Player's Handbook (JoeFudge)
• First Look at the 2024 Player's Handbook for Dungeons & Dragons (GameMasters)
• 2024 PHB Flip through (Jorphdan) [taken down]
• D&D New Player's Handbook, DM's Guide, Monster Manual, and Project Sigil Info (maturemindedgamers)
• 2024 Player's Handbook: Questions Answered! (Alphastream)
• D&D 2024 Player's Handbook Walkthrough (Sly Flourish) [redacted]

---

Release timeline (i.e. when you can get it!)

• August 1st: Reviewers. Some reviewers have copies already, with their embargo lifting August 1st.
• August 1st-4th: Gen Con. There will be 3,000 copies for sale at Gen Con.
• September 3rd: US/Canada Hobby Stores. US/Canada hobby stores get it September 3rd.
• September 3rd: DDB 'Master' Pre-orders. Also on this date, D&D Beyond 'Master Subscribers' get the digital version.
• September 10th: DDB 'Hero' Pre-orders. On this date, D&D Beyond 'Hero Subscribers' get the digital version.
• September 17th: General Release. For the rest of us, the street date is September 17th.

 

[dave2008]

I don't recall anything "optional" about that lore, or any lore prior to 5e Tasha's really, going back to the TSR days. The 4e stuff was just markedly different from what came before to greater degree, and it snapped my suspenders.

Well IMO all lore is 100% optional. However, in 4e the lore was sometimes (usually?) qualified with things like: sages speculate..., or some stories say..., etc. implying, to me at least, that this one version, but not necessarily "the" version of what happened. Also, IIRC, the even had different lore about the same event from different perspectives. Similar to how the "First World" is the dragons story and not necessarily the truth (and actually contradicted by the Giants) in 5e.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I've always been curious about how many people assume end of session = long rest. That's not an assumption I've made in my RPGing ever, as best I can recall. But it seems quite widespread.

I've never made that assumption. Game time and real time are different things.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Well IMO all lore is 100% optional. However, in 4e the lore was sometimes (usually?) qualified with things like: sages speculate..., or some stories say..., etc. implying, to me at least, that this one version, but not necessarily "the" version of what happened. Also, IIRC, the even had different lore about the same event from different perspectives. Similar to how the "First World" is the dragons story and not necessarily the truth (and actually contradicted by the Giants) in 5e.

I have to say, the last time D&D added new lore I actually liked was the addition of the Feywild and Shadowfell. Nothing else, including the rest of 4e's lore (which is fine for a specific setting but which I hated as a default) and all the new stuff added in 5e did not work for me. My lore is 2e plus a few bits and pieces from 3e.

 

[dave2008]

I don't recall anything "optional" about that lore, or any lore prior to 5e Tasha's really, going back to the TSR days. The 4e stuff was just markedly different from what came before to greater degree, and it snapped my suspenders.

page 148 of the 4e DMG, the first page of the chapter talking about the campaign world:

"That said, these books do make some assumptions about the world in which your adventures take place. This chapter talks about those assumptions, and then discusses how you might change them. In the end, the setting of your campaign is your world—the details are yours to change or create from whole cloth."

"The D&D World: The game is built around certain core assumptions, but you can fill in the details or alter those assumptions to make the world your own."

Page 151 is titled: It's Your World and is all about making the game your own. I am not going to copy and past the whole page, but it is full of things like:

".... Just as you can alter names in published adventures to suit the flavor of your campaign, you can change the names of these assumed parts of the world."

or

"The assumptions sketched out on the previous page aren’t graven in stone. They make for an exciting D&D world full of adventure, but they’re not the only set of assumptions that do so. You can build an interesting campaign concept by altering one or more of those core assumptions. Ask yourself, “What if this wasn’t true in my world?”

This is just a start really, but you get the idea

 

[dave2008]

I have to say, the last time D&D added new lore I actually liked was the addition of the Feywild and Shadowfell. Nothing else, including the rest of 4e's lore (which is fine for a specific setting but which I hated as a default) and all the new stuff added in 5e did not work for me. My lore is 2e plus a few bits and pieces from 3e.

I pretty much like it all, but have a strong preference for 1e and 4e lore with 5e lore gaining ground. Some of the 2e stuff and 3e stuff I didn't really care for, but have found ways to incorporate it in some fashion.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

I am not spinning and I have watched about 20 hours in the last two days and read more than that. As I said most of them have been neutral but I have not seen one that I would call generally positive overall. I've watched a bunch, especially from Treantmonk, but also from D4 deep dive, D&D shorts, and some others.

Maybe you're spinning or maybe we are just interpreting things differently or maybe I didn't listen to the specific parts where these reviewers were positive. What I know for a fact though is that you are purposely misrepresenting what I said to prove some point or win some kind of message board recognition and with that in mind I find it difficult to believe you are being completely honest and forthright.

Do you have an example of an objectively, definitive positive review? You don't have to run down "all the reviews" to provide just one example.

I’ve listened to both Treantmonk and slyflurish’s initial reviews and came across thinking they were both generally positive. I think it is likely we bring our own bias into how we interpret these.

Also 20 hours of video and more reading in the past 2 days - do you sleep?! No wonder you have a different impression - your brain is fried!

Edit: just did the math and you just claimed to have spent over 40 hours digesting the 2024 phb information that had, at the time of your posting, been out only 44 hours. I tip my hat to you - that is some serious work! Maybe get a rest and look at this with fresh eyes!

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

But then 5E feel out of favour with me a long time ago. Its assumptions about attritional combat and number of combats just don't work with my limited game time.

Fortunately the game works great even if you don’t play by those “assumptions.” I mean. We average something like 2-3 combat encounters in a combat heavy session, but the game works with 0 combats up to at least 10 (which was the max we ever reached before a long rest).

I mean not liking the game is fine, but claiming it was because of assumed number of combats feels a bit ridiculous to me.

 

[Zehnseiter]

Fortunately the game works great even if you don’t play by those “assumptions.” I mean. We average something like 2-3 combat encounters in a combat heavy session, but the game works with 0 combats up to at least 10 (which was the max we ever reached before a long rest).

I mean not liking the game is fine, but claiming it was because of assumed number of combats feels a bit ridiculous to me.

Sure I can and have made it work but well I need to invest time in it and the end result feels ill fitting with stuff like for example class balance. Given that 5E is very work intensive on the GM side I just went for another game that worked better right out of the box for me in my group. As I said I have not too much game time so I prioritized. In hindsight a very good decision. I spent way too much time trying to make 5E work for me.

 

[OB1]

Just saw in a flip through video (Nerd Immersion) of the Playing the Game chapter that the basic order of play, (DM describes the scene, Players describe their actions, DM narrates the results, asking for a D20 Test if the result is uncertain) remains in 2024 as the basic order of play. Actions have been moved out of the combat section and there is a note about the fact that players can only take one action at a time, which I think is a nice addition to limit players trying to do 4 things at once (especially for newer DMs). But the two combined still gives the DM ultimate flexibility to call for a check even if the player hasn't specifically called out using one of the actions in the PHB.

So if you take the Hide action, and then describe your character leaving cover to walk up to the guard and attack them, the DM can ask for a stealth check or simply state that you are no longer hidden (depending on if the result is uncertain) when you declare the attack action. Hopefully the DMG will explicitly give this advice to DMs,

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

Sure I can and have made it work but well I need to invest time in it and the end result feels ill fitting with stuff like for example class balance. Given that 5E is already work intensive on the GM side I just went for another game that worked better right out of the box for me in my group. As I said I have not too much game time so I prioritized.

That’s fantastic, play a game that works for you.

I’m a player not a DM, but as I live with my DM I can assure you he doesn’t spend a lot of time prepping our games!

Regardless, I don’t believe the number of combats per day was the issue for you, but I could be wrong. I can only be sure that it is not an issue for us.