D&D (2024) 2024 PHB - A much too early review

[Yaarel]

Because backgrounds are so integral to worldbuilding, I am fine with the Custom Background being in the DMs Guide.

Even so, the feats being gated by specific backgrounds feels overly rigid. I would prefer a talk-your-DM to modify a background "in a way that you and your DM agree on". But actually, permission to use a Custom Background is already in the rules of D&D 2024.

The Players Handbook explicitly says (page 37):

"You can choose any of the backgrounds detailed in chapter 4, and your DM might offer additional backgrounds as options."

That the DM can introduce a Custom Background as an option (or use the Custom Background to generate various backgrounds) is Rules-As-Written.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

There are 16 official backgrounds now. I bet the internet that this time next year there will be 160. This, as well as the inevitable bugs, is why early adoption is always a bad idea. Give it 12 months, then switch to the new rules.

 

[Yaarel]

There's less flavour, I have Level Up if I'm in the mood for D&D. ...

2024 is focussing even more on spells. I don't like the bonus actions for potions, the new surprise rules, and the default lack of background customization. I don't like the shift to more rulesy language with actions and conditions. And I really dislike the ranger being even more magicky.

2024 is not a huge change. I get that but it's enough to turn me off, especially since there are so many 5e variations out there that I prefer. Ghostfire is updating Grimhollow to the new 2024 ruleset but there is going to be huge customization and flavour with their background system. They also have a cool variety of species. I'm going to back that version of 2024 D&D.

I suspect the Forgotten Realms Adventure Guide is where the deep dive will be for things like the physical appearances of a species, height-weight and complexions (as they appear in this particular setting), other playable species, bespoke backgrounds and languages, prominent religious traditions, and more immersion in the flavors according to a specific setting.

 

[FrogReaver]

I suspect the Forgotten Realms Adventure Guide is where the deep dive will be for things like the physical appearances of a species, height-weight and complexions (as they appear in this particular setting), other playable species, bespoke backgrounds and languages, prominent religious traditions, and more immersion in the flavors according to a specific setting.

One good thing about less descriptions of species is they can be somewhat different from setting to setting.

 

[DEFCON 1]

There are 16 official backgrounds now. I bet the internet that this time next year there will be 160. This, as well as the inevitable bugs, is why early adoption is always a bad idea. Give it 12 months, then switch to the new rules.

Or the other option... start with the game now and just remember that playing Rules As Written is a waste of a person's time and creativity and instead just make up some new Backgrounds right now that work better for them (even without the DMG having been released to "give permission" for a person to do it.)

 

[mamba]

I suspect the Forgotten Realms Adventure Guide is where the deep dive will be

wonder if they will do the same for other settings, I doubt it and at that point these descriptions become pretty much the universal ones… the other question is whether there really would be much difference in other settings

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I also think two feat proposals would have really helped to make them feel more customiazable and unique.

Skilled is way too prevalent.

 

[Yaarel]

wonder if they will do the same for other settings, I doubt it and at that point these descriptions become pretty much the universal ones… the other question is whether there really would be much difference in other settings

For example, where the 2024 core rules are more setting neutral, Eberron, Dark Sun, and Magic the Gathering are more free to do their own thing. Also Greyhawk. Dragonlance too. Because the majority of DMs homebrew and mix-and-match, the more accommodating core help more tables.

Even Forgotten Realms benefits. A setting guide becomes necessary, to flesh out all of the flavorful details. So now the Forgotten Realms guides (DM and player) is free to explore its uniquenesses. For example, even tho the Sun culture and Moon culture are both "High" Elves, they substantially differ and the guides can describe how. I expect Elf backgrounds to be amazing, like Avariel communities producing alchemists who can make glassteel, and in Uda cultures adamantine.

I prefer the core be even more setting neutral. The Elf description calling out "Corellon" and as a "god" is too culturally prejudicial for most settings. I prefer the Elves to be more animistic in theme, but I am ok with them descending from a primordial ancestor.

Since the core rules make setting guides more necessary, the guides can be profitable for WotC. So there is an interest in making the Forgotten Realms guides unique and interesting. Other settings too.

I like how the setting guides are local. The initial Forgotten Realms guides will be an assortment of five regions. The Dalelands is something like Germany-France Continental Europe. Waterdeep might be London, England. (Moonshae is more Celtic Britain. To me, Neverwinter is Stockholm Sweden with the forest outback.) Icewind is more like arctic circumpolar ethnicities, including Saami and Inuit, and perhaps Siberian Evenk. Plus Calimshan being Moorish Spain and Morocco. Regions are awesome because DMs can plug them in anywhere.

 

[mamba]

For example, where the 2024 core rules are more setting neutral, Eberron, Dark Sun, and Magic the Gathering are more free to do their own thing.

I understand the principle, I just doubt that 1) they will release such books for other settings and 2) even if they did the species differences will at best be minor

 

[mellored]

Just going to point out that each background has a nearly full page art attached.

They couldn't make 36 backgrounds doing it that way.