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.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Is WoTC underestimating the ability of new players to read and understand the rules in the 2024 PHB? If a new player has trouble understanding a rule or two in the PHB, they can either critically think about what they mean or they can turn toward a more experienced player or the DM for help.

I don't know. I seem to give people more credit in figuring this stuff out than some people here, but then I had different experiences. I certainly want the text to assume critical thinking personally; one if the ways I learned the skill was from reading and playing D&D. Then again, I'm not a giant corporation trying to maximize my profits in any way I can get away with.

 

[Steampunkette]

I honestly don't understand a strict adherence to the concept of "you don't know until level 3 or later" unless the player really wants that kind of story.

Because new DMs tend to follow the rules in the book to the letter. They'll read this, think this is how it -has- to be, and go from there.

And when they meet a player whose character concept goes against the RAW (like knowing who they made a deal with) there's a decent chance they'll shoot it down because "The rules say!"

You don't write a PHB just for people that have been playing for 20 years. You also write it for the folks picking up the book for the first time.

And, of course, because it's bad design to make the class's entire narrative about the patron and then not have it present from the start.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I know others may run it differently, but I as a DM know exactly who the patron is at Level 1. In a recent campaign, so did the warlock player. My players and I have conversations about their character's background and choices, and they either already know who they worship (if a cleric or other religious character), who they make a pact with (if they want their PC to know and don't want it to be a surprise), and the nature of their sorcerous spark (again, unless they don't want their PC to know). Either way, they players have already planned their choices for their Level 3 subclasses, because levels 1 and 2 go by so quickly. Even if the player doesn't want their PC to know for roleplay purposes, the player knows.

I honestly don't understand a strict adherence to the concept of "you don't know until level 3 or later" unless the player really wants that kind of story.

I am sure that this is how it is commonly handled. But, if that is de facto how it is done, then why not just make it de jure as well? If the narrative works better if the choice is made at level one, then why not just write the rules that way to begin with?

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

Me neither. That's why I don't like not knowing being the default.

The player does know. If the PC does not know, that is a choice. There is only one sentence in Pact Magic that speaks to the character, and that choice was made off-screen, before the PC is being played in a Level 1 adventure.

"Through occult ceremony, you have formed a pact with a mysterious entity to gain magical powers. The entity is a voice in the shadows—its identity unclear—".​

​

The sentence isn't even a rule, just flavor. Even if before the campaign the Warlock made the original pact with a mysterious entity to become a level 1 Warlock, it doesn't mean they don't know the results of their pact, and who they are no bound to.

This is a mountain over a molehill, and it is being argued by folks who aren't even playing it. Love ya, Micah, and correct me if I'm wrong, but you're arguing something you don't even seem to be interested in actually playing. Because it doesn't play the way you're trying to pigeon-hole it into, unless the DM and player want it to play that way.

 

[Micah Sweet]

The player does know. If the PC does not know, that is a choice. There is only one sentence in Pact Magic that speaks to the character, and that choice was made off-screen, before the PC is being played in a Level 1 adventure.

"Through occult ceremony, you have formed a pact with a mysterious entity to gain magical powers. The entity is a voice in the shadows—its identity unclear—".​

​

The sentence isn't even a rule, just flavor. Even if before the campaign the Warlock made the original pact with a mysterious entity to become a level 1 Warlock, it doesn't mean they don't know the results of their pact, and who they are no bound to.

This is a mountain over a molehill, and it is being argued by folks who aren't even playing it. Love ya, Micah, and correct me if I'm wrong, but you're arguing something you don't even seem to be interested in actually playing. Because it doesn't play the way you're trying to pigeon-hole it into, unless the DM and player want it to play that way.

You're right. I'm arguing that the rules default gives a poor standard to follow (IMO) that, while it has no effect on me and my game, may very well be an issue for new players with nothing but the book to guide them.

 

[Imaro]

I shouldn't have to start at level 3 to have the class fantasy promised by the game.

What difference does it make... what's the actual objection here? Is it to hard for you to start at level 3?

How is the DM supposed to role-play a mysterious voice that can't have a clear agenda or characterization because the player hasn't even chosen what kind of patron they want yet?

Vaguely and sparringly??

 

[Imaro]

Where are the powers coming from if you have no contact with your patron?

You have unearthed Eldritch Invocations, pieces of forbidden knowledge that imbue you with an abiding magical ability.
Through occult ceremony, you have formed a pact with a mysterious entity to gain magical powers.

So Invocations are gained via forbidden knowledge you have attained and spells are gained from a pact with an entity that has not fully revealed itself to you yet. All seems pretty warlocky to me.

 

[Steampunkette]

The more I think about it, the more I appreciate the Oberoni fallacy and how well it describes this kinda stuff.

 

[dragoner]

Overall it looks good, about the only thing I'd pull are the muskets, I have a game in mind to run.

 

[Corinnguard]

The more I think about it, the more I appreciate the Oberoni fallacy and how well it describes this kinda stuff.

What exactly is the Oberoni fallacy? And how does it apply here? Making a Knowledge check here.