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.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Not really. I thought it was an amusing anecdote but it does illustrate the point. The game is one where the DM tells the players what they are sensing, the players say what they do, and the DM tells them what they are now sensing. That is the entirety of roleplaying. We create rules so DMs can do that job well and consistently. No one wants to play in a world were things don't have some level of consistency.

What if the character senses panic, characterized by a tightness in their chest and a cold sweat over their body? Does the DM tell them that?

Because, the player is playing a PC in the world. They are inside that PC's mind. They are not inside the mind of the NPC's of the world. The Patron is an NPC.

Why can't they be inside the mind of an NPC? If I write a backstory and explain that my Father left the family because he was scared of his enemies attacking us, then I have entered and described the mind of an NPC. And... what reason do you actually have to swoop in as the DM and say "No, you are wrong, that isn't what happened."? I'm not saying DMs don't do that, I'm asking WHY they do that. Simply because it is an NPC and they felt like it?

My point about working with the player is that players (NOT PC's) often have good ideas that can benefit a DM's game. If a player said "Hey as a cleric I noticed that you haven't designed the regalia of the High Pontifex yet. You care if I take a stab at it. I may be happy to let that PLAYER try and with approval for it to become canon in the game." The problem with the Patron is he is a dynamic NPC with his agenda etc. This is why I said the player could suggest things but ultimately the NPCs are in the domain of the DM.

How do you know that NPC is Dynamic with their agenda? Maybe their agenda is static and unchanging. Maybe their agenda is incredibly simple. Again, other than "that's an NPC therefore I reserve all rights to change everything about them with no warning or consultation" why would you decide that a Sentient Dagger that wants to kill as many people as possible, is REALLY a mad angel who wishes to cleanse sin, and therefore they have been going through a millenia long plan to gather souls so that they can be used to....ect ect ect.

Again, I know many DMs WOULD do that. But I'm asking for the root reasoning. Is there anything there beyond "I'm the DM, so I can do what I want."?

 

[Chaosmancer]

True. I think we are advocating for or against in the public square. You absolutely can do anything you like in your game just as I can. I'm sure there are things I do that are not mainstream in today's D&D. For one, I don't actually play D&D but some spin off.

My answers have been based on my own approach to roleplaying. Your own experiences and preferences can vary. We were debating the merits of our approaches. This isn't about what is allowed. If the DM allows it then it is allowed.

If the DM doesn't allow it, and six players do it anyways, does it matter that the DM didn't allow it?

And I am once more struck by the sheer number of people who don't play the current game coming in with discussions about it. To remind you, the entire starting point of this conversation was the idea of non-traditional Warlock patrons allowed by the new rules. You don't play the new rules, and you are solely speaking from your perspective of what you would expect to happen at your table. That in no way says anything about whether or not the changes are things that will open up different avenues of play. In fact, it seems to support that something different might occur, from the sheer fact that it ISN'T what everyone is used to, and is in fact a little bit different.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Who said it was impossible? People play games off-label all the time.

So if people play differently all the time, why is it supposedly self-evident that the DM will "of course" decide things for the NPC. People play "off-label" all the time, so it would not be self-evidently true.

 

[Micah Sweet]

What if the character senses panic, characterized by a tightness in their chest and a cold sweat over their body? Does the DM tell them that?



Why can't they be inside the mind of an NPC? If I write a backstory and explain that my Father left the family because he was scared of his enemies attacking us, then I have entered and described the mind of an NPC. And... what reason do you actually have to swoop in as the DM and say "No, you are wrong, that isn't what happened."? I'm not saying DMs don't do that, I'm asking WHY they do that. Simply because it is an NPC and they felt like it?



How do you know that NPC is Dynamic with their agenda? Maybe their agenda is static and unchanging. Maybe their agenda is incredibly simple. Again, other than "that's an NPC therefore I reserve all rights to change everything about them with no warning or consultation" why would you decide that a Sentient Dagger that wants to kill as many people as possible, is REALLY a mad angel who wishes to cleanse sin, and therefore they have been going through a millenia long plan to gather souls so that they can be used to....ect ect ect.

Again, I know many DMs WOULD do that. But I'm asking for the root reasoning. Is there anything there beyond "I'm the DM, so I can do what I want."?

Well, the vast majority of D&D corebooks straight say the DM controls the NPCs, do one answer for "why" is that they're following directions. Another, perhaps more controversial, answer is that it makes logical sense that the person who created a character plays that character, and that the person who created everything else plays everything else.

As you say, it could easily be done a different way. But it makes logical sense to me.

 

[Micah Sweet]

So if people play differently all the time, why is it supposedly self-evident that the DM will "of course" decide things for the NPC. People play "off-label" all the time, so it would not be self-evidently true.

Read my post above regarding what the books say. Feel free to provide or write a book that says otherwise. I know they're out there.

 

[pemerton]

it makes logical sense that the person who created a character plays that character, and that the person who created everything else plays everything else.

So if a player writes up some stuff about their PC's family members, as part of establishing their PC's backstory, who plays those characters?

Or suppose the player of a paladin PC makes up some stuff about their PC's mentor, or the leader of the military order that their PC is a member of - who plays those characters?

Even when it comes to the warlock's patron, it is the player who makes the patron part of the fiction, by making a choice as part of their PC build.

I think there are a lot of examples, including the one at issue, that don't seem to easily conform to your logic.

Why can't they be inside the mind of an NPC? If I write a backstory and explain that my Father left the family because he was scared of his enemies attacking us, then I have entered and described the mind of an NPC. And... what reason do you actually have to swoop in as the DM and say "No, you are wrong, that isn't what happened."? I'm not saying DMs don't do that, I'm asking WHY they do that. Simply because it is an NPC and they felt like it?

This is the sort of thing I would expect to be very common in establishing PC backstory - ie the player writing some stuff about the NPCs who constitute their friends, family, mentors, etc.

GMs who just swoop in and rewrite that stuff are in my view terrible, and it rather baffles me that any player would go along with it.

why would you decide that a Sentient Dagger that wants to kill as many people as possible, is REALLY a mad angel who wishes to cleanse sin, and therefore they have been going through a millenia long plan to gather souls so that they can be used to....ect ect ect.

Again, I know many DMs WOULD do that.

Would they really? The GM who can't find anything more interesting to present, as fiction, than a subverting/undoing of fiction that a player has brought into the game via the build and backstory of their PC, strikes me as a terrible GM. Again, it baffles me that players would go along with this sort of thing.

 

[Micah Sweet]

So if a player writes up some stuff about their PC's family members, as part of establishing their PC's backstory, who plays those characters?

Or suppose the player of a paladin PC makes up some stuff about their PC's mentor, or the leader of the military order that their PC is a member of - who plays those characters?

Even when it comes to the warlock's patron, it is the player who makes the patron part of the fiction, by making a choice as part of their PC build.

I think there are a lot of examples, including the one at issue, that don't seem to easily conform to your logic.

This is the sort of thing I would expect to be very common in establishing PC backstory - ie the player writing some stuff about the NPCs who constitute their friends, family, mentors, etc.

It's not the only reason why you might subscribe to this separation of character control, but it's a straight-forward one where it applies.

Another reason, one that works well for me, is simply that roleplay works better IMO when two actual people are talking. So a PC and his Patron, or a PC and his mentor, or a PC and his father, should IMO be portrayed by different people for authenticity sake is nothing else.

 

[Older Beholder]

I had a player in one of my games during lockdown that would take over random NPC's that the DM wasn't using.
Like, we had a group of soldiers with us for a mission, so this guy would start improv roleplaying as Wilhelm, a soldier with a wife and family back home.

It helped that he was a really good roleplayer, and added to verisimilitude.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

The player decided on the nature of, and meaning of, the demon's opposition. And also decided what adherence to faith required. Which is the relevance to the current discussion: the claim that the GM must decide what the patron demands of the character, if those demands are to be understood as a genuine constraint, is false.

I see. I think there is difference between things like faith, and actual, explicit, concrete demands from a NPC. Here the player decided how their character understands the demands of their faith. I think that is quite different than a player deciding what exact request a NPC makes to them, as well as the capabilities the NPC has to enforce that demand. And I think the warlock/patron situation is usually more like the latter. It is not nebulous religious edict up to interpretation, it is an explicit demand from a supernatural mob boss.

 

[Emerikol]

What if the character senses panic, characterized by a tightness in their chest and a cold sweat over their body? Does the DM tell them that?

When I said senses I was talking about the five senses. I think your use of that term is in a different way than I used it.

Why can't they be inside the mind of an NPC? If I write a backstory and explain that my Father left the family because he was scared of his enemies attacking us, then I have entered and described the mind of an NPC. And... what reason do you actually have to swoop in as the DM and say "No, you are wrong, that isn't what happened."? I'm not saying DMs don't do that, I'm asking WHY they do that. Simply because it is an NPC and they felt like it?

As a DM, I work with players but I also absolutely reserve the right to reject a particular backstory. If the PC says, I come from a desert nomad clan, and there isn't a desert within a thousand miles, I might reject that backstory. Now, I might work with it too. The point isn't what would be worked with or not. Most things would be if possible. The point is that anything coming into a campaign world created by a DM has to be approved.

How do you know that NPC is Dynamic with their agenda? Maybe their agenda is static and unchanging. Maybe their agenda is incredibly simple. Again, other than "that's an NPC therefore I reserve all rights to change everything about them with no warning or consultation" why would you decide that a Sentient Dagger that wants to kill as many people as possible, is REALLY a mad angel who wishes to cleanse sin, and therefore they have been going through a millenia long plan to gather souls so that they can be used to....ect ect ect.

Again, I know many DMs WOULD do that. But I'm asking for the root reasoning. Is there anything there beyond "I'm the DM, so I can do what I want."?

Why would anyone decide that? To make the game more fun. Though I do try to design things before any particular character gets the item. I work to be unbiased in my adjudication. I'm not against player proposals but they must be approved. Maybe I as DM know things about the world that the players don't yet know. If their suggestion conflicted with what I know then I might reject it. I might make a counterproposal that was a compromise.