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.

 

[Oofta]

Paladin falling rules were the main one. I also recall that both 3.0 and 3.5 had a few pointed notes in the CN alignment description including something like "he is not just as likely to cross a bridge as jump off it".

I'm glad they changed how paladins work (and made alignment more of a general descriptor) but I don't remember specifics. I know 2E for CN had wording like "You may switch sides in a fight just to see what happens." Because what happens? The rest of the group doesn't appreciate being attacked by a supposed ally and kill them or kick them out of the group.

I'm glad we now have wording like "...avoid character choices that ruin the fun of the other players and the DM. Choose actions that delight you and your friends."

So the rules go out of their way to tell people to play nice with others. I don't see why rules from editions most people haven't ever read matter now.

That's why I was asking why this particular tangent is even discussed and thought maybe I had missed something. The new rules go out of their way to say "play nice with others." Of course some people will ignore it.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

And you aren't just not part of the solution. You are trying to prevent the problem (of rules encouraging bad behaviour from DMs - which leads to players responding in kind) from being solved.

There is no "top down" solution. I am very very selective about the people I play D&D with. That works just fine for me.

A few would. Most needed to be encouraged to give the shocks by the experimenter. And would have stopped without the direct cajoling of the experimenter. These are not the same.

Given that experiment was not performed, it's amazing how you know the outcome!

You are trying to fight this by claiming that because there isn't a perfect set of rules you can't get better rules than the ones that tell the DM to be a jerk.

D&D has no rules that tell anyone to be a jerk, if it did, no decent person would use those rules. It has rules that you personally do not like, and you are tying to justify your dislike by pretending you have a moral imperative.

 

[Neonchameleon]

D&D has no rules that tell anyone to be a jerk, if it did, no decent person would use those rules. It has rules that you personally do not like, and you are tying to justify your dislike by pretending you have a moral imperative.

D&D no longer does. I'm pretty sure, just taking one clear cut case, that you realise that playing a classic Kender the way you were told to play them by the rulebook was encouraging you to play like a jerk.

This was hardly the only one back in the day; @Oofta has also mentioned the instructions for playing Chaotic Neutral from TSR era D&D. And those are both on the player side.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

D&D no longer does. I'm pretty sure, just taking one clear cut case, that you realise that playing a classic Kender the way you were told to play them by the rulebook was encouraging you to play like a jerk.

No, Kender had role-playing advice that encouraged jerks to choose to play them and use it as an excuse for their bad behaviour. But without Kender, they just find some other excuse, such as “chaotic neutral “. It’s quite possible to play a PC with negative characteristics and not harm your fellow players. I’ve done it several times myself.

I have seen a neutral good human barbarian screw things up for everyone. Needless to say, they did not return.

 

[Neonchameleon]

No, Kender had role-playing advice that encouraged jerks to choose to play them and use it as an excuse for their bad behaviour. But without Kender, they just find some other excuse, such as “chaotic neutral “.

Or they play something more party orientated because they don't get told that this is playing in good faith.

It’s quite possible to play a PC with negative characteristics and not harm your fellow players. I’ve done it several times myself.

It is also possible to in good faith play a toxic PC.

I have seen a neural good human barbarian screw things up for everyone. Needless to say, they did not return.

Yes. No one is denying that there are toxic players. However most players aren't. Old School D&D encouraged people who weren't necessarily trying to be toxic to be toxic.

You seem incapable of understanding the idea that people with good intentions can screw up badly?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

It is also possible to in good faith play a toxic PC

No. It is not. Not being a jerk prevents you playing any character in such a way that is toxic to other players, no matter how loathsome and chaotic evil the character is.

You seem incapable of understanding the idea that people with good intentions can screw up badly?

There are a lot of people who claim to have good intentions. Some of them even believe it themselves.

 

[Neonchameleon]

No. It is not. Not being a jerk prevents you playing any character in such a way that is toxic to other players, no matter how loathsome and chaotic evil the character is.

There are a lot of people who claim to have good intentions. Some of them even believe it themselves.

Indeed. No wonder you need to be "very very selective about the people I play D&D with" given your unwillingness to try and disentangle problems or even understand that misunderstandings and clashes are far more common than malice. I have little doubt that you believe you have good intentions.

But there's no point us continuing this.

 

[abirdcall]

If I thought the thread police were necessary I would have reported, not responded.

I've been more or less ignoring this thread since it got sidetracked into issues like this that have nothing to do with the 2024 PHB. So I thought I may have missed something.

But honestly? I don't recall any rules that encouraged bad behavior for any WotC edition. Long ago there was horrible advice on how CN alignment was basically "Play an a-hole that nobody would want in the party." Of course there was wonderful advice from Gygax that instead of talking to your players and discussing issues you should teach them a lesson by punishing their PCs.

But those issues were long ago in an edition far far away AFAIK. So I was wondering if there was anything in the rules of the current edition that caused concern.

The only thing for me is in the DMG the bit about telling the DM to change what they roll and lie to the players about it.

But that is DMG and not PHB.

 

[Oofta]

The only thing for me is in the DMG the bit about telling the DM to change what they roll and lie to the players about it.

But that is DMG and not PHB.

Is that in the 2024 DMG? I haven't made the time to read through it thoroughly.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Is that in the 2024 DMG? I haven't made the time to read through it thoroughly.

There was such advice in the old DMG too. Though it was presented as an option and warned about the drawbacks.
I don't know how it is worded in the new one.