D&D (2024) DMs what do you think of the new PHB?

[Gorck]

@SlyFlourish is using different rulebooks for different campaigns, right now they are using Level Up if I am not mistaken

His next campaign will be using ToV. Watching his podcast from Friday, I’m getting massive “fantasy Firefly” vibes from it, and I’m all in on that.

 

[KYRON45]

No, but people sure seem to read that into my posts despite my regular and explicit testimony to the contrary.

Don't take it personally. It's pretty standard for at least one person to make an argument out of...well...anything.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I view 5E more Witcher/Renaissance (With the REALLY high upper class looking like late game Assassins Creed 2)/Soul Calibur in regards to looks/aesthetics in feel

I would like to view it that way, but sometimes the ascetics and game assumptions provided (especially in modern D&D) make that challenging.

 

[DrJawaPhD]

Having used the new stuff in two sessions so far, there is really no difference in combat speed so far.

Same here, I'm not seeing any difference in combat speed, and I think the fear of slower combat is extremely overblown.

With 2014 rules, some people were prepared for their turn and went fast, other people took forever to make even the simplest decision. With 2024 rules, the same people are still prepared, the same people are still indecisive. In my experience, combat delays have always been a player problem not a rules problem.

 

[Scott Christian]

I have not had a chance to read it in its entirety. But my initial takeaways are:

• The examples of play in the beginning (and the order of the book) seem more cohesive.
• It seems like it is written for a younger audience.
• Rule explanations are clear and concise, yet are sometimes separated by text.

Once I finish a solid read-through, I will have more to say. Once we play a solid campaign, I will have even more to say.

 

[Azzy]

So far, I've only had the chance to really read the first chapter. So far, I have a positive view of the book. I'll probably just skip to the glossary before reading up on character creation.

 

[OptionalRule]

Reading reviews and it's a lot of gushing over how many new options and powers the PCs have. Which is grand from a player perspective.

What do my fellow Forever DMs think?

I think it's cleaned up some elements of the game, made some things more consistent.

The continued power creep is making the game worse IMO. It's also increasing complexity, which I don't think is good. I believe part of that is to align it better with their VTT to figure it out for you. Which I don't appreciate design wise.

 

[THEMNGMNT]

His next campaign will be using ToV. Watching his podcast from Friday, I’m getting massive “fantasy Firefly” vibes from it, and I’m all in on that.

Mike runs two games concurrently. I believe he is running Level Up in one campaign and Tales of the Valiant in the other.

 

[Shadowdweller00]

Overall an improvement. There ARE some things I'm skeptical of or waiting to see in action - such as weapon mastery abilities (I'm a bit worried about there being too many sources of advantage / disadvantage, or that some of the weapon traits aren't worth the added complication); or the summoning changes. There were some wasted opportunities to clarify things in some cases. I hope they scale up Monsters and give them some extra options / abilities to make up for PC power creep.

My major issues with the book are formatting though - the spell lists for each class were put in the individual class descriptions rather than the beginning of the spell listings; making them harder to look up. They also COULD have included hanging tabs or clearer chapter labels to make flipping to individual sections easier. The glossary is an improvement over the 2014 PHB's index at least.

 

[BoneMan]

Hard Pass