D&D (2024) Here's The Full List of Changes in the D&D 2024 Player's Handbook

WotC has provided a full list of changes between the 2014 and 2024 versions of Dungeons & Dragons' Player's Handbook.

The changes include classes, backgrounds, species, spells, stat blocks, feats, equipment, rules, and new terminology.

• Classes
• Origins
• Feats
• Equipment
• Spells
• Stat Blocks
• Rules
• New Terminology

Also included is a list of things from 2014 which are still usable in 2024, which includes 7 subclasses, 2 species, and 3 feats.

There's a separate list which details the changes to the D&D Beyond platform.

 

[Eyes of Nine]

So is Spelljammer Conformed or not?

They seem to be leaning into the Multiverse proposition - but not sure if that confirms Spelljammer or not

 

[Demetrios1453]

So is Spelljammer Conformed or not?

Oddly enough, Spelljammer is one of the few settings that didn't get a big, chapter-heading work of art featuring famous NPCs from that setting.

Planescape didn't as well, but that's more than made up for by all the mentions of Sigil and the Lady of Pain in the text. Apparently, according the the new PHB, Common started out as the common tongue of Sigil and spread throughout the multiverse from there. Which is actually a reasonable theory, given that it always has been spoken everywhere. I guess the addition of the typical Planescape slang was a later or at least parallel development (like Cockney slang in London while English spread across the world). Beyond that, that gives me hope that we'll be seeing a follow-up to the Planescape slipcase set relatively soon (2026 or so since we know next year's schedule), probably in a Manual of the Planes type book.

 

[bedir than]

Oddly enough, Spelljammer is one of the few settings that didn't get a big, chapter-heading work of art featuring famous NPCs from that setting.

Planescape didn't as well, but that's more than made up for by all the mentions of Sigil and the Lady of Pain in the text. Apparently, according the the new PHB, Common started out as the common tongue of Sigil and spread throughout the multiverse from there. Which is actually a reasonable theory, given that it always has been spoken everywhere. I guess the addition of the typical Planescape slang was a later or at least parallel development (like Cockney slang in London while English spread across the world). Beyond that, that gives me hope that we'll be seeing a follow-up to the Planescape slipcase set relatively soon (2026 or so since we know next year's schedule), probably in a Manual of the Planes type book.

Spelljammer is confirmed in the "World of Adventure" section

D&D worlds exist in a multiverse and are connected to one another and to other planes of existence. Some of the worlds have been published as official D&D settings, including the Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance, Spelljammer, Planescape, Dark Sun, Eberron, and Ravenloft settings. Alongside these worlds are thousands more, created by generations of D&D players for their own games. Amid the richness of the multiverse, you might create a world of your own.

 

[Marandahir]

As far as I can tell, the only reason why Bards even have a spell list above level 5 is for the 8th-level spell Glibness, only shared with Warlocks and not the other three lists Bards can draw from.

Though I appreciate a standard Bard spell list for all 9 levels despite Magical Secrets; it’s compatible with otherwise 2014 Bards, and it’s a good starting place to consider these spells “on theme” before digging into the Magical Secrets and thus could help avoid options paralysis.

 

[dave2008]

Unless the primary source is biased in favor of itself (which it always is). I prefer a wide range of commentary over marketing speak from a mega-corp.

The primary source is the books themselves, not the articles or marketing about the book

 

[dave2008]

So is Spelljammer Conformed or not?

What do you mean, Spelljammer is already out. It is even available on DMsGuild.

 

[Micah Sweet]

The primary source is the books themselves, not the articles or marketing about the book

Quite right, I shouldn't have accepted that claim. In that case I don't feel like paying for the primary source.

 

[pukunui]

Unless the primary source is biased in favor of itself (which it always is). I prefer a wide range of commentary over marketing speak from a mega-corp.

Oh come on! Unless you’re majoring in marketing, you’re never going to regard marketing pieces as a primary source. Don’t be ridiculous. I shouldn’t have to tell you that’s not what I meant.

 

[TheSword]

There are a lot of changes. It feels far more has changed than between 3.0 and 3.5.

The spells alone are very different in dozens of cases. Don’t get me wrong, I’ve not seen a change yet I didn’t like, but the volume of it is gonna take some time to digest.

I’ll probably be spinning out 5.0 assumptions a couple of years on. (Then again I still occasionally misremember things from Pathfinder as being 5.0 so )

 

[dave2008]

Quite right, I shouldn't have accepted that claim. In that case I don't feel like paying for the primary source.

Sure, that was why libraries and free rules/SRD were also listed as options