I’ve been a long-time fan of Dungeons & Dragons, but the recent 2024 rules update has left me deeply disappointed. Instead of expanding the game to be more inclusive of a wide range of campaign worlds and allowing Dungeon Masters (DMs) to freely craft their own settings, Wizards of the Coast has doubled down on a vision that confines D&D to their world, their lore.
Take character creation as an example. In the new Player's Handbook, the process is focused on creating characters for their specific campaign setting. It assumes that the world the DM is running is the one they've designed. Gone is the flexibility that let a DM truly shape their own world and tailor character options to fit that unique vision. Instead, it’s like they’re saying, “Here’s how to make a character for our world, and if your campaign doesn’t fit, good luck.” That approach is disheartening.
I’m not going to dissect every aspect of the new handbook, but one glaring issue is how it handles player choices. Instead of fostering a dialogue between players and the DM to shape characters that fit the world they’re playing in, the game now feels more like a preset menu. Players are encouraged to pick any race or class they like, and at second level, they’re automatically handed a common magic item. This kind of design discourages customization and flexibility. What happened to consulting the DM, to crafting a character whose backstory and abilities are tied to the campaign’s unique world?
It feels like the handbook is more focused on guiding players into a specific vision, rather than empowering collaboration between players and DMs. And this isn’t just about world-building—this trend toward predetermined choices also leads to noticeable power creep. The game’s structure now makes it difficult to run classic scenarios, like the humble farm boy rising to become a great wizard, because characters start out so powerful right from the first level. That kind of slow-burn narrative is becoming harder and harder to create in a system that prioritizes immediate power and predefined rewards over gradual character growth.
Why has the game evolved this way? D&D used to be a simple, flexible ruleset that any DM could easily adapt to their needs. Now, it feels like this massive behemoth that you have to dismantle piece by piece just to run your own campaign. I can already picture the DM's Guide paying lip service to the idea of "make the game your own," only to offer no actual tools or guidance to help do that. It’s frustrating because running a custom campaign in this system feels more difficult than ever. I have to cut out about half the players handbook just to get the taste of the Forgotten Realms out of my mouth.
I miss the days when the rules were just a framework, not a dictation. Here's hoping we see better support for true DM flexibility in the future, but for now, I’m left feeling like D&D continues to move in the wrong direction.
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.
The worlds of the multiverse share characteristics, but each world is set apart by its own history and geography. Your DM might set a campaign on one of these worlds or on a world of their own invention. Because there is so much variety among D&D worlds, check with your DM about the world of your upcoming adventures.
In Playing the Game:
An adventure might be created by the Dungeon Master or purchased (the examples of play in this chapter are inspired by a published adventure, Curse of Strahd). In either case, an adventure features a fantastic setting, such as an underground dungeon, a wondrous wilderness, or a magic-filled city.
[...]
As with adventures, a DM might create a campaign from scratch, assemble a campaign from published adventures, or mix homemade material with published material. And the campaign might take place in a world of the DM’s creation or in a published campaign setting, such as the Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk (the latter is described in the Dungeon Master’s Guide).
In Creating a Character (brought up because you called this out):
The DM decides whether your character starts with more than the standard equipment for a level 1 character, possibly even one or more magic items. The Starting Equipment at Higher Levels table is a guide for the DM.
The Player's Handbook is the basics of how to run the game along with the primary player options. That's literally its purpose. Are characters a little stronger in this version than under the 2014 rules? Maybe. But your points about them focusing on one world and leaving others in the dust hold no water, nor do your complaints about the player-DM conversations. The things I highlighted here are all in the beginning of the new book.
I miss the days when the rules were just a framework, not a dictation. Here's hoping we see better support for true DM flexibility in the future, but for now, I’m left feeling like D&D continues to move in the wrong direction.
Many players have had complaints that the rules were too vague or didn't cover enough because they actually don't. 4e was criticized harshly in part because it felt more like a combat simulator than a role-playing game. But the rules in the book are absolutely generic. Just because they use examples from official worlds to show the flow of gameplay doesn't mean they're shoving those worlds down your throat. (Not to mention the Forgotten Realms plane of Toril isn't even the focus of the new book.)
I’ve been a long-time fan of Dungeons & Dragons, but the recent 2024 rules update has left me deeply disappointed. Instead of expanding the game to be more inclusive of a wide range of campaign worlds and allowing Dungeon Masters (DMs) to freely craft their own settings, Wizards of the Coast has doubled down on a vision that confines D&D to their world, their lore.
Take character creation as an example. In the new Player's Handbook, the process is focused on creating characters for their specific campaign setting. It assumes that the world the DM is running is the one they've designed. Gone is the flexibility that let a DM truly shape their own world and tailor character options to fit that unique vision. Instead, it’s like they’re saying, “Here’s how to make a character for our world, and if your campaign doesn’t fit, good luck.” That approach is disheartening.
I’m not going to dissect every aspect of the new handbook, but one glaring issue is how it handles player choices. Instead of fostering a dialogue between players and the DM to shape characters that fit the world they’re playing in, the game now feels more like a preset menu. Players are encouraged to pick any race or class they like, and at second level, they’re automatically handed a common magic item. This kind of design discourages customization and flexibility. What happened to consulting the DM, to crafting a character whose backstory and abilities are tied to the campaign’s unique world?
It feels like the handbook is more focused on guiding players into a specific vision, rather than empowering collaboration between players and DMs. And this isn’t just about world-building—this trend toward predetermined choices also leads to noticeable power creep. The game’s structure now makes it difficult to run classic scenarios, like the humble farm boy rising to become a great wizard, because characters start out so powerful right from the first level. That kind of slow-burn narrative is becoming harder and harder to create in a system that prioritizes immediate power and predefined rewards over gradual character growth.
Why has the game evolved this way? D&D used to be a simple, flexible ruleset that any DM could easily adapt to their needs. Now, it feels like this massive behemoth that you have to dismantle piece by piece just to run your own campaign. I can already picture the DM's Guide paying lip service to the idea of "make the game your own," only to offer no actual tools or guidance to help do that. It’s frustrating because running a custom campaign in this system feels more difficult than ever. I have to cut out about half the players handbook just to get the taste of the Forgotten Realms out of my mouth.
I miss the days when the rules were just a framework, not a dictation. Here's hoping we see better support for true DM flexibility in the future, but for now, I’m left feeling like D&D continues to move in the wrong direction.
I am sorry, what? A DM MUST hand a PC a magic item????
I don't believe that is in this PHB, or any previous PHB.
I am sorry, what? A DM MUST hand a PC a magic item????
I don't believe that is in this PHB, or any previous PHB.
They're referring to the recommended gear for level 2-4 characters. But like I highlighted above, that section is guidance for the DM to use as a recommended baseline. That's a quote from the book itself.
I’ve been a long-time fan of Dungeons & Dragons, but the recent 2024 rules update has left me deeply disappointed. Instead of expanding the game to be more inclusive of a wide range of campaign worlds and allowing Dungeon Masters (DMs) to freely craft their own settings, Wizards of the Coast has doubled down on a vision that confines D&D to their world, their lore.
The new DMG is not even out yet. And Wizards has never forced GMs and players to play a specific way. If anything, Wizards encourage to GMs to use the rules however they want, including bending and breaking them.
Take character creation as an example. In the new Player's Handbook, the process is focused on creating characters for their specific campaign setting. It assumes that the world the DM is running is the one they've designed. Gone is the flexibility that let a DM truly shape their own world and tailor character options to fit that unique vision. Instead, it’s like they’re saying, “Here’s how to make a character for our world, and if your campaign doesn’t fit, good luck.” That approach is disheartening.
The only differences in the character creation process between the old and new PHB are: reordering certain steps in the character creation process; ASIs moved to background; Origin Feats are mandatory; and lack of guidelines for PBIF. None of the differences impact how the GM should design their world.
I’m not going to dissect every aspect of the new handbook, but one glaring issue is how it handles player choices. Instead of fostering a dialogue between players and the DM to shape characters that fit the world they’re playing in, the game now feels more like a preset menu. Players are encouraged to pick any race or class they like, and at second level, they’re automatically handed a common magic item. This kind of design discourages customization and flexibility. What happened to consulting the DM, to crafting a character whose backstory and abilities are tied to the campaign’s unique world?
Character creation in the new PHB is no different from character creation in the old PHB, in regards to letting them pick whatever species and class they want.
Characters are not automatically handed a magic item at second level.
In Chapter 2 of the PHB, there is literally a section called Talk with Your DM: " Talk with Your DM Start by talking with your Dungeon Master about the type of D&D game they plan to run. If the DM draws inspiration from Greek myth, for example, you might choose a different direction for your character than if the DM is planning for swashbuckling on the high seas. Think about the kind of adventurer you want to play in this game. If you don’t know where to begin, look at the character illustrations in this book for inspiration. - SESSION ZERO - Some Dungeon Masters start a campaign with a “session zero,” an initial gathering focused on creating characters and setting expectations, including topics to avoid as well as those to embrace. A session zero provides a great opportunity to talk to the other players and the DM and decide whether your characters know one another, how they met, and what sorts of quests the group might undertake together. "
I recommend reading the new PHB and back up your claims with text from the book.
It feels like the handbook is more focused on guiding players into a specific vision, rather than empowering collaboration between players and DMs. And this isn’t just about world-building—this trend toward predetermined choices also leads to noticeable power creep. The game’s structure now makes it difficult to run classic scenarios, like the humble farm boy rising to become a great wizard, because characters start out so powerful right from the first level. That kind of slow-burn narrative is becoming harder and harder to create in a system that prioritizes immediate power and predefined rewards over gradual character growth.
As mentioned above, the book literally tells you to talk to your GM. The job of the PHB is to guide players through the character creation process. The job of the PHB is not to deal with world building; that is the DMG's job. The game's structure got more options now, but it has not been fundamentally changed. GMs still have complete control over player progression with milestone leveling. And level 1 characters can still be easily overwhelmed.
Why has the game evolved this way? D&D used to be a simple, flexible ruleset that any DM could easily adapt to their needs. Now, it feels like this massive behemoth that you have to dismantle piece by piece just to run your own campaign. I can already picture the DM's Guide paying lip service to the idea of "make the game your own," only to offer no actual tools or guidance to help do that. It’s frustrating because running a custom campaign in this system feels more difficult than ever. I have to cut out about half the players handbook just to get the taste of the Forgotten Realms out of my mouth.
I miss the days when the rules were just a framework, not a dictation. Here's hoping we see better support for true DM flexibility in the future, but for now, I’m left feeling like D&D continues to move in the wrong direction.
D&D is still a simple and flexible ruleset. Despite what some people say, you can use the D&D engine run modern day, sci-fi, and super hero adventures. Despite what the new PHB says, I have no issue not replacing certain old rules with new rules; if anything, it is pretty easy to run both old and new rules at the same time. Old and new surprise rules can be used at the same time, incentivising its use even more. Exhaustion can be used at the same time to make it particularly punishing, alternatively it can be used separately as well.
The old DMG have very limited guidance on world building, and even less tools to do so. Hopefully, the new DMG would significantly expand on what the old had. Additionally, if Wizards release a GM facing book dedicated to world building, that would be nice.
Additionally, if Wizards release a GM facing book dedicated to world building, that would be nice.
Just a side note, there's an officially licensed product, The Worldbuilder's Journal, that has a few hundred prompts meant to help guide a DM through worldbuilding over time. If that's something you're interested in, I've found it pretty cool. To make it infinitely reusable, I just write in other notebooks or in a Word document.
Take character creation as an example. In the new Player's Handbook, the process is focused on creating characters for their specific campaign setting. It assumes that the world the DM is running is the one they've designed. Gone is the flexibility that let a DM truly shape their own world and tailor character options to fit that unique vision. Instead, it’s like they’re saying, “Here’s how to make a character for our world, and if your campaign doesn’t fit, good luck.” That approach is disheartening.
I'm surprised you've come to this conclusion - the 2024 PHB has less specific campaign setting content than the 2014 PHB did. They've stripped out all the campaign setting sample characters (Bruenor, Tika, Artemis). They dropped all the campaign setting specific lists of deities. They cut the FR human ethnicity name lists. And so on. The new PHB is pretty much as generic as it possibly can be ... which makes it easier for a DM to layer campaign setting specifics on top.
Players are encouraged to pick any race or class they like
That's nothing new with 5e.
and at second level, they’re automatically handed a common magic item.
I think you've misunderstood the "starting at higher level" section. That's all just suggestions for the DM for when they're starting a campaign at a level higher than 1st. That stuff was in the 2014 DMG and has been moved to the PHB, so it's not new either.
The game’s structure now makes it difficult to run classic scenarios, like the humble farm boy rising to become a great wizard, because characters start out so powerful right from the first level. That kind of slow-burn narrative is becoming harder and harder to create in a system that prioritizes immediate power and predefined rewards over gradual character growth.
Again, this is not new to 2024 5e. Have you been away from D&D for a while and have only just returned or something?
People were making this same complaint about 2014 5e and 4e before that. No way is this a new thing.
I have to cut out about half the players handbook just to get the taste of the Forgotten Realms out of my mouth.
As I said above, there's less FR stuff to cut out in the 2024 PHB than there was in the 2014 PHB, so I have no idea what you're on about.
After the first d20 conversion I cant think of much thats improved over the old system. I think everyone who played 2.0 wanted a better system, but that's not what they've been given, and I'm really shocked that young people don't demand better. I guess that antiquates me.
Listen, I think 5e is a good game. It's just not AD&D. They have discontinued that game, and its a darn shame. That's all.
They forcing theirs new rules through DnD app which now makes using originall 5e confusing and annoying in way that DM has to give up ir controll and check everything
The new rules itself - i would agree it railroads to less creative gameplay, more sandboxy which is probably mostly because VTT and BG3 (more suitable for this platform)
I would be ok with that since its just another edition, and i would keep using original 5e. The push in app is problem though and the core issue which makes me think about transit to another system
Good comment. I've looked into a lot of other RPGs, there are a tone of them. I've just not found one that, to me, is a good successor to AD&D: an up-to-date version of 2e with the better bells and whistles of some of the newer games. I guess I'll just have to make it myself! ;-)
I hear you. You have valid retorts. I guess I am not capable of expressing my feelings well enough. Did you play 2e so that your comments are well-informed? I think I need old 2e players to tell me what they think. I value your input though. In my campaign I have done my best to not allow most of the classes and races, I have custom races, classes, spells, items, technologies, lore, rules and rule interpretations. It works well, but I've been accused of not playing D&D anymore -- which is really rich TBH, because all I've done is make it more like what used to be called D&D before Wizards took over lol.
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.
The worlds of the multiverse share characteristics, but each world is set apart by its own history and geography. Your DM might set a campaign on one of these worlds or on a world of their own invention. Because there is so much variety among D&D worlds, check with your DM about the world of your upcoming adventures.
In Playing the Game:
An adventure might be created by the Dungeon Master or purchased (the examples of play in this chapter are inspired by a published adventure, Curse of Strahd). In either case, an adventure features a fantastic setting, such as an underground dungeon, a wondrous wilderness, or a magic-filled city.
[...]
As with adventures, a DM might create a campaign from scratch, assemble a campaign from published adventures, or mix homemade material with published material. And the campaign might take place in a world of the DM’s creation or in a published campaign setting, such as the Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk (the latter is described in the Dungeon Master’s Guide).
In Creating a Character (brought up because you called this out):
The DM decides whether your character starts with more than the standard equipment for a level 1 character, possibly even one or more magic items. The Starting Equipment at Higher Levels table is a guide for the DM.
The Player's Handbook is the basics of how to run the game along with the primary player options. That's literally its purpose. Are characters a little stronger in this version than under the 2014 rules? Maybe. But your points about them focusing on one world and leaving others in the dust hold no water, nor do your complaints about the player-DM conversations. The things I highlighted here are all in the beginning of the new book.
I miss the days when the rules were just a framework, not a dictation. Here's hoping we see better support for true DM flexibility in the future, but for now, I’m left feeling like D&D continues to move in the wrong direction.
Many players have had complaints that the rules were too vague or didn't cover enough because they actually don't. 4e was criticized harshly in part because it felt more like a combat simulator than a role-playing game. But the rules in the book are absolutely generic. Just because they use examples from official worlds to show the flow of gameplay doesn't mean they're shoving those worlds down your throat. (Not to mention the Forgotten Realms plane of Toril isn't even the focus of the new book.)
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.
The worlds of the multiverse share characteristics, but each world is set apart by its own history and geography. Your DM might set a campaign on one of these worlds or on a world of their own invention. Because there is so much variety among D&D worlds, check with your DM about the world of your upcoming adventures.
In Playing the Game:
An adventure might be created by the Dungeon Master or purchased (the examples of play in this chapter are inspired by a published adventure, Curse of Strahd). In either case, an adventure features a fantastic setting, such as an underground dungeon, a wondrous wilderness, or a magic-filled city.
[...]
As with adventures, a DM might create a campaign from scratch, assemble a campaign from published adventures, or mix homemade material with published material. And the campaign might take place in a world of the DM’s creation or in a published campaign setting, such as the Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk (the latter is described in the Dungeon Master’s Guide).
In Creating a Character (brought up because you called this out):
The DM decides whether your character starts with more than the standard equipment for a level 1 character, possibly even one or more magic items. The Starting Equipment at Higher Levels table is a guide for the DM.
The Player's Handbook is the basics of how to run the game along with the primary player options. That's literally its purpose. Are characters a little stronger in this version than under the 2014 rules? Maybe. But your points about them focusing on one world and leaving others in the dust hold no water, nor do your complaints about the player-DM conversations. The things I highlighted here are all in the beginning of the new book.
I miss the days when the rules were just a framework, not a dictation. Here's hoping we see better support for true DM flexibility in the future, but for now, I’m left feeling like D&D continues to move in the wrong direction.
Many players have had complaints that the rules were too vague or didn't cover enough because they actually don't. 4e was criticized harshly in part because it felt more like a combat simulator than a role-playing game. But the rules in the book are absolutely generic. Just because they use examples from official worlds to show the flow of gameplay doesn't mean they're shoving those worlds down your throat. (Not to mention the Forgotten Realms plane of Toril isn't even the focus of the new book.)
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.
The worlds of the multiverse share characteristics, but each world is set apart by its own history and geography. Your DM might set a campaign on one of these worlds or on a world of their own invention. Because there is so much variety among D&D worlds, check with your DM about the world of your upcoming adventures.
In Playing the Game:
An adventure might be created by the Dungeon Master or purchased (the examples of play in this chapter are inspired by a published adventure, Curse of Strahd). In either case, an adventure features a fantastic setting, such as an underground dungeon, a wondrous wilderness, or a magic-filled city.
[...]
As with adventures, a DM might create a campaign from scratch, assemble a campaign from published adventures, or mix homemade material with published material. And the campaign might take place in a world of the DM’s creation or in a published campaign setting, such as the Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk (the latter is described in the Dungeon Master’s Guide).
In Creating a Character (brought up because you called this out):
The DM decides whether your character starts with more than the standard equipment for a level 1 character, possibly even one or more magic items. The Starting Equipment at Higher Levels table is a guide for the DM.
The Player's Handbook is the basics of how to run the game along with the primary player options. That's literally its purpose. Are characters a little stronger in this version than under the 2014 rules? Maybe. But your points about them focusing on one world and leaving others in the dust hold no water, nor do your complaints about the player-DM conversations. The things I highlighted here are all in the beginning of the new book.
I miss the days when the rules were just a framework, not a dictation. Here's hoping we see better support for true DM flexibility in the future, but for now, I’m left feeling like D&D continues to move in the wrong direction.
Many players have had complaints that the rules were too vague or didn't cover enough because they actually don't. 4e was criticized harshly in part because it felt more like a combat simulator than a role-playing game. But the rules in the book are absolutely generic. Just because they use examples from official worlds to show the flow of gameplay doesn't mean they're shoving those worlds down your throat. (Not to mention the Forgotten Realms plane of Toril isn't even the focus of the new book.)
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.
The worlds of the multiverse share characteristics, but each world is set apart by its own history and geography. Your DM might set a campaign on one of these worlds or on a world of their own invention. Because there is so much variety among D&D worlds, check with your DM about the world of your upcoming adventures.
In Playing the Game:
An adventure might be created by the Dungeon Master or purchased (the examples of play in this chapter are inspired by a published adventure, Curse of Strahd). In either case, an adventure features a fantastic setting, such as an underground dungeon, a wondrous wilderness, or a magic-filled city.
[...]
As with adventures, a DM might create a campaign from scratch, assemble a campaign from published adventures, or mix homemade material with published material. And the campaign might take place in a world of the DM’s creation or in a published campaign setting, such as the Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk (the latter is described in the Dungeon Master’s Guide).
In Creating a Character (brought up because you called this out):
The DM decides whether your character starts with more than the standard equipment for a level 1 character, possibly even one or more magic items. The Starting Equipment at Higher Levels table is a guide for the DM.
The Player's Handbook is the basics of how to run the game along with the primary player options. That's literally its purpose. Are characters a little stronger in this version than under the 2014 rules? Maybe. But your points about them focusing on one world and leaving others in the dust hold no water, nor do your complaints about the player-DM conversations. The things I highlighted here are all in the beginning of the new book.
I miss the days when the rules were just a framework, not a dictation. Here's hoping we see better support for true DM flexibility in the future, but for now, I’m left feeling like D&D continues to move in the wrong direction.
Many players have had complaints that the rules were too vague or didn't cover enough because they actually don't. 4e was criticized harshly in part because it felt more like a combat simulator than a role-playing game. But the rules in the book are absolutely generic. Just because they use examples from official worlds to show the flow of gameplay doesn't mean they're shoving those worlds down your throat. (Not to mention the Forgotten Realms plane of Toril isn't even the focus of the new book.)
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.
The worlds of the multiverse share characteristics, but each world is set apart by its own history and geography. Your DM might set a campaign on one of these worlds or on a world of their own invention. Because there is so much variety among D&D worlds, check with your DM about the world of your upcoming adventures.
In Playing the Game:
An adventure might be created by the Dungeon Master or purchased (the examples of play in this chapter are inspired by a published adventure, Curse of Strahd). In either case, an adventure features a fantastic setting, such as an underground dungeon, a wondrous wilderness, or a magic-filled city.
[...]
As with adventures, a DM might create a campaign from scratch, assemble a campaign from published adventures, or mix homemade material with published material. And the campaign might take place in a world of the DM’s creation or in a published campaign setting, such as the Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk (the latter is described in the Dungeon Master’s Guide).
In Creating a Character (brought up because you called this out):
The DM decides whether your character starts with more than the standard equipment for a level 1 character, possibly even one or more magic items. The Starting Equipment at Higher Levels table is a guide for the DM.
The Player's Handbook is the basics of how to run the game along with the primary player options. That's literally its purpose. Are characters a little stronger in this version than under the 2014 rules? Maybe. But your points about them focusing on one world and leaving others in the dust hold no water, nor do your complaints about the player-DM conversations. The things I highlighted here are all in the beginning of the new book.
I miss the days when the rules were just a framework, not a dictation. Here's hoping we see better support for true DM flexibility in the future, but for now, I’m left feeling like D&D continues to move in the wrong direction.
Many players have had complaints that the rules were too vague or didn't cover enough because they actually don't. 4e was criticized harshly in part because it felt more like a combat simulator than a role-playing game. But the rules in the book are absolutely generic. Just because they use examples from official worlds to show the flow of gameplay doesn't mean they're shoving those worlds down your throat. (Not to mention the Forgotten Realms plane of Toril isn't even the focus of the new book.)
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.
The worlds of the multiverse share characteristics, but each world is set apart by its own history and geography. Your DM might set a campaign on one of these worlds or on a world of their own invention. Because there is so much variety among D&D worlds, check with your DM about the world of your upcoming adventures.
In Playing the Game:
An adventure might be created by the Dungeon Master or purchased (the examples of play in this chapter are inspired by a published adventure, Curse of Strahd). In either case, an adventure features a fantastic setting, such as an underground dungeon, a wondrous wilderness, or a magic-filled city.
[...]
As with adventures, a DM might create a campaign from scratch, assemble a campaign from published adventures, or mix homemade material with published material. And the campaign might take place in a world of the DM’s creation or in a published campaign setting, such as the Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk (the latter is described in the Dungeon Master’s Guide).
In Creating a Character (brought up because you called this out):
The DM decides whether your character starts with more than the standard equipment for a level 1 character, possibly even one or more magic items. The Starting Equipment at Higher Levels table is a guide for the DM.
The Player's Handbook is the basics of how to run the game along with the primary player options. That's literally its purpose. Are characters a little stronger in this version than under the 2014 rules? Maybe. But your points about them focusing on one world and leaving others in the dust hold no water, nor do your complaints about the player-DM conversations. The things I highlighted here are all in the beginning of the new book.
I miss the days when the rules were just a framework, not a dictation. Here's hoping we see better support for true DM flexibility in the future, but for now, I’m left feeling like D&D continues to move in the wrong direction.
Many players have had complaints that the rules were too vague or didn't cover enough because they actually don't. 4e was criticized harshly in part because it felt more like a combat simulator than a role-playing game. But the rules in the book are absolutely generic. Just because they use examples from official worlds to show the flow of gameplay doesn't mean they're shoving those worlds down your throat. (Not to mention the Forgotten Realms plane of Toril isn't even the focus of the new book.)
I hear you. You have valid retorts. I guess I am not capable of expressing my feelings well enough. Did you play 2e so that your comments are well-informed? I think I need old 2e players to tell me what they think. I value your input though. In my campaign I have done my best to not allow most of the classes and races, I have custom races, classes, spells, items, technologies, lore, rules and rule interpretations. It works well, but I've been accused of not playing D&D anymore -- which is really rich TBH, because all I've done is make it more like what used to be called D&D before Wizards took over lol.
You know, nothing in your first post said anything about 2e. But here's my take on complaining about older editions not being like newer editions:
Just play the older edition. Is the company supporting it further? No. Doesn't mean you can't play it.
Newer editions cover different markets. I'm the case of 5th edition, it's been simplified to reach a broader market. Some people like crunchier systems. That just means 5e isn't necessarily for them.
A halfway decent DM could still take the new adventures and run the right checks, scaling DC where appropriate. Would have to pick different monsters, but there's likely close equivalents you can use in older sources.
Did you play 2e so that your comments are well-informed? I think I need old 2e players to tell me what they think.
2e was the first edition of D&D I ever played back in the 90s. I've played every edition since, and I've even tried 1e. I would much rather play 5e (including 2024 5e) than go back to any of those older systems.
Did you play 2e so that your comments are well-informed? I think I need old 2e players to tell me what they think.
2e was the first edition of D&D I ever played back in the 90s. I've played every edition since, and I've even tried 1e. I would much rather play 5e (including 2024 5e) than go back to any of those older systems.
I have not played 2e, i have only read the books and watched some actual plays, but from what i can tell 2e dnd and 5e dnd are different games completely. It’s not fair to compare them because they are completely different. I think that it is purely a matter of opinio.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please, honor this signature by humming that one Zelda sound next time your players find a magic item
There are multiple versions of D&D. Each edition makes changes, sometimes massive changes. if one edition doesn’t match your style, but an older one does- play those. I myself stuck with 5e 2024 because I do not like the changes overall. Mostly due to its changes in how stats work (the traded species-ism for classism, when they had the inoffensive option perfectly established in Tasha’s) and the even more heavy focus on magic, and the heavy, non optional aspect of feats (half the games I run don’t use feats).
really, it boils down to 5e 2014 being highly modular, and 2024 not.
i liked adnd 1 and especially 2, and hated 3e.
find the game that works for you. It won’t always be the new one.
I’ve been a long-time fan of Dungeons & Dragons, but the recent 2024 rules update has left me deeply disappointed. Instead of expanding the game to be more inclusive of a wide range of campaign worlds and allowing Dungeon Masters (DMs) to freely craft their own settings, Wizards of the Coast has doubled down on a vision that confines D&D to their world, their lore.
Take character creation as an example. In the new Player's Handbook, the process is focused on creating characters for their specific campaign setting. It assumes that the world the DM is running is the one they've designed. Gone is the flexibility that let a DM truly shape their own world and tailor character options to fit that unique vision. Instead, it’s like they’re saying, “Here’s how to make a character for our world, and if your campaign doesn’t fit, good luck.” That approach is disheartening.
I’m not going to dissect every aspect of the new handbook, but one glaring issue is how it handles player choices. Instead of fostering a dialogue between players and the DM to shape characters that fit the world they’re playing in, the game now feels more like a preset menu. Players are encouraged to pick any race or class they like, and at second level, they’re automatically handed a common magic item. This kind of design discourages customization and flexibility. What happened to consulting the DM, to crafting a character whose backstory and abilities are tied to the campaign’s unique world?
It feels like the handbook is more focused on guiding players into a specific vision, rather than empowering collaboration between players and DMs. And this isn’t just about world-building—this trend toward predetermined choices also leads to noticeable power creep. The game’s structure now makes it difficult to run classic scenarios, like the humble farm boy rising to become a great wizard, because characters start out so powerful right from the first level. That kind of slow-burn narrative is becoming harder and harder to create in a system that prioritizes immediate power and predefined rewards over gradual character growth.
Why has the game evolved this way? D&D used to be a simple, flexible ruleset that any DM could easily adapt to their needs. Now, it feels like this massive behemoth that you have to dismantle piece by piece just to run your own campaign. I can already picture the DM's Guide paying lip service to the idea of "make the game your own," only to offer no actual tools or guidance to help do that. It’s frustrating because running a custom campaign in this system feels more difficult than ever. I have to cut out about half the players handbook just to get the taste of the Forgotten Realms out of my mouth.
I miss the days when the rules were just a framework, not a dictation. Here's hoping we see better support for true DM flexibility in the future, but for now, I’m left feeling like D&D continues to move in the wrong direction.
In the Introduction:
In Playing the Game:
In Creating a Character (brought up because you called this out):
The Player's Handbook is the basics of how to run the game along with the primary player options. That's literally its purpose. Are characters a little stronger in this version than under the 2014 rules? Maybe. But your points about them focusing on one world and leaving others in the dust hold no water, nor do your complaints about the player-DM conversations. The things I highlighted here are all in the beginning of the new book.
As for this...
Many players have had complaints that the rules were too vague or didn't cover enough because they actually don't. 4e was criticized harshly in part because it felt more like a combat simulator than a role-playing game. But the rules in the book are absolutely generic. Just because they use examples from official worlds to show the flow of gameplay doesn't mean they're shoving those worlds down your throat. (Not to mention the Forgotten Realms plane of Toril isn't even the focus of the new book.)
I am sorry, what? A DM MUST hand a PC a magic item????
I don't believe that is in this PHB, or any previous PHB.
They're referring to the recommended gear for level 2-4 characters. But like I highlighted above, that section is guidance for the DM to use as a recommended baseline. That's a quote from the book itself.
The new DMG is not even out yet. And Wizards has never forced GMs and players to play a specific way. If anything, Wizards encourage to GMs to use the rules however they want, including bending and breaking them.
The only differences in the character creation process between the old and new PHB are: reordering certain steps in the character creation process; ASIs moved to background; Origin Feats are mandatory; and lack of guidelines for PBIF. None of the differences impact how the GM should design their world.
Character creation in the new PHB is no different from character creation in the old PHB, in regards to letting them pick whatever species and class they want.
Characters are not automatically handed a magic item at second level.
In Chapter 2 of the PHB, there is literally a section called Talk with Your DM:
"
Talk with Your DM
Start by talking with your Dungeon Master about the type of D&D game they plan to run. If the DM draws inspiration from Greek myth, for example, you might choose a different direction for your character than if the DM is planning for swashbuckling on the high seas. Think about the kind of adventurer you want to play in this game. If you don’t know where to begin, look at the character illustrations in this book for inspiration.
- SESSION ZERO -
Some Dungeon Masters start a campaign with a “session zero,” an initial gathering focused on creating characters and setting expectations, including topics to avoid as well as those to embrace. A session zero provides a great opportunity to talk to the other players and the DM and decide whether your characters know one another, how they met, and what sorts of quests the group might undertake together.
"
I recommend reading the new PHB and back up your claims with text from the book.
As mentioned above, the book literally tells you to talk to your GM. The job of the PHB is to guide players through the character creation process. The job of the PHB is not to deal with world building; that is the DMG's job. The game's structure got more options now, but it has not been fundamentally changed. GMs still have complete control over player progression with milestone leveling. And level 1 characters can still be easily overwhelmed.
D&D is still a simple and flexible ruleset. Despite what some people say, you can use the D&D engine run modern day, sci-fi, and super hero adventures. Despite what the new PHB says, I have no issue not replacing certain old rules with new rules; if anything, it is pretty easy to run both old and new rules at the same time. Old and new surprise rules can be used at the same time, incentivising its use even more. Exhaustion can be used at the same time to make it particularly punishing, alternatively it can be used separately as well.
The old DMG have very limited guidance on world building, and even less tools to do so. Hopefully, the new DMG would significantly expand on what the old had. Additionally, if Wizards release a GM facing book dedicated to world building, that would be nice.
Check Licenses and Resync Entitlements: < https://www.dndbeyond.com/account/licenses >
Running the Game by Matt Colville; Introduction: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-YZvLUXcR8 >
D&D with High School Students by Bill Allen; Season 1 Episode 1: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52NJTUDokyk&t >
Just a side note, there's an officially licensed product, The Worldbuilder's Journal, that has a few hundred prompts meant to help guide a DM through worldbuilding over time. If that's something you're interested in, I've found it pretty cool. To make it infinitely reusable, I just write in other notebooks or in a Word document.
I'm surprised you've come to this conclusion - the 2024 PHB has less specific campaign setting content than the 2014 PHB did. They've stripped out all the campaign setting sample characters (Bruenor, Tika, Artemis). They dropped all the campaign setting specific lists of deities. They cut the FR human ethnicity name lists. And so on. The new PHB is pretty much as generic as it possibly can be ... which makes it easier for a DM to layer campaign setting specifics on top.
That's nothing new with 5e.
I think you've misunderstood the "starting at higher level" section. That's all just suggestions for the DM for when they're starting a campaign at a level higher than 1st. That stuff was in the 2014 DMG and has been moved to the PHB, so it's not new either.
Again, this is not new to 2024 5e. Have you been away from D&D for a while and have only just returned or something?
People were making this same complaint about 2014 5e and 4e before that. No way is this a new thing.
As I said above, there's less FR stuff to cut out in the 2024 PHB than there was in the 2014 PHB, so I have no idea what you're on about.
Yes, I have been absent since 2nd edition. before it was sold to Wizards of the Coast. They have effectively ruined the game.
After the first d20 conversion I cant think of much thats improved over the old system. I think everyone who played 2.0 wanted a better system, but that's not what they've been given, and I'm really shocked that young people don't demand better. I guess that antiquates me.
Listen, I think 5e is a good game. It's just not AD&D. They have discontinued that game, and its a darn shame. That's all.
They forcing theirs new rules through DnD app which now makes using originall 5e confusing and annoying in way that DM has to give up ir controll and check everything
The new rules itself - i would agree it railroads to less creative gameplay, more sandboxy which is probably mostly because VTT and BG3 (more suitable for this platform)
I would be ok with that since its just another edition, and i would keep using original 5e. The push in app is problem though and the core issue which makes me think about transit to another system
Good comment. I've looked into a lot of other RPGs, there are a tone of them. I've just not found one that, to me, is a good successor to AD&D: an up-to-date version of 2e with the better bells and whistles of some of the newer games. I guess I'll just have to make it myself! ;-)
I hear you. You have valid retorts. I guess I am not capable of expressing my feelings well enough. Did you play 2e so that your comments are well-informed? I think I need old 2e players to tell me what they think. I value your input though. In my campaign I have done my best to not allow most of the classes and races, I have custom races, classes, spells, items, technologies, lore, rules and rule interpretations. It works well, but I've been accused of not playing D&D anymore -- which is really rich TBH, because all I've done is make it more like what used to be called D&D before Wizards took over lol.
You know, nothing in your first post said anything about 2e. But here's my take on complaining about older editions not being like newer editions:
Just play the older edition. Is the company supporting it further? No. Doesn't mean you can't play it.
Newer editions cover different markets. I'm the case of 5th edition, it's been simplified to reach a broader market. Some people like crunchier systems. That just means 5e isn't necessarily for them.
A halfway decent DM could still take the new adventures and run the right checks, scaling DC where appropriate. Would have to pick different monsters, but there's likely close equivalents you can use in older sources.
2e was the first edition of D&D I ever played back in the 90s. I've played every edition since, and I've even tried 1e. I would much rather play 5e (including 2024 5e) than go back to any of those older systems.
I have not played 2e, i have only read the books and watched some actual plays, but from what i can tell 2e dnd and 5e dnd are different games completely. It’s not fair to compare them because they are completely different. I think that it is purely a matter of opinio.
Please, honor this signature by humming that one Zelda sound next time your players find a magic item
There are multiple versions of D&D. Each edition makes changes, sometimes massive changes.
if one edition doesn’t match your style, but an older one does- play those.
I myself stuck with 5e 2024 because I do not like the changes overall. Mostly due to its changes in how stats work (the traded species-ism for classism, when they had the inoffensive option perfectly established in Tasha’s) and the even more heavy focus on magic, and the heavy, non optional aspect of feats (half the games I run don’t use feats).
really, it boils down to 5e 2014 being highly modular, and 2024 not.
i liked adnd 1 and especially 2, and hated 3e.
find the game that works for you. It won’t always be the new one.
Real
Please, honor this signature by humming that one Zelda sound next time your players find a magic item