Release Dates for the 2024 Updated Core Rulebooks

[DragonEyeSeeker]

No they are not.
No, they are not.

Xanathar's had a useful variation on encounter balancing (by CR and creature number) did you try that? A number of folks I play with like it better than the encounter values from the Basic Rules / DMG.

Compared to 4E, a lot of 5E monster designs and encounter balance is less than ideal. Based on what I have heard from the design team, they are improving both of these aspects for the new non-edition.

Which beg the question of why anyone should pay another 60 bucks for this it's-totally-the-same-edition MM.

I honestly can't wait for the WotC folks to finally go "actually you need to buy the new MM to play."

At least this non-new-edition will have different fairly stat blocks and vibes compared to the differences between the 3.0 to 3.5 Monster Manuals.

This made me smile out loud. Silly as it is, it's also true. People these days are accustomed to getting everything they want at once, and when it doesn't happen, they get all mad about it. Like, wtf? Why?

I think most people would have been fine with a staggered release over three months. A staggered release over 5 months is a very different prospect. I do not believe it is weird to ask why the release is occurring over such a long period of time.

[Psyren]

Well, there was a highly disruptive global pandemic since 2014 too. I think a 2 month extension between the first release and the last one is reasonable.

[Unoriginal]

Compared to 4E, a lot of 5E monster designs and encounter balance is less than ideal.

4e famously had botched monster designs and encounter balance for years.

"Padded Sumo gameplay" was a common criticism.

I doubt even most of the people who like 4e would describe those two areas as "ideal".

[ZRN]

I think most people would have been fine with a staggered release over three months. A staggered release over 5 months is a very different prospect. I do not believe it is weird to ask why the release is occurring over such a long period of time.

The "why" is pretty straightforward, isn't it? They can't finish the MM until late February and they want to get the other books out before Christmas.

[Oramac]

I think most people would have been fine with a staggered release over three months. A staggered release over 5 months is a very different prospect. I do not believe it is weird to ask why the release is occurring over such a long period of time.

Yup. This.

The "why" is pretty straightforward, isn't it? They can't finish the MM until late February and they want to get the other books out before Christmas.

So push the PHB and DMG back by one month each. Problem solved. (They can't do that now, obviously, but had they announced them that way we'd never know the difference and wouldn't be having this conversation)

[Unoriginal]

So push the PHB and DMG back by one month each. Problem solved. (They can't do that now, obviously, but had they announced them that way we'd never know the difference and wouldn't be having this conversation)

We wouldn't know, but their bank accounts would.

Which they favor is well known.

[Inquisitor]

Until then. We get to make due with a 1-13 adventure and an attempt at a 10-20 adventure multiverse-style.

https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1660...-book-releases

I'm happy to see the 10-20 level play though. There's been precious little of that over the course of 5e. If it gets good reviews I'll be buying and seeing what my group can do about Vecna.

[DragonEyeSeeker]

Did anyone else notice a lack of a new starter set in the release schedule?

• Descent into the Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth – March 2024
• Vecna: Eve of Ruin – May 21, 2024
• The Making of Original Dungeons and Dragons: 1970-1976 – June 18, 2024
• Quests from the Infinite Staircase – July 16, 2024
• 2024 Player’s Handbook – September 17, 2024
• 2024 Dungeon Master’s Guide – November 12, 2024
• 2024 Monster Manual – February 18, 2025

Spoiler: Side Discussion about CR, different edtions, etc

Show

4e famously had botched monster designs and encounter balance for years.

"Padded Sumo gameplay" was a common criticism.

I doubt even most of the people who like 4e would describe those two areas as "ideal".

It depends on what you are going for. As someone who played & DMed a lot of 3E and PF1E, the fact that not every combat was resolved in the first round of "Rocket Tag" was a bit of a selling point.

Regardless of the combat numbers being absolutely correct or not, I was more thinking of the way monsters were designed in 4E to be interesting game pieces. The average monster in D&D lasts just a few rounds in combat. Having them make bold & impactful moves on the battlefield is - to me & my wargaming nature - more fun than a lot of 3E and 5E monsters whose abilities amount to "roll xd20, end turn."

This is why I am a fan of third party monsters, from places like Kobold Press and MCDM. Your interest & mileage will, of course, vary.

One thing I did love about 4E CR. It was simple and correct in a way that 3E's and 5E's design simply is not. This is one reason why I am pretty excited for the new non-edition. Perkins and Crawford have talked about how the CR system is a lot better now. Also, their monster design in the Monsters of the Multiverse book is noticeably more interesting & fun (at least for how I approach the game (your mileage may vary)).

The "why" is pretty straightforward, isn't it? They can't finish the MM until late February and they want to get the other books out before Christmas.

I am not sure that their inability to finish the book is necessarily the core reason (we have no real idea, so let's do some conjecturing...). December is largely a lost cause for releasing new things. You want your products out in November, when people start buying for the holidays. So December is off the menu. January can be a tricky month. If we look at Magic's Standard sets, they used to release a set in the middle of January but now release them in mid-February instead. I wonder if they have data that shows February is a better buying month than January? This trend largely continues for D&D, this trend holds true, with the only new product released in January being the Dungeons & Dragons Rules Expansion Gift Set (which was the first printing of the Monsters of the Multiverse book). However, this was a mistake as the bundle was supposed to have shipped in early December.

Looking at 5's books, only two have actually dropped in December - the DMG and the mega ultimate flop that was Dragonlance: Shadow of the Dragon Queen (whose notably terrible sales actually helped kill the Dragonlance TV show).

So in December and January are off the menu, then February is the earliest you can do, unless you release the book much earlier in the fall.

Part of me also kind of feels like the team arbitrarily tying the rules revamp to the 50th anniversary is tying their hands some. If the product is truly not ready, then they should all be delayed until they are ready to go. Sadly, corporate executives would disagree with me

[animewatcha]

When the revised PB drops and with WOTC's inevitable bungling with the classes, Would discussion about combining class features from it, Tasha, and the 2014 one for each class belong in this forum or in the Homebrew section of the forums with appropriate title tag/marker?

[prototype00]

When the revised PB drops and with WOTC's inevitable bungling with the classes, Would discussion about combining class features from it, Tasha, and the 2014 one for each class belong in this forum or in the Homebrew section of the forums with appropriate title tag/marker?

That certainly sounds like homebrewing the newly released classes to your satisfaction.

I’m just glad they made quite good on the monk and seemingly the warlock.

[Envyus]

When the revised PB drops and with WOTC's inevitable bungling with the classes, Would discussion about combining class features from it, Tasha, and the 2014 one for each class belong in this forum or in the Homebrew section of the forums with appropriate title tag/marker?

Stuff looks better than it originally did. So bungling is a little strong a word

[Oramac]

I'm happy to see the 10-20 level play though. There's been precious little of that over the course of 5e. If it gets good reviews I'll be buying and seeing what my group can do about Vecna.

Agreed. As someone who prefers running high level games, I'm already planning to buy the Vecna adventure. I'd love to see more high level stuff from WOTC, especially if the new (ish) monster design and DMG revamp make it easier to plan.

[Psyren]

Stuff looks better than it originally did. So bungling is a little strong a word

We only allow hate around here, didn't you get the memo

So push the PHB and DMG back by one month each. Problem solved. (They can't do that now, obviously, but had they announced them that way we'd never know the difference and wouldn't be having this conversation)

What "problem" would that "solve?" The MM would still be next year, but we'd all have to wait longer for the PHB... why?

[Blatant Beast]

[/QUOTE=Psyren;25963533]We only allow hate around here, didn't you get the memo/QUOTE]

We all know that eventually a three book, combo package will be available. It is not that unreasonable for a consumer to want the revised design kit all at once, and not separated by months of time.

The staggered release schedule might benefit WotC, but that does not automatically mean that is also the best means to showcase the product and satisfy the fan base.

For myself, it probably means waiting until all the books are released before purchasing, and frankly if I am going to wait 6 months to buy the books, then I might as well wait a year, and buy lightly worn used books for a fraction of the price, because some of the revised books will be available for used books prices by then. Of course, if I am waiting 5 months or a year to buy, perhaps I just skip the purchase, all together.

[titi]

[/QUOTE=Psyren;25963533]We only allow hate around here, didn't you get the memo/QUOTE]

We all know that eventually a three book, combo package will be available. It is not that unreasonable for a consumer to want the revised design kit all at once, and not separated by months of time.

The staggered release schedule might benefit WotC, but that does not automatically mean that is also the best means to showcase the product and satisfy the fan base.

For myself, it probably means waiting until all the books are released before purchasing, and frankly if I am going to wait 6 months to buy the books, then I might as well wait a year, and buy lightly worn used books for a fraction of the price, because some of the revised books will be available for used books prices by then. Of course, if I am waiting 5 months or a year to buy, perhaps I just skip the purchase, all together.

So for you what would be the difference if all books arrived at once in 6 months ? You'd still have to wait, which you said is enough reason for you to want to buy used books

[Psyren]

We all know that eventually a three book, combo package will be available. It is not that unreasonable for a consumer to want the revised design kit all at once, and not separated by months of time.

The staggered release schedule might benefit WotC, but that does not automatically mean that is also the best means to showcase the product and satisfy the fan base.

Well the MM won't be ready until 2025, so to get them all at once would mean they'd all have to wait until 2025. The staggered release schedule benefits me, because it means I won't have to wait until 2025 for the PHB. The "fan base" is not a monolith.

For myself, it probably means waiting until all the books are released before purchasing, and frankly if I am going to wait 6 months to buy the books, then I might as well wait a year, and buy lightly worn used books for a fraction of the price, because some of the revised books will be available for used books prices by then. Of course, if I am waiting 5 months or a year to buy, perhaps I just skip the purchase, all together.

Okay? That's your prerogative, and always was. Is this supposed to convince me a staggered release is somehow bad?

[Arkhios]

I think most people would have been fine with a staggered release over three months. A staggered release over 5 months is a very different prospect. I do not believe it is weird to ask why the release is occurring over such a long period of time.

Well, it takes time to finish a book. And they're revising three, for crying out loud. I'm sure they don't want to release them unfinished, or rather, unpolished (again), any more than we do. It's been too common lately. Just look at how several highly anticipated games turned out at the time of release (Starfield, Cyberpunk 2077, or, you know, 2014 PHB, DMG, or MM); playable, to be fair, but flawed. As the OneD&D undertaking proves.

Besides, you know the saying "The Rome wasn't built in a day", right? Chill, give them all the time they need to get it right. It's not like we're in a hurry. If they can manage the PHB revision within the game's 50th anniversary year, that's good enough.

[KorvinStarmast]

I'm sure they don't want to release them unfinished, or rather, unpolished (again), any more than we do.

But they probably will, based on what they have been putting out since around the time that Tasha's came out. The QC effort has been noteworthy in its general absence.

With that complaint registered, I liked the Fizban's book.

[Arkhios]

But they probably will, based on what they have been putting out since around the time that Tasha's came out. The QC effort has been noteworthy in its general absence.

Now that's straight old cynicism if I ever saw one. You know, a little bit of optimism won't kill you.

[Psyren]

They probably will release with errors and need errata. The Pathfinder 2e Remaster needed errata on day one of release too.

[DragonEyeSeeker]

I cannot imagine WotC releasing a book without the need for errata and FAQs. The game is too complex for there not to be, honestly.

[Mindflayer_Inc]

The PHB coming out in September is much later than I expected, I was convinced it was going to be ready by at least by GenCon, if not earlier. I suppose the leaked release date in May was way too early, given the fact that we are still in the middle of play testing. They are probably banking more on the holidays than high school and college students being free during the summer. I would have assumed the Monster Manual would come before the DMG. My guess is that they are very proud of their new DMG (which Chris Perkins has alluded to in several interviews) and want to get it out the door ASAP, which means it will be probably be a great product (unlike the current, much maligned, DMG). I do find it fascinating that they will not have a Gift Bundle ready to go for Christmas. That seems like a big misstep on their part (IMO).

I just realized the PHB and DMG are two months apart but the Monster Manual is coming a full three months after the DMG, which means it will take five full months for all three books to come out. That is a really stretched out time line. I wonder if abandoning Penguin plays a part in the length between the three releases?

What a colossal screw up to not have everything released in 2024. Guess that might be why they won't call if D&D 5e:2024 or whatever.

I feel like the less needed book is the DMG as the 5e DMG should suffice... Well, honestly, just wing it before reading that but still, the point stands. They should have released the PHB and the MM closer together and then let pre-fab adventures bridge the gap.

Staggered releases are generally favored for D&D book releases because retailers do not like "going all in" on three really expensive books at the exact same time. Staggering the releases eases the financial burden on retailers (especially FLGSs). Having said that, their print schedule for the the core three books has been all over the place with every edition.

A fix to this would be to release the monster manual in parts (based on monster groups or whatever) and sell them as paperbacks. Could even make them look like an adventurer's book (Ranger or Druid?) that has badly drawn (on purpose) art. Like a Ranger was running away from a beast and was drawing it when they got to a sage spot. They're shaky so the owlbear looks a bit more like a owlblob with a human face.

[KorvinStarmast]

Now that's straight old cynicism if I ever saw one. You know, a little bit of optimism won't kill you.

Sorry, WotC has expended whatever good will they once had with me. This play test clown show has been an enormous let down. I was so optimistic when it began and that's all gone.

[Mindflayer_Inc]

Sorry, WotC has expended whatever good will they once had with me. This play test clown show has been an enormous let down. I was so optimistic when it began and that's all gone.

I feel ya, the bar was so dang low and yet I was still disappointed.

[Arkhios]

Errata is standard issue for minor errors, such as missing or erroneous details and mistakes in editing etc. That's normal. People make mistakes. It's basically same as patching a videogame's bugs, not an entire overhaul nor equivalent to a new expansion or edition of a game.

So, yeah. Even I don't expect it to be entirely free of errors like that, as in not needing an errata or two, but I am expecting to see a bit more thoroughly edited and more polished products than in 2014. As far as I recall, that was the whole point of this project. 2024 marking D&D's 50th Anniversary only gave them a good excuse to do it now.


The content itself is another issue, whether it is what we wanted or not. The final quality of the content is the point here. We may agree or disagree with their decisions, but that's not the point.

[stoutstien]

What I don't get is why they aren't releasing the DMG first. Sure it won't sell nearly as the same volume as the PHB but hopefully they learned *something* from 5e and aren't planning to ad hoc it after they have already started kicking out material.

Theoretically the DMG would showcase the actual system design changes that would be in the PHB/MM and proved (coherent) support for actually running the system.
That is needed *before* people picking apart the player facing content because once they are intrenched you are having to unteach before you do anything else.

[Oramac]

What I don't get is why they aren't releasing the DMG first. Sure it won't sell nearly as the same volume as the PHB but hopefully they learned *something* from 5e and aren't planning to ad hoc it after they have already started kicking out material.

I get releasing the PHB first, but I agree that the DMG should be much sooner after that. Or, ideally, release the PHB and DMG at the same time, then wait 3 ish months for the MM. That way both DMs and players have what they truly NEED to play the game, since the PHB has some monsters in it already, and the DMG has the DM stuff. Then the MM later just adds more options for the DM.

[Mindflayer_Inc]

Errata is standard issue for minor errors, such as missing or erroneous details and mistakes in editing etc. That's normal. People make mistakes. It's basically same as patching a videogame's bugs, not an entire overhaul nor equivalent to a new expansion or edition of a game.

So, yeah. Even I don't expect it to be entirely free of errors like that, as in not needing an errata or two, but I am expecting to see a bit more thoroughly edited and more polished products than in 2014. As far as I recall, that was the whole point of this project. 2024 marking D&D's 50th Anniversary only gave them a good excuse to do it now.


The content itself is another issue, whether it is what we wanted or not. The final quality of the content is the point here. We may agree or disagree with their decisions, but that's not the point.

Errata for "oh we meant this" or "oh we should have meant this" is the only acceptable errata for a product w/ this much money backing it.

Errata for stuff a spell check or simple editing? No. That's 100% unacceptable for a product of this cost.

[Unoriginal]

What I don't get is why they aren't releasing the DMG first. Sure it won't sell nearly as the same volume as the PHB but hopefully they learned *something* from 5e and aren't planning to ad hoc it after they have already started kicking out material.

Theoretically the DMG would showcase the actual system design changes that would be in the PHB/MM and proved (coherent) support for actually running the system.
That is needed *before* people picking apart the player facing content because once they are intrenched you are having to unteach before you do anything else.

The PHB coming first is normal, as it is the "one book you need to play".

The DMG coming before the MM has always been weird to me, though.

[Hael]

The PHB coming first is normal, as it is the "one book you need to play".

The DMG coming before the MM has always been weird to me, though.

Having done this several times now, the staggered release was never ideal. From a publishing and profit point of view, I understand why its necessary, but every single time it creates confusion and growing pains.

For people buying the books. I highly recommend holding off for a year as that first printing invariably changes as errata and inconsistencies in the core books are ironed out.