D&D (2024) New One D&D Playtest Document: 77 Pages, 7 Classes, & More!

There's a brand new playtest document for the new (version/edition/update) of Dungeons of Dragons available for download! This one is an enormous 77 pages and includes classes, spells, feats, and weapons.

Unearthed Arcana Playtest

Unearthed Arcana Playtest Materials Get Unearthed Arcana playtest content, try it out in your game, and provide feedback! Check back regularly for ...

www.dndbeyond.com

In this new Unearthed Arcana document for the 2024 Core Rulebooks, we explore material designed for the next version of the Player’s Handbook. This playtest document presents updated rules on seven classes: Bard, Cleric, Druid, Monk, Paladin, Ranger, and Rogue. This document also presents multiple subclasses for each of those classes, new Spells, revisions to existing Spells and Spell Lists, and several revised Feats. You will also find an updated rules glossary that supercedes the glossary of any previous playtest document.

​

 

[Veltharis ap Rylix]

They're traditionally depicted as being... cartoonishly stupid to the point that no, they should already be dead. D&D's weird attitude toward the intelligent species you're meant to rob and kill puts them somewhere south of chimps in terms of intelect and combat skill. And living in conditions where is is impossible that they're forging metal or practicing with weapons more complicated than bonk sticks. A trained soldier using combat techniques would have a field day.

Depends on the setting.

Goblinoids in Eberron are the descendants of an ancient continent-spanning empire whose martial prowess is spoken of in legend, whose civilization went into a long, slow decline after barely surviving a protracted planar incursion from the setting equivalent of the Far Realm, and who were then subjugated and/or driven from their lands by human colonizers from across the seas.

Goblinoids (as a whole) aren't stupid, they're one of the primary indigenous populations of Khorvaire living in and around the society created by (and largely for) those who conquered their homeland, with all the political and social messiness that entails.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Well, not much, but you'd still have to be pretty good at that tactic to pull it off against them!

I feel that's where being a fighter comes in.

Yeah, I've never bought that line of thinking. I mean, I'm fine with them being somewhat comedic, but when the chips are down, they ought to be pretty dangerous.

But then, I've never had goblins (or orcs for that matter) all be evil, either. Or all be any one thing at all.


I suppose. I guess I've studied enough history to have a lot of respect for (ahem) "primitive" peoples. I guess I've always seen that sort of thing as lies told by their enemies. (Including PCs). It's how the Bard tells the tale, not what actually happened.

I'm there with you on not depicting sapient species this way, but if arguing from the D&D perspective, I'm going to use D&D's 'drunk uncle no one invites to anything' perspective.

 

[TwoSix]

Im more interested in solutions then in people repeating problems without solutions. Its like weve been stuck on the same episode for 50 years and instead of finding a way out we just ignore solutions to instead repeat the problem.

And to be specific, I'm interested in novel solutions I can implement at my table, not changes you think WotC should put in their next book. I'd much rather see your homebrew bard than a list of things WotC did wrong with the bard in the latest playtest, because I can actually use your homebrew bard.

 

[Gradine]

I guess it depends on how one looks at it.

I mean, 5E does have it-- we have dual-wielding (which allows for rapier and dagger), we also even have a feat that grants you additional defense while wielding the off-hand dagger (the Dual-Wielder feat that grants the +1 AC). So if anyone wants to emulate the real-life fencing of yore, it's there for them in a form and fashion.

Now granted... from a game perspective we don't ever actually see it, because the game has determined a dagger only does 1d4 damage and shortsword does 1d6. Thus for the game itself no one ever just uses a dagger because there's no mechanical reason to do so over using a shortsword in the off-hand instead. But whether or not that is the game's fault for not allowing the dagger to do the same damage as a shortsword comes down to how defined "narratively" people want the game to be.

The game could just tell us that when dual-wielding, your damage die with the offhand weapon is 1d6-- and allow all players to describe them themselves whatever it is they want the weapon to be. That would be the way we would see the traditional "real world" pairing of rapier and dagger / main gauche. Gamma World 4E did that-- the game would define a weapon that requires two hands as doing 1d12 damage (I think) and it let the player decide what type it was... whether it was a greatsword, a sledgehammer, a stop sign, a chainsaw or anything else they could think of.

But is that what most people want for D&D? Blank slates of mechanics that are not defined and rely on the participants to tell us what they represent? Maybe not. Which means all that's left is for individual tables to decide to allow that for this particular PC who is fighting rapier / main-gauche that THEIR main-gauche does 1d6 damage (because it's mechanically using the shortsword, even though it's being described and called a main-gauche.) At some point... isn't that enough? Does the game itself have to to make that call for you or can you just make that call on your own?

To be fair you can't huck a shortsword at some jerk who's just over there

 

[FitzTheRuke]

To be fair you can't huck a shortsword at some jerk who's just over there

I mean, you can, but the expectation would be that you use the rather terrible "improvised weapon" rules. Edit: I'm not saying the rules are terrible, I'm saying you'd be relatively terrible at doing it. (Without a feat).

 

[Gradine]

I mean, you can, but the expectation would be that you use the rather terrible "improvised weapon" rules. Edit: I'm not saying the rules are terrible, I'm saying you'd be relatively terrible at doing it. (Without a feat).

Actually reviewing the relevant rules, it appears that if you had the Tavern Brawler feat then a thrown shortsword is functionally identical to a thrown dagger.

 

[Shardstone]

And to be specific, I'm interested in novel solutions I can implement at my table, not changes you think WotC should put in their next book. I'd much rather see your homebrew bard than a list of things WotC did wrong with the bard in the latest playtest, because I can actually use your homebrew bard.

We're on the same page! Yay, whooo, yeah!

 

[TwoSix]

We're on the same page! Yay, whooo, yeah!

Two down, many thousands to go.

 

[Shardstone]

Very briefly, being able to take the additional time to change the game and find people willing to deal with your personal homebrew is a luxury that tends to get harder and harder to access over time. The older you get, the more precious your hours become, especially now that the internet gives us so many additional things to be doing with our time.

Tbh, maybe I'm just not old enough, but I don't get this experience. I have a pretty large pool of people I could tap to make a game happen, both veterans and people who haven't played but have vocalized interest. And I also do work full time at the ol' 9-5, so I get the burnout and everything that comes with ending the day. But...idk. I've never had a problem finding people willing to play and willing to get a lil' freaky with the rules. Unironically sorry that's the case for you man, hope you find your group too.

 

[Marandahir]

If I have twenty options that all appeal to me, they are overwhelming to the point where I choose none, then I have no real options.

When I have four options that all appeal to me and I can process and bring myself to buy, I then have four options.

Four is more than none.

3.5 hosing the market with splat was not good for users, or for the company. Producing a rational amount of material at a steady pace is good for both.

It's not just that. The market was hosed, but they also hosed it in such a way that gave birth to oggles of competitors that they were hosing just to keep up with the output.

5e is more confident to peddle along with 3-7 releases a year (including special edition reprints, recompliations, etc), while taking in the paycheck from the DM's Guild sails. Same OGL, different implementation.

4e and 2e both tried to tighten their grips allowing more systems to slip out of their fingers. 2024 5e MIGHT have done that had they not had a radical jerk back and scratch out of said revised OGL. But in any case, even for someone who BOUGHT all the 3.5e and 4e splat, I was then hosed in options on what to make with it all.