D&D (2024) One D&D Expert Classes Playtest Document Is Live

The One D&D Expert Class playest document is now available to download. You can access it by signing into your D&D Beyond account at the link below. It contains three classes -- bard, rogue, and ranger, along with three associated subclasses (College of Lore, Thief, and Hunter), plus a number of feats.

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

 

[DEFCON 1]

The Exhaustion table for me became fine by just rearranging the order of the penalties.

The new rules for it seem okay, but I dunno if I'd stop using my rearranged table over these new rules should they get implemented.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

re: The Bard

It looks much the same as before, which is to say, I hate it. A jack of all trades who also has expertise, buffs their allies, and can cast any 9th level spell? Aside from the complete lack of spotlight balance, there's no coherent character concept here.

Also, it seems like WotC is really doubling down on having a bunch of fiddly little widgets to track. Spell slots, uses per day equal to proficiency, bleh. I hate it.

Seems as if they indeed don't change too much. In the case of the bard, I am rather positive, although bardic inspiration is rarer at lower levels in general.

 

[Micah Sweet]

There are some creative class abilities in this packet (Rover! Elusive!) that are very welcome.

But why oh why do they keep forcing mundane class abilities into the spellcasting framework? This just makes it harder to develop classes for low-magic settings or classes with unique mechanics that have an impact on how they feel during play.

For example, it would be so easy to say something like "If you are able to study an opponent for 1 round before engaging in combat, you gain the benefit of the Hunter's Mark spell against that opponent. You do not need to maintain concentration. You can use this ability prof bonus times per day."

I'm also slightly disappointed that they seem to be bending over backwards to make sure that abilities are as "easy" to use as possible. Bardic inspiration is a reaction now. But it felt interesting and appropriate when the bard could take a bonus action to give a physical die to another player--like they are actually taking the time to give a pep talk, a short song, or a witty remark instead of just shouting "Duck!" "Heal!" "Get 'em!" during combat all the time.

I think its pretty clear that WotC has no vested interest in making it easier for DMs to design their own rules. Use their rules as you see fit, sure, but use  their rules. These folks have books to sell.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Can we drop the Crawford minutia? This is a mostly positive packet, let's take joy in that.

Yeah I’d say the classes are 60% positive and the feats are 40% positive. Glossary is 80% tho, if not more.

I’d rather play a 2014 Rogue, especially Thief, but I’d rather play a ODND UA Ranger. Bard I’m nearly even on.

 

[DEFCON 1]

The thing I like the best from the packet is that it seems like the variant rule of "alternative ability scores" for skill checks is now going to be the main rule. So no longer are proficiencies tied to ability score, they can be used whenever they apply.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

Yeah, I'm not sure I understand why they changed the Hunter. It was pretty good (on a pretty bad class, though). Now they have that weird Conjure Barrage features that's kinda bad for melee rangers, no?

I'd also like if they gave some not-overtly smite spells for the (downcastable) for the melee rangers, as an option,

 

[Sacrosanct]

[URL='https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford']Jeremy Crawford
[/URL]
@JeremyECrawford

Replying to
@XXXXXXXX
Alternate features for multiple classes are still a possibility, but we want to do more research before we invest time in them. We don’t want our design to chase phantoms but real desires held by a large number of players.


7:47 PM · Jul 28, 2018·Twitter for iPhone

I'm not going to beat you up on this because several others have already pointed the flaw out in this. I just wanted to say I hope you understand that before going around personally attacking designers, that you step back and understand that maybe you've misinterpreted something, and it's better to avoid insulting people in general.

Fatigue/Exhaustion was always meaningless, because the first level was such a strong effect, that nothing besides Berserker ever ended up using the mechanic. Making it less punishing and not require a separate table look-up should make it possible for it to come up more.

I'm not following this. Exhaustion isn't something that is only a choice berserkers make. It's an effect that could come up during the exploration pillar of the game fairly often if the PCs don't make preparations or run into scenarios where every PC, regardless of class, needs to decide to push on and get exhaustion, or hold back and risk the mission.

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

I'm not following this. Exhaustion isn't something that is only a choice berserkers make. It's an effect that could come up during the exploration pillar of the game fairly often if the PCs don't make preparations or run into scenarios where every PC, regardless of class, needs to decide to push on and get exhaustion, or hold back and risk the mission.

Go have a look at the exploration rules. Our DnD people can go for days without food, water or sleep with ease. And we have multiple easy spells (or even Outlander as a free background) that just... remove any need to interact with even those rules.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

They don't want to as it will confirm they got the entire class wrong. They have a huge ego, especially Crawford

At least they have access to market research and put out a game with millions of players.
I can say: at my tables we had quite a few rangers and all players were rather happy. In the beginning our ranger wanted cantrips and prepared spells so switched to druid. He would be pleased now.
I am happy since tasha, but I like the new version generally better.

 

[Bill Zebub]

It doesn't seem that WoTC doesn't read the previous critiques when they presented alternatives to the ranger class.

Or maybe they did but they have access to a lot more information than you do.