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

 

[Neonchameleon]

Legolas is a fighter. He has some nature-y stuff on account of being an elf in a world where "elf" does a ton of work.

Same thing for Katniss Everdeen. She's a bow user who's good in the woods. She has high Dex, and stealth and survival proficiencies. But she doesn't do anything mystical, so she isn't a ranger.

4e, sure, they'd be rangers, because rangers were explicitly martials who focused on ranged attacks. But in 5e, if we take the definition that WotC has given us, rangers are inherently mystical. A character who's good in the woods by reason of skill and training alone is not a ranger.

And this is the problem. The definition that WotC has given us is messed up. In 1e and 2e rangers didn't get any spells before 8th level. In 3.0 and 3.5 Katniss (who is not known for insight) would have no spells before sixth level and wouldn't reach the heady heights of two spells a day until tenth level. Given the nature of many ranger spells and that she wasn't that high level this wouldn't break Katniss as a character at all.

So in 1e Katniss works as a ranger. In 2e Katniss works as a ranger. In 3.0 ... we don't talk about the 3.0 Ranger. In 3.5 Katniss works as a ranger. And in 4e Katniss works as a ranger.

I agree that Katniss does not work as a 5e ranger. And neither does Aragorn. And neither does Drizzt. This is because WotC broke the archetype. The 5e ranger is therefore not fit for purpose.

And if the 5e ranger is not fit for purpose now is the time to fix it.

The ranger class, in-game, isn't satisfying anyone because it's stretched too far, and thus it becomes too hard to pack a lot of flavor in.

This is because WotC decided to flush the characteristics of a ranger down the toilet and give us a hedge mage using the name ranger. If the class doesn't cover Aragorn and Drizzt it is because the class is doing it wrong.

And no the issue isn't "it becomes too hard to pack a lot of flavour in". It's that the ranger absolutely reeks of the flavour of "spellcaster" and that basic odour drowns out everything else. Before 5e there was just a splash of spellcaster in the ranger - but the One D&D smells more of spellcaster than the 2e and 3.5 bards did. They literally drowned the class in sauce - but a sauce that's shared with over half of all other classes.

A lack of flavour isn't the problem. An overwhelming amount of the wrong flavour is.

(For that matter the only reason the paladin didn't also get drowned in eau de caster is that it's rare that a paladin uses their first or second level slots to cast spells when low level divine smites are so good)

 

[Maxperson]

You would hope people would be doing something ridiculous at 20th level.

Even at first level you will go a minimum of 5 extra feet with a failed check and 10 to 25(assuming 16 str and proficiency) extra feet with a DC 10. So that 1st level fighter dashing will go 65-85 feet with his 30 move.

A regular lv0 Str10 commoner can jump 10 feet vertically. But only sometimes! Half the time he jumps only 5 feet straight up.

Not so. the str 10 commoner can still roll a natural 20 and the check total is how far you jump, so the commoner is moving 10 feet, possibly jumping 20 feet, landing and moving 20 feet more, and then dashing for 30. A non-proficient strength 10 commoner with a 30 move can go 80 feet with these rules.

 

[DeviousQuail]

You would hope people would be doing something ridiculous at 20th level.

A regular lv0 Str10 commoner can jump 10 feet vertically. But only sometimes! Half the time he jumps only 5 feet straight up.

Roof repair certainly got a lot easier with this edition. Everyone's been culturing their chi for that proper wuxia float.

Spoiler: High Jump Rules

High Jump. When you make a High Jump, you leap into the air a number of feet equal to 3 + your Strength modifier if you move at least 10 feet on foot immediately before the jump. When you make a standing High Jump, you can jump only half that distance. Either way, each foot you clear on the jump costs a foot of Movement. In some circumstances, your GM might allow you to make a Strength (Athletics) check to jump higher than you normally can.

You can extend your arms half your height above yourself during the jump. Thus, you can reach above you a distance equal to the height of the jump plus 1½ times your height.

A 6ft tall character with a strength score of 8 doing a standing high jump gets ((3 - 1)/2) + (6 * 1.5) = touching the rim of a basketball hoop. According to D&D I must have a strength score of around 6. That's a blow to my ego.

 

[Micah Sweet]

And this is the problem. The definition that WotC has given us is messed up. In 1e and 2e rangers didn't get any spells before 8th level. In 3.0 and 3.5 Katniss (who is not known for insight) would have no spells before sixth level and wouldn't reach the heady heights of two spells a day until tenth level. Given the nature of many ranger spells and that she wasn't that high level this wouldn't break Katniss as a character at all.

So in 1e Katniss works as a ranger. In 2e Katniss works as a ranger. In 3.0 ... we don't talk about the 3.0 Ranger. In 3.5 Katniss works as a ranger. And in 4e Katniss works as a ranger.

I agree that Katniss does not work as a 5e ranger. And neither does Aragorn. And neither does Drizzt. This is because WotC broke the archetype. The 5e ranger is therefore not fit for purpose.

And if the 5e ranger is not fit for purpose now is the time to fix it.

This is because WotC decided to flush the characteristics of a ranger down the toilet and give us a hedge mage using the name ranger. If the class doesn't cover Aragorn and Drizzt it is because the class is doing it wrong.

And no the issue isn't "it becomes too hard to pack a lot of flavour in". It's that the ranger absolutely reeks of the flavour of "spellcaster" and that basic odour drowns out everything else. Before 5e there was just a splash of spellcaster in the ranger - but the One D&D smells more of spellcaster than the 2e and 3.5 bards did. They literally drowned the class in sauce - but a sauce that's shared with over half of all other classes.

A lack of flavour isn't the problem. An overwhelming amount of the wrong flavour is.

(For that matter the only reason the paladin didn't also get drowned in eau de caster is that it's rare that a paladin uses their first or second level slots to cast spells when low level divine smites are so good)

You know, if they change the way smites work (which is entirely possible, as many think they are too good), you could easily end up with the same thematic issue with paladin that we currently have with ranger.

 

[Minigiant]

And that's just level 1. The newer rangers are just objectively better in how usable their features are and in pure numbers. How in the world did they become "less desirable" to you?

Because they stripped out all the flavor to power it up.

They should have Fixed the 2014 ranger features and spells instead of just converting it all to Hunters Mark, Barkskin 2.0, and Invisibility.

 

[TwoSix]

Even at first level you will go a minimum of 5 extra feet with a failed check and 10 to 25(assuming 16 str and proficiency) extra feet with a DC 10. So that 1st level fighter dashing will go 65-85 feet with his 30 move.

Not so. the str 10 commoner can still roll a natural 20 and the check total is how far you jump, so the commoner is moving 10 feet, possibly jumping 20 feet, landing and moving 20 feet more, and then dashing for 30. A non-proficient strength 10 commoner with a 30 move can go 80 feet with these rules.

I'm unclear how the commoner is getting two actions. Jump is an action, and so is Dash. Even with a nat 20 check, the commoner moves 10', takes their Jump action to move 20' more in the air, and then moves the final 20' of their movement rate. They don't have another action available to Dash.

 

[gorice]

With the new exhaustion rules, I feel some are going to come up with a house rule that dropping to 0 HP and then recovering from that, gives you 1 level of exhaustion.

Funnily enough, I'd already though about giving it a try. The exhaustion rules are a clear winner out of this UA, for me at least.

 

[Neonchameleon]

You know, if they change the way smites work (which is entirely possible, as many think they are too good), you could easily end up with the same thematic issue with paladin that we currently have with ranger.

I know. On the other hand it shows us a way out of the thematic mess that's the current ranger without too much in the way of overhauls. You need some sort of useful spell sink and Hunter's Mark is too efficient.

Of course by making the Ranger a "Spells prepared" class WotC means that rangers are going to spend far more time fiddling with their spells, making the whole situation worse.

 

[Maxperson]

I'm unclear how the commoner is getting two actions. Jump is an action, and so is Dash. Even with a nat 20 check, the commoner moves 10', takes their Jump action to move 20' more in the air, and then moves the final 20' of their movement rate. They don't have another action available to Dash.

Ahh. Forgot dash was an action. The commoner can move 30 and jump 20. Okay. That makes more sense. Thanks for the clarification. The fighter can move 30 and jump 30.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I'm unclear how the commoner is getting two actions. Jump is an action, and so is Dash. Even with a nat 20 check, the commoner moves 10', takes their Jump action to move 20' more in the air, and then moves the final 20' of their movement rate. They don't have another action available to Dash.

I think people are forgeting they made jump cost your action