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

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

If they want to test 48 subclasses, all the classes, and everything else they mentioned AND correct errors and things people don't like, they will need to pick up the pace of UA releases considerably.

Agreed, but I do seem to continue forgetting that D&D '24 is still probably more 18 months away.

 

[Parmandur]

Agreed, but I do seem to continue forgetting that D&D '24 is still probably more 18 months away.

It could be upwards of 24 months away, based on when in the year prior Editions published.

Given the roadmap in the latest packet and the time frame suggested by Crawford when the whole thing began (a year to a year and a half from the Presents announcement), they certainly seem to have enough time based on prior UA release cadences.

 

[DEFCON 1]

For me at least, the problem isn't in having multiples of the same party. The problem is that having magic can sometimes feel too fantastic unless the DM also does the worldbuilding necessary to support the magic. And also low-magic worlds are grittier without having to make them dark or mess around with long rests.

Then that's a DM issue, not a game design one.

If you're stuck playing a game with a lot of magic or it being "less gritty" because that's what the DM wants to run or what the other players want to play... it isn't on WotC to change all their rules so as to make it harder for that DM and players to do so. You might just have to make some hard choices yourself about the games and tables you are choosing to sit at.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Then that's a DM issue, not a game design one.

If you're stuck playing a game with a lot of magic or it being "less gritty" because that's what the DM wants to run or what the other players want to play... it isn't on WotC to change all their rules so as to make it harder for that DM and players to do so. You might just have to make some hard choices yourself about the games and tables you are choosing to sit at.

The default game has "a lot of magic". Not playing with a lot of magic is an active change.

 

[DEFCON 1]

The default game has "a lot of magic". Not playing with a lot of magic is an active change.

And if the DM and table want to play with less magic... it's perfectly easy to just select those options in the game that use less magic.

But here's I think the real issue-- the people who say they want "less magic" in their D&D are probably playing at tables where the others in the group really don't give a rat's ass. So while that one person wishes for a "more gritty, less magical" game... their fellow players take Wizards, Warlocks, Clerics, Druids, and the subclasses of Fighters, Rogues, and Barbarians that use magic, and the DM just throws out NPCs and monsters that use magic cause they just don't have a problem with it.

But that's not WotC's problem to fix. That's the table coming to a consensus on the game they want to play.

If (generic) you can't get a game together that is actually "more gritty" and uses "less magic"... either because you personally do not wish to put in the time and effort to cherry pick the rules in the game to use to accomplish that, or because none of the other players at the table want to go along with it... that's (generic) your issue, and not an issue WotC needs to design their rules around.

Especially if they've determined that the "low-magic" contingent is an exceedingly small number of the D&D playerbase.

 

[Maxperson]

Agreed, but I do seem to continue forgetting that D&D '24 is still probably more 18 months away.

Yep, but they're going to need around half a year of that to finalize the order of things in the books, correct spelling and grammatical errors, send the final layout to the printers, get the run printed and then get it to stores.

 

[darjr]

If the PHB keeps selling like it is now they have a lot of room yet. Enough time to really experiment if they want.

 

[Minigiant]

If the PHB keeps selling like it is now they have a lot of room yet. Enough time to really experiment if they want.

Well the last time they stopped the playtest ~6-8 months before release and a bunch of stuff didn't get properly playtest out of house.

 

[Faolyn]

Then that's a DM issue, not a game design one.

If you're stuck playing a game with a lot of magic or it being "less gritty" because that's what the DM wants to run or what the other players want to play... it isn't on WotC to change all their rules so as to make it harder for that DM and players to do so. You might just have to make some hard choices yourself about the games and tables you are choosing to sit at.

It kind of is a game design issue. As @Micah Sweet says, the game assumes a lot of magic--a large number of races have built-in magic, there are far more magical classes than nonmagical, and even nonmagical classes have lots of magical options. And that's without magic items.

As a side note, you mention monks... but monks are inherently magical--ki--and the vast majority of monk archetypes are overtly magical. And a large number of barbarian, fighter, and even rogue archetypes are magical as well. There are really only three barbarian archetypes (out of 8), five nonmagical fighter archetypes (out of 10), and six rogue archetypes (out of 9) that are truly nonmagical

Which isn't bad, just not to the tastes of a lot of people. (And is another good reason to plug Level Up, since it has seven nonmagical classes and most of those archetypes aren't magical, either.)

 

[Parmandur]

Yep, but they're going to need around half a year of that to finalize the order of things in the books, correct spelling and grammatical errors, send the final layout to the printers, get the run printed and then get it to stores.

Sure, which is why they expect the pkaytest to run up to 18 months from the start thisnpast August, but that includes a half year of flex time: their base roadmap isnto get everything outlined in Packet 2 out within the year.