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

 

[Olrox17]

And that UA failed.

Actually, no. My apologies, I misguided you by saying it was an UA, but it wasn't.
It was an article on the official D&D site, aimed to DMs, to help them create home-brew class variants. It pre-dates the UA series. The spell-less ranger was the example they provided as a class variant. It gave up spells, and in exchange received the battlemaster's combat superiority dice and the ability to craft healing poultices and natural antivenom. Afaik, they never made a survey about it.

Edit: It can't be found on the official site anymore, but I managed to find a copy. It's a 2015 article by
Rodney Thompson.

 

[Faolyn]

Apparently quite a lot actually.

Aaand you're ignoring everything else I wrote.

Plus, the spell doesn't say that they give totally accurate, intelligent, useful descriptions.

"Hey plant, did anything come near you last night?"

"Yes! 1 moving thing!"

"What sort of moving thing?"

"Moving thing that didn't eat me."

"How big was it?"

"Big!"

(plant is a dandelion)

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Actually, no. My apologies, I misguided you by saying it was an UA, but it wasn't.
It was an article on the official D&D site, aimed to DMs, to help them create home-brew class variants. It pre-dates the UA series. The spell-less ranger was the example they provided as a class variant. It gave up spells, and in exchange received the battlemaster's combat superiority dice and the ability to craft healing poultices and natural antivenom. Afaik, they never made a survey about it.

Edit: It can't be found on the official site anymore, but I managed to find a copy. It's a 2015 article by
Rodney Thompson.

Regardless, it never turned into anything meaningful.

There has never been enough demand to justify doing anything more serious with it.

 

[Olrox17]

Regardless, it never turned into anything meaningful.

Correct. It was probably never meant to, considering that the article merely presented it as good example on how to do a home-brew.

There has never been enough demand to justify doing anything more serious with it.

That, I don't know. I would like to know your sources, if you do.

Edit: I think doctorbadwolf just put me on ignore? I can no longer see their posts, not even the quotes I put in mine. If that is the case, I'm surprised. I think we were having an extremely normal conversation.

 

[Faolyn]

Hardly. The difference between the two is massive.
Now, I’ll grant that the spell progression of half casters is not great, but frankly that’s only an argument for more spell exclusivity, not for ditching Spellcasting.

Except that I referenced the half-caster spell progression--since I looked at the ranger's spell list at the time--and used the wrong name for it.

"More spell exclusivity" isn't helpful when you can't actually get the spells you apparently need to have in order to be a ranger until much higher level, but at the same time, have no non-magical abilities to make up for that lack.

Aaaand ignored. Oh well.

 

[Faolyn]

Pretty much, yeah. And his luck means he constantly stumbles (and it really is stumbling a lot of the time, no real intentionality) across stuff, and his smarm and disruptiveness means bad guys get irrationally fixated on him (maybe that is high CHA, just of a perverse kind lol?)

In the Discworld novels, the idea of negative charisma is brought up. It's called charisn'tma.

 

[Eric V]

And that UA failed.

Keep your courtesy trolling. You speak dismissively and insultingly about things people like and the people who make them, and get offended when I call a claim you make absurd?

No. If this is how you do, do it with someone else.

Insultingly? Where? Where are we actually disagreeing?

 

[Eric V]

Correct. It was probably never meant to, considering that the article merely presented it as good example on how to do a home-brew.

That, I don't know. I would like to know your sources, if you do.

Edit: I think doctorbadwolf just put me on ignore? I can no longer see their posts, not even the quotes I put in mine. If that is the case, I'm surprised. I think we were having an extremely normal conversation.

Experiencing the same, though I am not ignored yet. I genuinely don't understand what's happening.

 

[Faolyn]

Sounds like more of a player problem than a system problem.

This. Another player at my table and I both produce grimoires of our spells--we have a list of every single spell we can cast and what it can do. We don't even make them fancy. They're just lists. It's not that hard to do and in this day and age, can easily be made by copypasting from a digital source.

Fireball 3rd lvl evo, 1 action, range 150', VSM, Dur Instant: 20' radius sphere, spreads around corners, ignites flammable objects that aren't worn/carried, 8d6 fire Dex save half, +1d6/slot level.
Major Image 3rd level ill, 1 action, range 120', VSM, Dur Con 10 min; non-harmful, insubstantial visual+auditory+olfactory illusion that fits in 20' cube; can use action to alter illusion; Int (Investigation) vs. my spell save DC to reveal it's fake; if cast with 6th lvl slots, lasts until dispelled.

 

[Faolyn]

Correct. It was probably never meant to, considering that the article merely presented it as good example on how to do a home-brew.

That, I don't know. I would like to know your sources, if you do.

Edit: I think doctorbadwolf just put me on ignore? I can no longer see their posts, not even the quotes I put in mine. If that is the case, I'm surprised. I think we were having an extremely normal conversation.

I think it just might be their way of stepping away from a conversation that was upsetting them.