D&D (2024) One D&D Cleric & Revised Species Playtest Includes Goliath

"In this new Unearthed Arcana for the One D&D rules system, we explore material designed for the next version of the Player’s Handbook. This playtest document presents the rules on the Cleric class, it's Life Domain subclass, as well as revised Species rules for the Ardling, the Dragonborn, and the Goliath. You will also find a current glossary of new or revised meanings for game terms."

Claim Unearthed Arcana now! - D&D Beyond

www.dndbeyond.com

WotC's Jeremey Crawford discusses the playtest document in the video below.

 

[Maxperson]

5e is being replaced in 2024. There have been a bunch of videos and playtest packets about it.

It's being replaced in the same was as 3e was. With a half edition change. The mechanics aren't going to be so different that it's a new edition.

 

[Maxperson]

Then you're in luck, because they are removing the word "edition" entirely and just labeling it "D&D." That's the whole premise of OneD&D. That's the first thing they tell us in the announcement video.

Gimmicks are just that, gimmicks. It's going to be 5.5 regardless of their effort to foist off on us their gimmick name.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Weren't you saying that they were wrong to not call it a new edition? So, their opinion isn't more valid than yours (even though they have more experience with this subject than you do), but yours is somehow more valid than theirs?

No, I just think this isn't going to work out the way they've said. I could be wrong too.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

No, I just think this isn't going to work out the way they've said. I could be wrong too.

They know how extensive the changes are going to be. At least, they know better than we do (they don't completely know what the finished product will be, but they know what they've designed so far). I see no reason to believe that they are lying.

 

[Micah Sweet]

They know how extensive the changes are going to be. At least, they know better than we do (they don't completely know what the finished product will be, but they know what they've designed so far). I see no reason to believe that they are lying.

I don’t think they're lying. I think this will functionally end up as a new edition in the minds of the fans (where it really matters) once the dust has settled, regardless of what WotC wants. Adventurer's League is also a place where the edition question will be determined.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I don’t think they're lying. I think this will functionally end up as a new edition in the minds of the fans (where it really matters) once the dust has settled, regardless of what WotC wants. Adventurer's League is also a place where the edition question will be determined.

They know where the extent of the changes they're proposing. So you're either saying that your opinion is more valid than the game designers', who have designed several editions of the game and very much know what that term means, or you're saying that they're lying.

 

[Azzy]

It feels to me like if you have to specify which printing of a book to use because the amount of substantive errata is no longer able to be sifted through easily, then it's effectively a new edition.

Oh, I agree. There's enough changes in the playtests that '24 will effectively be a new edition as I'm used to the term being used (much like B/X to BECMI, 1e to 2e and, to an extent, 3e to 3.5e). However, since WotC's stewardship of D&D, a new "edition" has pretty much meant a whole system overhaul (3e to 4e to 5e), so I get why they are saying that it's not a new "edition" (even if, to me, it is a new edition). WotC's intention (and my takeaway from the playtests) is that the '24 edition will be compatible enough that you'll be able to use older much of the older 5e material, run '14 characters and '24 characters in the same campaign, and/or mix and match elements from each edition. Sure, there will be some stuff that will need varying degrees of modifications (just like when my group and I ran hybrid 1e/2e games), but that's to be expected and doesn't take away from the overall compatibility of the two.

 

[Micah Sweet]

They know where the extent of the changes they're proposing. So you're either saying that your opinion is more valid than the game designers', who have designed several editions of the game and very much know what that term means, or you're saying that they're lying.

I'm not allowed to think a company's business plan isn't going to have the exact results they want?

Huh.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I'm not allowed to think a company's business plan isn't going to have the exact results they want?

Huh.

No, I'm not discussing whether or not the community will call it a new edition or .5 edition (I currently think the published rulebooks will be referenced to with a variety of terms when they're published, like they are now). I'm saying that if you think WotC is wrong to not call it a new edition, you're saying that their opinion is less valid than yours is, even though they have more experience with this subject than you do.

 

[Micah Sweet]

No, I'm not discussing whether or not the community will call it a new edition or .5 edition (I currently think the published rulebooks will be referenced to with a variety of terms when they're published, like they are now). I'm saying that if you think WotC is wrong to not call it a new edition, you're saying that their opinion is less valid than yours is, even though they have more experience with this subject than you do.

Agree to disagree. I'm done fighting on this. We're each allowed to have our opinions.