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.

 

[Parmandur]

Nah, I don't think you're going to be able to mix and match classes, based on what we've seen. And no, that's not a problem for me.

I'm playing almost exclusively on Roll20* these days, so from a practical perspective, I'm either going to run 5e or 1D&D. Other VTTs may be different, but Roll20 pretty much makes you pick a rule set, unless I want to do a bunch of manual work that I pay good money not to do. I'm hopeful I'll go with 1D&D, but I'm buying it either way. It's the 50th Anniversary!

* Assuming D&D on Roll20 is still a thing in 2024.

Based on what they have printed, it will be possible to use old Subclass options, and probably will work fine to run the old Base Classes in a game with the new ones. It won't make a difference to the way the game runs

 

[Parmandur]

Only if they're really chill players who don't care about "balance," I think. I'm not that chill. If I think we're playing 1D&D and make a Lore Bard and you bring in a 5e Lore Bard, I'm going to be slightly miffed.

People don't tend to think in terms of "balance" when playing D&D. When I learned to play, we were hobbling together 3E and 3.5 willy-nilly, and 5E/OneD&D mixed games seem like a cinch in comparison. Just remember, specific beats general.

 

[Parmandur]

I only did one Adventurer's league years ago (maybe pre-2018) and didn't know that. Do you have a favorite reference as to needing the 2018 or newer one? Or do the errata not go back all the way to the 2014 one?

What happens now if a player shows up with a 2014 PHB?


I don't think it's necessarily a standard, but it feels like it could be insightful as to how they're viewing the new version/printing/reorganization/whatnot.

Per what you shared, if someone ahows.up with a 2014 PHab they have to use the rules from the most current Errata instead.

But AL is just one campaign, it's not the official Way to Play.

 

[Parmandur]

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

On the contrary, whatever nomenclature WotC actually uses in the end will eventually catch on. As proof, I submit thst you are here in 2022 talking about "half editions" and ".5 updates" with a straight face, which was even more of a gimmick foisted on people in 2003.

 

[Parmandur]

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.

Honestly, not.muxh more will be needed to change than is currently the case if one runs a 5E Adventure with 6 PCs, say.

 

[Maxperson]

On the contrary, whatever nomenclature WotC actually uses in the end will eventually catch on. As proof, I submit thst you are here in 2022 talking about "half editions" and ".5 updates" with a straight face, which was even more of a gimmick foisted on people in 2003.

If you notice in my discussions, I almost always refer to the entire run as 3e. It's only when someone will be utterly confused if I don't use 3.5 that I use it.

I'll do the same with 5e and 5.5 I'm sure.

Edit: But you're right in that most people use 3.5, so that caught on. I'm not convinced One D&D will be the same, since it's not a number and is waaaay gimicky.

 

[JEB]

Per what you shared, if someone ahows.up with a 2014 PHab they have to use the rules from the most current Errata instead.

Now I am genuinely curious how they will handle the new core in 2024. Right now you can reference any printing of the book, errata just takes precedence (and there's errata online, so you don't technically need to have a newer printing on hand). But when Monsters of the Multiverse came out, and there were now multiple competing versions of the races available, they said you had to update your old DDAL characters to the new rules and couldn't use the older versions anymore.

 

[Bill Zebub]

People don't tend to think in terms of "balance" when playing D&D. When I learned to play, we were hobbling together 3E and 3.5 willy-nilly, and 5E/OneD&D mixed games seem like a cinch in comparison. Just remember, specific beats general.

As I’ve related previously, my very first D&D character, created for me by a friend’s friend’s older brother, who apparently owned multiple rule sets, was an Elf (that’s class, not race) with 18/33 strength. I played that character a long time before I even realized something was amiss.

I fully expect that newer, younger players, happily ignorant of the concept of ‘edition wars’, will freely mix 2014 and 2024 versions without a second thought.

 

[Greg Benage]

People don't tend to think in terms of "balance" when playing D&D.

::blink::
If there's one "discourse" that, in my experience, has dominated D&D, and certainly 5e, it's "martial-caster balance." Players want equally good options. Players don't want "traps" that make their characters less capable than those that chose other options. Players want niche protection: If they play a rogue, they want to be the go-to guy or girl for sneaking and such. If they're a greatsword fighter, they don't want CoDzilla showing up and dishing out more damage, but also tanking damage, healing, flying, teleporting, and doing just about anything else that comes up better than they can.

I'm not saying every player cares about these things, but I'd confidently say most do, in my experience, and I think the designers over the decades have recognized it and attempted to address it, with varying levels of success. At various times during the game's history, it's been possible to mix and match some things without running afoul of normie D&D player balance concerns, definitely. That doesn't mean most people are going to have one Lore Bard with 6th-level Magical Secrets at the table alongside another that has to wait until 11th level and not run into a problem. Put it this way: I'll bet you good money they don't try to run AL that way, and I certainly wouldn't run my table that way.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

You're not going to be able to let players mix and match this stuff.

Everything but what is updating the core books will be perfectly mix and match friendly, from what we have so far, and from all the statements they’ve made and what they’re publishing now.

And even the phb stuff, game won’t break if you use old versions of some thing and new versions of other things.