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.

 

[Vaalingrade]

But listen to EnWorlders?

Oh heavens no.

No, no, no, no.

Of course not!

 

[Aldarc]

nevermind

 

[doctorbadwolf]

We all are. I know this has been mentioned in various discussions, but by virtue of even being on this site (or reddit, twitter, whatever people have run away from twitter on) we are a dramatically small, hyper invested, almost myopically focused sub group of the "D&D Players" group.

That’s the point I made in the text you quoted.

I said "may not be able to do so," not "definitely won't be able to." Because we don't know what the fighter is going to look like.

But we basically do know, at least as far as subclasses working with the class. They’ve been very clear about that. Whatever they change, will probably be less than they’ve proposed for the cleric, but even if they change quite a bit, it will be done so that existing subclasses work with the new class.

The only “may” in all that is that literally anything could happen, however unlikely.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

Any guesses on what parts of this playtest packet will make 70% or 80%+ even? Does anything fail?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Any guesses on what parts of this playtest packet will make 70% or 80%+ even? Does anything fail?

If they ask if pushing subclass to level 3 is liked, I'd say, we get less than 80%.
I just hope they don't ask that question.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

If they ask if pushing subclass to level 3 is liked, I'd say, we get less than 80%.
I just hope they don't ask that question.

@JEB
To clarify:
I think sometimes it takes less popular decisions to make something objectively better. Change is sometimes accompanied by resistance due to being used to something unwieldy or outdated (e. g. Keyboard layout, self trained techniques in sports etc., the term "race", lesser grade mathematical techniques, ThAC0)
And when you finally got used to the new way of doing it, you finally notice the advantages and wonder why you didn't do it that way before.

As a math teacher, I can definitely say, that if I teach new rules only if more than 70% of the class votes for it, we would only do elementary school math...

 

[Bill Zebub]

As a math teacher, I can definitely say, that if I teach new rules only if more than 70% of the class votes for it, we would only do elementary school math...

As long as you don’t teach them how to compute percentages you have nothing to worry about. “Oh, look, 93% of you want to learn polynomials!”

 

[Henadic Theologian]

The fact that Aasimar are going to be playable in yet another D&D video game (BG3 this time) is more evidence that Aasimar deserve to be in the One D&D PHB. I encourage all of you to send WotC that message in the feedback for this playtest.

 

[Pedantic]

It is frustrating that they pitched Aardlings immediately with flavor stolen from the existing Aasimar, mostly because it's completely unnecessary. They could absolutely sell the entry on it's own without the "celestial" and "counterpart to Tieflings" stuff, but they immediately started on the wrong foot.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

PSA that flying Winged Figure in the video is not an Angel, D&D Aasimon Angels don't wear Armour, their bodies are tougher then steel, they don't need it and they have physical wings and fly, physical armour would be an absolutely epic pain in the ass, not to mention really hard to put on and remove, even with custom armour (there is a reason Pixies and Aacrokra aren't depicted where plate Armour ever).

The art backs me up, in D&D you never see Aasimon Angels wearing armour, you can barely get them to wear clothes, Aasimar are often Paladins, they wear armour, their flesh is no more resistant to steel then a humans.

So it dressed like a Stripper its an Angel, if its armoured like a knight of the Round Table its an Aasimar, Aasimar Sorcerers and Monks are possible exceptions, just a rule of thumb.

Also engergy Angels of 4e weirdly are an exception as are newer MtG Angels (which look stupid compared to the older MtG Angel art, I mean these creatures fly for goodness sakes, why would they want to be weighed down?).

I noticed alot of confusion online over this so I just thought I'd clarify.