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.

 

[Yaarel]

Fursonas' animal components are almost always continuous across the entire character unless limited to only a few features like ears and eyes. A full animal head on a full human body is usually only going to come up if it's a direct reference to mythology. The stark division between animal and human is closer to a mermaid than to a sahuagin, and few would call mermaids furries/scalies.

Ah. So "furry" is about blending, not attaching.

A Werewolf counts as a furry?

The OneD&D Species rules says, a character of mixed parentage can describe their character however they like, so a character could be both Aardling and Human, choose either the Aardling or Human stats, then depict their character as a blend of Humanoid and Beast.

That sorta counts a furry?

 

[Incenjucar]

Ah. So "furry" is about blending, not attaching.

A Werewolf counts as a furry?

The OneD&D Species rules says, a character of mixed parentage can describe their character however they like, so a character could be both Aardling and Human, choose either the Aardling or Human stats, then depict their character as a blend of Humanoid and Beast.

That sorta counts a furry?

It's not a matter of whether it "counts" but whether your average furry fan would actually want that appearance for a furry character. It's not about gatekeeping or anything like that, it's just what descriptions they generally prefer. The original ardling appearance with an animal head on a human-like-skin body is incredibly niche among furry fans, compared to one that defaults to having fur or feathers all over the body, which seems to be what the audience pressured WotC into through the survey.

 

[Yaarel]

When playing an earlier edition game, one of my characters was killed by a Werewolf.

It occurs to me, the character isnt really dead, but is an NPC Werewolf. So. In 5e, this a playable character concept.

I plan on creating a 5e version of the same character, and creating a new Feat for him.

The Feat grants two Alternate Forms: a natural Wolf form and a Werewolf Form that is a transitional anthropomorphic wolf. Balancewise, this is no problem. The idea for supernatural Strength is, an Alternate Form can swap any higher Mental Ability for any lower Physical Ability. For example, Str 10 and Int 16 becomes Str 16 and Int 10 during the Alternate Form. If swapping in this way, the character must make a saving throw using the lower swapped Mental Ability. A success means maintaining ones self-identity, a failure means loosing ones humanity within the animal identity, for a duration before reverting back to Human (or in this case back to Elf). The player decides which Abilities swap if any, when gaining the Feat.

I havent played the character yet, and am still building its concept mechanically. But it should be fun.

 

[Incenjucar]

When playing an earlier edition game, one of my characters was killed by a Werewolf.

It occurs to me, the character isnt really dead, but is an NPC Werewolf. So. In 5e, this a playable character concept.

I plan on creating a 5e version of the same character, and creating a new Feat for him.

The Feat grants two Alternate Forms: a natural Wolf form and a Werewolf Form that is a transitional anthropomorphic wolf. Balancewise, this is no problem. The idea for supernatural Strength is, an Alternate Form can swap any higher Mental Ability for any lower Physical Ability. For example, Str 10 and Int 16 becomes Str 16 and Int 10 during the Alternate Form. If swapping in this way, the character must make a saving throw using the lower swapped Mental Ability. A success means maintaining ones self-identity, a failure means loosing ones humanity within the animal identity, for a duration before reverting back to Human (or in this case back to Elf). The player decides which Abilities swap if any, when gaining the Feat.

I havent played the character yet, and am still building its concept mechanically. But it should be fun.

Werefolk come with a lot of interesting roleplay opportunities, and things get extra weird if you combine them with non-humans as a base, like a dwarf. I played up something similar with a deva who used wildshape to become a rakshasa-like tiger, who would always seem confused when anyone brought it up.

 

[Yaarel]

a deva who used wildshape to become a rakshasa-like tiger, who would always seem confused when anyone brought it up.

Heh, that is kinda awesome.

 

[Incenjucar]

A fun little trick is a speed boost that requires both hands to be empty, to represent going to all fours while in a humanoid form, etc. Can apply to a lot of non-human character types.

 

[Yaarel]

A fun little trick is a speed boost that requires both hands to be empty, to represent going to all fours while in a humanoid form, etc. Can apply to a lot of non-human character types.

Shifting from Were Form to Wolf Form does that, Speed goes from 30 to 40, and can shift back to Were Form.

"Werefolk" is probably a good name for the Feat, and can open it up to more animals.

 

[Azzy]

A Werewolf counts as a furry?

IMNSHO, yes. Try seeing the Howling (or other werewolf horror movies) through that light now.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Referencing back to the compatibility issue, I have a way to look at this that may help some people.

When the "One D&D isn't compatible" discussion on this thread started, someone mentioned Dragonborn and Goliath not being compatible, because they have new abilities. However, this leads me to a question.

Was Fizban's Dragonborn compatible with 5e DnD?

Because before Fizban's the Dragonborn had resistance and an action breath weapon, and basically nothing else. In Fizban's the dragonborn had resistance, five new potential energy types, attack breath weapons that scaled diffrently, and new abilities including immunity, a massive AOE shove, AND LIMITED FLIGHT. The Gem dragonborn flight is basically identical to the version in One DnD.

So, if OD&D is not compatible, because Dragonborn have flight as a new ability... wouldn't that have meant that Fizban's wasn't compatible with DnD 5e either?


Now, a stronger argument can be made for the cleric. They did rearrange some of the abilities... but again, not really incompatible, is it?

Let us say that I wanted to play a One D&D cleric with the Grave Domain. We haven't seen this one playtested, but it would be rather simple for me to do. At 3rd level I'd get Circle of Mortality and Eyes of the Grave features. The Domain spells would cut off the 1st level spells, but otherwise I'd get the same spells at the same levels.

6th level, the Channel Divinity: Path to the Grave feature. 10th Sentinel at Death's Door. 14th, Keeper of Souls.

Yes, there are changes, but as we keep saying "compatible =/= identical"


The only class of the four we have seen so far, that I could not trivially work into the One D&D framework, is the Bard. Because, to date, it is the only class that only has THREE subclass features in normal DnD, where the One D&D standard is four.

Now, this is a compatibility issue, but one that can be solved by simply having a default bard feature to plug into the level 10 slot. Something any bard can have to replace their normal feature with.

Looking ahead, the only other classes that have subclass issues like this are the Fighter (five subclass features) and the warlock because of their dual-subclass nature and unusual class design. Neither of which we have actually seen yet, so we can only speculate on whether or not it will be an issue.

I will admit, The Fighter is a tricky one. My best current solution would be to combine two of the subclass features, and give them both at the level. But, since we haven't even SEEN the fighter class yet, we don't even know if that will be necessary

And that's... really it. Nothing else we have seen is "incompatible" with 5e. Feat at level 1? Already exist in 5e. Most of the "changes" exist to one degree or another, or are things like changing the rules for grappling, or how a spell works. Which are perfectly compatible, because they are no different than a Grave Cleric saying "now you can cast spare the dying as a bonus action with a range of 60 ft". It is a change, but it is compatible with the game.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Dragonbait has a statblock in Tomb of Annihilation, so they certainly have some idea of how they should work in 5E (and One D&D shouldn't be a radical leap).

Sadly ToA just presents him as the world's worst Paladin (and even says "dude isn't a Paladin", which seems super-mean). He can't even smite or cast any spells and his aura is from his Holy Avenger, not him.

And he has absolutely no racial abilities whatsoever, he's just a dude who can't talk, only make smells (I've met guys like that lol). They even drew him with a normal-looking sword and no tail, just to complete his humiliation. Even his AC is just what you'd expect from the listed breastplate, shield, DEX 13 (apparently this dude doesn't even have Heavy armour proficiency!). He doesn't even have Darkvision, which is further mean-ness!

This innocent and lovely Saurial has been BULLIED by whoever wrote ToA. Poor thing.

(I will admit he can detect alignment at will due to being a "Champion of Good" - i.e. cut-rate Paladin, which seems like a huge no-no in 5E design, but whatever I guess.)

In 2E, Saurials had a base AC, 60' Infravision, natural weapons back when the didn't suck and gave you multiple attacks, and a bonus on saves against sonic attacks.

As Dragonbait gets literally NONE of that, I think it's hard to say what they'd have in 5E from ToA.