• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D (2024) New One D&D Playtest Includes 5 Classes & New Weapon Mastery System

Barbarian, Fighter, Sorcerer, Warlock, and Wizard

The latest playtest packet for One D&D has just landed, and features five classes (Barbarian, Fighter, Sorcerer, Warlock, and Wizard) and the new Weapon Mastery system.

In this new Unearthed Arcana document for the 2024 Core Rulebooks, we explore material designed for the next version of the Player’s Handbook. This playtest document presents the rules on the Weapon Mastery property, updates to weapons, new and revised spells, several new feats, and five classes: Barbarian, Fighter, Sorcerer, Warlock, and Wizard. You will also find an updated rules glossary that supercedes the glossary of any previous playtest documents.


 

log in or register to remove this ad


log in or register to remove this ad




Parmandur

Book-Friend
I've still yet to work out what the 'shared mechanic' of the mage group is. Sure they all have spellcasting, but so do ranger, bard, artificer, paladin, cleric, and druid.

Maybe their shared feature is having to flick to tons of different pages across the document to even read what your core class features do?
The Class specific Spells that can be modified by other Features, say Subclass, seems to be the unifying theme. I quite like it, actually.
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
Hmm. So, while I have long wished that 5E had better and more robust spell creation rules, the new wizard spell creation rules feel under-cooked, unless there's something I'm missing.

Specifically, if the spells stay the same level -- which they appear to -- why wouldn't every group fund the wizard creating bespoke enhanced spells for all of their go-to spells?

Fireballs that never injure the wizard's allies? Obviously you would prefer that and the martials (and put-upon healer) would likely be very happy to pay for the arcane focus cost. (Also, burning up a wand to do that feels weird in the fiction. Maybe some other sort of material cost should be included instead. Maybe I just haven't gotten to the new definition of Arcane Focus. EDIT: Nope, no new definition. The example starting arcane focus is a quarterstaff.)

For everything else, by default, the wizard should create silent versions of all their spells. This seems like a no-brainer for Illusionists and enchanters especially. I guess we now have a money sink, which is good, but a silent spell that's only balanced by a one-time spell component cost doesn't make sense to me, as a DM.

And for evokers, everything should be made into force damage, unless there's a new most effective damage type in 2024.

Am I missing something that balances modified spells?
One element that I think a lot of people are missing is that when a modified Spell is codified Create Spell, it loses the Arcane tag, so it cannot be modified again. And without Creating the Spell, a Wizard can only have one Modified Spell at a time.

Also, at the point most campaigns peeter out, a Wizard can only add two riders when modifying the Spell, and AR higher Levels they could spend the energy on just casting Level 9 Spells instead.
 


Word of God says it's not him anyway.

But don't worry, there's plenty of books were he's creepy and terrible to the point that 15 year old me thought he was The Man. God, I want to slap that kid.
14 year old me not only had a crush on him but I had an old picture of his creator cosplaying him hanging on my wall...
I am glad I don't live in that house anymore I would have to bleach the wall...
 

Nice to see somebody acknowledge that suspension of disbelief a choice. So many people claim that a rule they don't like "breaks immersion", while happily suspending disbelief on a thousand other gamist details.
Very good point. If hit points aren't immersion breaking, I don't know what would be! We're just used to them, that's all.

That said, while suspending disbelief is a choice, that choice can be easy or hard. :p If something presents itself as straight science fiction (as opposed to space opera or the like) and then tries to get me to swallow something pretty clearly magical with no explanation, that tends to throw me out of the story.

(Exhibit A: The famous copper-top scene in The Matrix. Seems like it didn't bother most people, but I have a degree in physics. After playing everything relatively straight the whole movie, you want to tell me you've repealed the second law of thermodynamics! And it would have been so easy to fix! The machines use our brains for extra processing power, done!)
 

(Exhibit A: The famous copper-top scene in The Matrix. Seems like it didn't bother most people, but I have a degree in physics. After playing everything relatively straight the whole movie, you want to tell me you've repealed the second law of thermodynamics! And it would have been so easy to fix! The machines use our brains for extra processing power, done!)
that falls under the special knowledge rule. I used to date a law student that could NOT stand most shows that had lawyers in it. At the time I was getting into suits and if it was on when he was over it would cause him headaches.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top