D&D (2024) New One D&D Playtest Document: 77 Pages, 7 Classes, & More!

There's a brand new playtest document for the new (version/edition/update) of Dungeons of Dragons available for download! This one is an enormous 77 pages and includes classes, spells, feats, and weapons.

Unearthed Arcana Playtest

Unearthed Arcana Playtest Materials Get Unearthed Arcana playtest content, try it out in your game, and provide feedback! Check back regularly for ...

www.dndbeyond.com

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 updated rules on seven classes: Bard, Cleric, Druid, Monk, Paladin, Ranger, and Rogue. This document also presents multiple subclasses for each of those classes, new Spells, revisions to existing Spells and Spell Lists, and several revised Feats. You will also find an updated rules glossary that supercedes the glossary of any previous playtest document.

​

 

[Ruin Explorer]

more changes than what? 1e to 2e? Probably because there are more (sub)classes now, but relatively speaking?

Relatively speaking it's easily in the same ballpark as 1E to 2E. We can argue the toss over whether it's "a bit less" or "a bit more", but it's in the ballpark. Major changes to every class in the game, classes reorganised according to a new mandate, spells are revised/changed, some dramatically, some barely at all, basic rules are changed but in ways that remain fairly compatible, new approaches to monsters in the MM, and so on.

I think maybe what we should really be saying is this is a "compatible edition", whereas 3E, 4E, and 5E were not "compatible editions", but basically entirely new games sharing a lot of IP.

probably, but shallow changes. In any case I said nothing about the changes from 14 to 24 relative to 3e to 3.5, so not sure why you are bringing this up

Oh, it looked like you were agreeing with the claim that the changes were smaller than 3E to 3.5E, I guess not.

But TSR and WorC have significantly poisoned the well of using that word normally, so WotC can't cleanly call it 9th Edition or 21st Edition (6th Edition would be pure absurdity), but they always made it clear that they were aiming for this to be a fully compatible evolution.

TSR's usage was fine. 1E to 2E is very much an "edition" in line with normal usage in publishing. So don't blame them for WotC's doing! They did enough stuff wrong already!

I dunno, the ~6 pages of the current rules Glossary are quite minor compared to 3.5 rule changes, and that Rules Glossary represents the entire current planned changes to the Core rules.

No? They're not. They're quite a lot broader, and no they aren't the "entire current planned changes", because for example they refer to "Epic boons" which aren't even in Packet 6. So you're flatly and factually wrong there.

The 3.5E changes are simply factually far smaller than these - they might have been spread out, but pretty much every 3.5E change could have been summarized in a far smaller amount of space than you could summarize the changes here, esp. relative to the actual PHB/DMG/MM.

In case you want to argue fact, here we go: D&D v.3.5 Accessory Update Booklet

 

[Marandahir]

I think we should all just discuss whether this is a new edition or not elsewhere or else we’re going to get the thread closed very quickly.

 

[Parmandur]

No? They're not. They're quite a lot broader, and no they aren't the "entire current planned changes", because for example they refer to "Epic boons" which aren't even in Packet 6. So you're flatly and factually wrong there.

Epic boons are just high Level Feats, not really a core rule.

Those 6 pages are all that is currently planned for changing core rules. Anything else that they tested for the core rules has been dropped like a hot potato, as noted in the document.

 

[mamba]

Relatively speaking it's easily in the same ballpark as 1E to 2E. We can argue the toss over whether it's "a bit less" or "a bit more", but it's in the ballpark. Major changes to every class in the game, classes reorganised according to a new mandate, spells are revised/changed, some dramatically, some barely at all, basic rules are changed but in ways that remain fairly compatible, new approaches to monsters in the MM, and so on.

To me 2e is the bigger change, because entire classes appeared and disappeared. The underlying system was largely compatible regardless however

I think maybe what we should really be saying is this is a "compatible edition", whereas 3E, 4E, and 5E were not "compatible editions", but basically entirely new games sharing a lot of IP.

Maybe, a tad too late for that however

 

[Parmandur]

TSR's usage was fine. 1E to 2E is very much an "edition" in line with normal usage in publishing. So don't blame them for WotC's doing! They did enough stuff wrong already!

OK, mini-rant time.

"First Edition" is not the first version of D&D, "AD&D" got what would typically be called a new Edition in the mid it's (all three core books got new ISBNs!), making "Second Edition" the third typical edition of "AD&D" even discounting OD&D and three editions of BD&D. And them in the mid-90's 2E got an upgrade thst would usually be called a new edition, the updated core books tried to argue they weren't a "Third Wdition," but at minimum they the 4th Edition of AD&D...and there were then 5 editions of BD&D and OD&D.

My point is, TSR abused these words almost as badly as WotC.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Epic boons are just high Level Feats, not really a core rule.

Those 6 pages are all that is currently planned for changing core rules. Anything else that they tested for the core rules has been dropped like a hot potato, as noted in the document.

Uh-huh, and you can summarize the 3.5E core rules changes in a far, far smaller space. Click the link I added if you want WotC-made proof. Feats are core rules, now, anyway, that's another change. They're no longer "optional".

 

[DEFCON 1]

Epic boons are just high Level Feats, not really a core rule.

Those 6 pages are all that is currently planned for changing core rules. Anything else that they tested for the core rules has been dropped like a hot potato, as noted in the document.

I wouldn't necessarily hold onto that idea myself.

Personally I can certainly see WotC having plenty of changes to the game that they are intending to make and do not feel the need to put or keep them in the playtest packets, especially if they are minor. So for instance at some point in the future they might decide "Okay, we've decided now how we're going to have the Death Save system work" and then they remove it from further playtest packets because there's nothing new they need to get from us players about how we "feel" about them. And it doesn't then mean they've "reverted back" to 5E14 just because it doesn't show up anymore.

Now I could fully be wrong about that. Maybe the packets are indeed a "living document" of exactly the full count of all changes happening. But the fact that these recent packets don't include all the older backgrounds and feats they had in previous packets leads me to believe that what we have in Packet 6 is not the only changes to 5E24 we are getting.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Now I could fully be wrong about that.

You're definitely not wrong about that re: Packet 6. Packet 6 refers to a bunch of a stuff that isn't in Packet 6, like Epic Boons. So any assertion that Packet 6 is "all they're going to change" is obviously in error, both factually, and of judgment.

 

[MockingBird]

I thought it was said if a rule didn't show up in the glossary then you revert back to the 2014 rule? I could be wrong though.

 

[Parmandur]

You're definitely not wrong about that re: Packet 6. Packet 6 refers to a bunch of a stuff that isn't in Packet 6, like Epic Boons. So any assertion that Packet 6 is "all they're going to change" is obviously in error, both factually, and of judgment.

First point is that I'm not arguing it isn't a new Edition, because of course it is. But it is a compatible Edition, and the history of the term being misused over and over again in D&D is why WotC is avoiding the terminology. Neither TSR nor WotC followed standard publishing industry nomenclature, so it no longer communicates much.

Ah, I think maybe the disconnect here might be what constitutes "core rules." Epic boons are Feat choice options, not individually part of the "How to Play the Game" rules chapter (the actual core rules of 5E) represented by the Rules Glossary. The document is quite clear that any core rule not mentioned in the Rules Glossary is to just refer to the 2014 books, and anything in prior Rules Glossaries has been dropped.