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.

​

 

[CapnZapp]

The problem isn't that that non-magic must adhere to real world physics, it's the outdated notion that the game even needs non-magical classes.

I LIKE non-magical classes.

It isn't that the game "needs" them. It's that the game offers better variety if it can be played without forcing the world to be intensely magical, like the D&D movie.

You're of course free to argue WotC should just shed all the players interested in low magic fantasy. What I don't feel is very compelling, however, is the argument we should drop low magic because it isn't "needed".

Cheers!

 

[CapnZapp]

Just going to ignore that the design of 5e is one where short rest classes get to dig in to take a "breather" every fight or two so they can nova through the next fight or two and whine that if they don't get their rests every time they burn their resources as fast as they could thst they are useless beside the long rest classes the gm is Allowing to "utterly dominate"?

That was the case in 2014 and still is as of the current packet 6

This wasn't super coherent, but let me reassure you: I am perfectly cognizant that if the DM doesn't allow very many long rests, that is, there's a low long rest to short rest ratio, that absolutely will allow short rest classes to dominate.

In fact, that's the entire basis of my argument. Not sure how we got that mixed up.

 

[CapnZapp]

So, nothing ever gets changed.

Things only ever change when WotC no longer can milk any given edition.

3rd Edition was a major change (and improvement), but it only happened once AD&D had run its course.

But in 2004, we were still many years away from WotC needing to admit the flaws in the d20 system, so we got 3.5 that claimed to fix everything while actually fixing nothing fundamental.

Only after driving the franchise into the ground financially did the desperation reach the level where creators got the creative freedom to actually question d20's fundamental design decisions, and start making real improvements.

That's how we got 5E as I see it.

It is clearly far too early to expect WotC to feel the need for true innovation. Perhaps five years from now... at the earliest.

All WotC intends to do from now til release fall '24 is to try to convince us 6E changes everything while still making sure nothing important actually changes. There will be changes yes, but the main reason isn't to actually fix something. It's to have something to point to if anyone complains nothing is really changed. "Look, this class gets three doodahs instead of two, and that class gets its stuff at level three instead of two. That's totally a new edition, complete with actual changes! Go buy it now, because even though the old one is technically compatible you know you'll be missing out if you don't get the totally-changed-and-not-at-all-the-same 6E!"

 

[Pauln6]

The flaws of 5e feel far more manageable to me than 3e did and it feels so much more like 'classic' DnD to than 4e ever did. They are largely just tinkering, none of which you need to apply to keep enjoying the game.

Because I started in 1e where about a third of your characters were fighters, thieves, or multiclass fighters and/or thieves I do agree that I feel martial characters have crumpled under the weight of magical subclasses and magical classes. I really want them to bump them up, I'm just hesitant to bump them up in ways that can then be poached by magical classes or subclasses. That's why building extra abilities into the action economy feels safer, even if it involves saying as a bonus action you could do this and now you can do this and this and this at the same time.

 

[tetrasodium]

This wasn't super coherent, but let me reassure you: I am perfectly cognizant that if the DM doesn't allow very many long rests, that is, there's a low long rest to short rest ratio, that absolutely will allow short rest classes to dominate.

In fact, that's the entire basis of my argument. Not sure how we got that mixed up.

I think you overlooked the bolded bit I was responding to. A response saying that the gm should counter the short rest 5mwd by forcing long rests in the middle of the six to eight medium to hard encounters per long rest is a"solution" that only creates more and different problems

 

[Hussar]

See @CapnZapp you point at WotC being unwilling to change because they want to milk the fandom.

I disagree.

They can’t make any changes because any changes are immediately rejected by a very loud cadre of fans who cannot bear the idea that WotC isn’t catering solely to them.

So WotC proposes a change and it gets shot down. WotC doesn’t innovate because they aren’t permitted to.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

See @CapnZapp you point at WotC being unwilling to change because they want to milk the fandom.

I disagree.

They can’t make any changes because any changes are immediately rejected by a very loud cadre of fans who cannot bear the idea that WotC isn’t catering solely to them.

So WotC proposes a change and it gets shot down. WotC doesn’t innovate because they aren’t permitted to.

I do not think that this is a fair way to characterise the matter. WoTC could absolutely create any version of D&D they want but they have a very successful sales model by being very focused on what the market wants. The market is pretty conservative and thus WoTC only innovates at the margins.
If you want to see radical changes in the D&D space one will have to look at the third party space and see if any of the alternative takes on D&D take off.

 

[Hussar]

I do not think that this is a fair way to characterise the matter. WoTC could absolutely create any version of D&D they want but they have a very successful sales model by being very focused on what the market wants. The market is pretty conservative and thus WoTC only innovates at the margins.
If you want to see radical changes in the D&D space one will have to look at the third party space and see if any of the alternative takes on D&D take off.

Potayto potahto. We’re largely in agreement. The market will not allow any big changes. Heck the market won’t even allow psionics.

But yeah, any actual deviation a la book of nine swords or a psionics handbook is only going to come from outside of DnD.

Which means, as a permanent dm, I’m never going to see it because players have zero interest.

 

[mamba]

No?

You're not interested in getting rid of an artificial limitation that basically just creates imbalance between classes out of thin air, a limitation that makes fast-paced (and slow-paced!) stories harder to write for no particular reason other than "a stupid rule existed in earlier editions"?

no, I am not interested in getting rid of long rests, the imbalance comes from short rests, and I am all for getting rid of those

Oh, and you misunderstood my proposal even though I have explained it in excruciating detail multiple times. It isn't "your skills will recharge whenever the DM tells you they do". You know ahead of time what needs to happen for your skills abilities to recharge.

Your DM might for instance tell you: "for this adventure, if you spend 8 hours sleeping that counts as a long rest once every 24 hours". And now you know how and when your abilities recharge during this scenario.

so you cannot have the trek through the desert and the goblin cave in the same adventure then, because they use different rest rules?

That is a weird limitation… if I were to do away with set rest lengths, I would do so entirely

 

[mamba]

WotC doesn’t innovate because they aren’t permitted to.

WotC doesn’t innovate because they do not allow themselves to. They could pay less attention to the 70% threshold and do what they feel is right regardless.

Use the feedback to tweak / improve on the original idea / goal, instead of abandoning it wholesale because only 63% were sufficiently enthusiastic

Of course that involves taking risks, and the threshold is designed to not rock the boat