D&D (2024) Bonus Unearthed Arcana Reveals The Bastion System

A 'bonus' Unearthed Arcana playtest document has appeared, and it shows off D&D's upcoming Bastion System.

This October, we’re bringing you a special treat. While we’re continuing to develop and revise public playtesting material for the 2024 Player’s Handbook, we’d thought you’d enjoy an early look at what we’re cooking up for the 2024 Dungeon Master’s Guide.

The coming Dungeon Master’s Guide will be the biggest of its kind in decades and contain an assortment of new tools for DMs and their tables. In Bastions and Cantrips, we’re showcasing one of these tools, the Bastions subsystem. Dungeon Masters and their parties can use this subsystem to build a home, base of operations, or other significant structure for their characters.

And if you’re raring to test out more character options, we’re also including revisions for 10 cantrips in this playtest packet.

Claim Unearthed Arcana now! - D&D Beyond

www.dndbeyond.com

​

 

[Reynard]

None. None whatsoever. It's just weird that it's not an official option, so it's up to each GM to try to figure out how much one is worth by themselves, which is definitely not obvious.

Oh yeah, having 100 Bastion Points in the bank resurrects you if you die. Which seems a little counterproductive for actually wanting to build your shack up.

It is a playtest. Write yourself a note to give that feedback.

 

[Imaro]

None. None whatsoever. It's just weird that it's not an official option, so it's up to each GM to try to figure out how much one is worth by themselves, which is definitely not obvious.

Oh yeah, having 100 Bastion Points in the bank resurrects you if you die. Which seems a little counterproductive for actually wanting to build your shack up.

But isn't this campaign dependent? The DM controls how much wealth their players can discover/gain and thus wouldn't it be hard for WotC to create a one size fits all pricing?

 

[Zaukrie]

We are using the MCDM Strongholds rules for our Rappan Athuk game and they are more extensive but not really any better on first glance than this. If the Bastion rules get the attention they deserve, it should be an interesting and playable take on the idea.

agreed. the MCDM rules are LONG and unneccearily complex. I'm selling both older MCDM books, as I see no way we ever actually use them going forward (unlike the monster book, which is quite good).

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Frankly, I don't see why they Cando both: let players pick any Monster stat block that meets the parameters, but if that is intimidating here are three flexible star blocks you can reflavor however you want. No special rules for the templates, just have them printed in the Druid section with explicit permission to reflavor. Let any player use whichever they want.

Agreed, as long as there is at least the customization of like 2 traits per critter you can choose between, like the Tasha’s summons. I’d want more than that, but I get folks get overwhelmed when they gotta choose a bunch of individual bits in order to do a thing.

 

[Dausuul]

Reading through the Bastion rules...

1. I love the idea of adding stronghold rules to the game. Definitely needed. Not sure about the name.

2. Not thrilled by the "magic item acquisition" function. I appreciate that they require DM approval, but I still don't think permanent magic items should just pop up in your base. I'd prefer something where you can get information about magic items, telling you where to find them. It is then up to you to go and get them -- paying the gold price or the iron price as appropriate. (I don't mind having your Bastion produce consumables, though.)

3. Whoa. If you die, you can self-resurrect in your base the next day at a cost of 100 BP? A combination word of recall and true resurrection, without even the pretense of in-game justification? What the hell? If this rule somehow makes it into the final version, it's going right back out again in my campaign.

4. Going through the list of facilities... wow. This is really long and complicated. Way, way too fiddly for my taste.

5. I notice that an awful lot of the facility functions seem to come down to generating combat or adventuring buffs. Don't really like that. The focus of the Bastion should be on engagement with the game world outside of dungeon crawling -- in particular, on enabling PCs (through their followers and hirelings) to advance story-related goals while they're off dealing with something else.

Overall: The goal is high and worthy but the implementation is a huge mess. This is one of those things where I really wish WotC's survey options included one for "Good idea, bad execution, please try again."

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Haven't looked over the UA yet but what would be the problem with the DM assigning a gold value to a bastion point?

I don't think there really would be one, honestly, but that kind of just doubles-down on the "money sink" issue.

The big hole with that system is really the fact that it's not a group project and then all the stuff being level-locked is just weird.

I get that other DMs care, but I don't get why.

This has been discussed heavily for decades, and nearly a decade with 5E specifically, and if you didn't get it at any point before, I think it's safe to say you're never going to understand it, and I think it's probably because don't want to understand it.

 

[Amrûnril]

Cunning Strike got 94% satisfaction, so is in the final book

Putting Cunning Strike in the final book certainly seems like the right call. That said, I think it would very much be worth putting it in another playtest to work out the details. Which of the specific options are people most and least excited about? Should every Rogue have access to all of the options, or should they choose a subset? Cunning Strike is comparable to Weapon Mastery in its novelty, complexity and importance, and I think it merits similarly detailed playtesting to get the details right.

 

[Incenjucar]

some good comments here, also some serious cynicism and negativity not specific at all ......the bastion rules need a ton of work, imo, but they are at least a start. I'm not sure I need them, but the idea is good to add to the game. As for the cost, I get that official costs matter, but the DM is in total control over how much treasure PCs get, and how much stuff costs. So I can't recall the last time I even paid attention to what WotC says about it.

Sloppy introduction of ideas drains enthusiasm. Introducing a good idea with easily criticized and obvious execution flaws triggers defensive cynicism.

I try to think of it as "oh boy another good idea for indies to do better".

 

[Parmandur]

This playtest material is not perfect. I am incensed!

Only if you can use a Divine or Druidic Focus.

 

[Imaro]

The big hole with that system is really the fact that it's not a group project and then all the stuff being level-locked is just weird.

I don't see either of these as a hole in the system. Personally my players would enjoy having their own strongholds as opposed to being forced into a group one (though group strongholds should be an option). And D&D is a level based game so I expect level gating.