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

​

 

[Horwath]

Crap. Hunter's Mark the class is here to stay, then.

 

[Zaukrie]

Who is "em"? I was responding to you, not Imaro. I'm not even disagreeing per se, I'm saying I don't believe you actually want to understand if you totally don't understand at this point. It's been discussed so much, and you've been part of some of those discussions.

It's fine to not want to understand something, there are some things I'm just not interested in understanding either, but I generally avoid discussions of those things, rather than bringing it up as if it needed to be explained to me.

me....a typo. Seriously. but you knew that. I'm not the only DM to post on this thread that the DM is 100% in control of treasure given out, and therefore what things cost also......

 

[Imaro]

I think that's a thoughtless response, frankly.

Well you're wrong... I gave it ample thought.

Very few groups which aren't full of the most "special" players around will actually want separate bases for every PC, in my experience. So the fact there's absolutely no provision for group strongholds, indeed you'd be penalized for trying to do it, is bananas.

Eh, I think different classes (and thus different archetypes) will want different bases that serve different functions as well as something they can claim as their own in the campaign world. The fact that you can't recognize this doesn't make it any less valid or common because.... Anecdotal is anecdotal... of course if they give individual and group rules as I suggested it would satisfy both camps.

Secondly, the idea that a level limit on casting a spell or using a special ability is the same as a level limit on owning a pub is just laughable and totally unserious lol. And that you think that it's acceptable for the level minimum to own a pub be LEVEL FRICKIN THIRTEEN lol, higher level than most campaigns even go to is just wild.

One of the attainable abilities is literally resurrection but yes continue to tell me about what shouldn't be level gated.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

but you knew that

No, I didn't, and it's extremely rude to tell someone with severe ADHD that they're lying about not understanding a word. Didn't you do this before sometime? Or was that someone else?

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

They appear to be moving legendary actions to reactions, so this change was needed for shocking grasp.....at least that's my theory.

Shocking Grasp now removes Opportunity Attacks, so they already solved it removing legendary actions from bosses. So we're just back to 'advantage to touch is too strong', which was the whole point of the cantrip - if you're using this as a regular caster in melee you REALLY want it to land, and if you're using it as EK/Bladesinger instead of hitting with your magical weapon, it HAS to land reliably to ever be worth considering (especially when EK could just weapon mastery push people off if they want to disengage from a single target).

 

[DarkCrisis]

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."

Seriously? This is true? Ha ha ha yikes. Free magic items/effects and a save/Ress point. They actually did find a way to make 5E D&Ds combat even easier.

 

[Aldarc]

Feeling slightly vindicated about the Necromancer.

I suspect that the problem with the Necromancer is that many younger folks expecting to play video game style Necromancers in D&D are gobsmacked by a 1970s concept of the archetype. Outdated and a lot of micromanaging the undead. I'm worried that WotC will think that the problem is only the subclass rather than many of the core spells that compose its class fantasy.

 

[TwoSix]

me....a typo. Seriously. but you knew that. I'm not the only DM to post on this thread that the DM is 100% in control of treasure given out, and therefore what things cost also......

Yes, but the argument is "WotC should provide more guidance and guidelines as to how treasure is acquired and spent in the core rules".

Saying "You can do that yourself!" doesn't refute that argument.

If you're saying "Guidance is pointless, because you SHOULD do it yourself", that's a much stronger position, but will certainly invite more pushback.

 

[Parmandur]

Yes, but the argument is "WotC should provide more guidance and guidelines as to how treasure is acquired and spent in the core rules".

Saying "You can do that yourself!" doesn't refute that argument.

If you're saying "Guidance is pointless, because you SHOULD do it yourself", that's a much stronger position, but will certainly invite more pushback.

Perkins already said they will have more clear guidance in the DMG. Probsvly won't see that in UA, though.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

One of the attainable abilities is literally resurrection but yes continue to tell me about what shouldn't be level gated.

Oh dear oh dear.

That's not a rational or logical argument. That's an outright logical fallacy.

Just because a magical power should level-gated, doesn't mean OWNING A PUB is justifiable as level gated lol. What does this pub serve magic drinks?

(I am disappointed to say I cannot locate the ancient World of Warcraft "Drinking Magic Dranks" rap)