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.

​

 

[Remathilis]

My point is: please stop worshiping "the majority". All it'll get you is stagnation and irrelevance in the long run.

Ah yes. An enlightened minority has always had the best interest of the majority in mind when they make sweeping radical changes...

 

[FitzTheRuke]

These two main arguments could go on forever when I think we all agree that:

1) The short-rest/long-rest dynamic as currently implemented has a few problems; & 2) They're not going to entirely excise it, so tweaking it a grade toward "better" would be nice.

And

1) The game being entirely designed by a committee of fans would probably turn out to be terrible; & 2) That doesn't mean that the fans should be ignored.

WotC has chosen their method of fan-interaction when it comes to rules. I don't think it's the best choice on how to do it (I generally always think that things could be better, if one keeps trying to improve) but it's what we've got and what they think works for them.

The results will speak for themselves, which will almost certainly be imperfect but successful (for awhile at least) before they need to look at it all again.

 

[CapnZapp]

The problem is Zapp, that DnD was designed the way you say - internally- repeatedly.

And while that worked for adnd, I can’t say the same for 3e onwards.

Yes, 4E is one of the five editions that weren't created by committee, and it failed. Your point?

 

[CapnZapp]

Ah yes. An enlightened minority has always had the best interest of the majority in mind when they make sweeping radical changes...

If your only reply can be an attempt to bring politics into this (with words like "enlightened" and "radical") you don't have very good arguments.

 

[CapnZapp]

The game being entirely designed by a committee of fans would probably turn out to be terrible

And a game maintained by the majority of fans won't ever evolve.

 

[CapnZapp]

Why do you think it is dishonest? A stable Evergreen game rules set reprinted and adjusted for theme and slight variations is a well established model. Settlers of Catan and Monopoly are the examples WotC used when Modern D&D first came out, and keeping all my current D&D books is extremely valuable to me.

Evergreen stability is not stagnation. Look at Catan and Monopoly, and how they thrive. Hardly irrelevant to the games market. Mike Mearls opined in some interview nigh a decade ago that if TSR hadn't ever made AD&D, but kept going with something like the Badic line, they could have kept it going. What we are seeing is the achievement of Evergreen D&D for the modetn rules: iteration and refinement over time, but overthrowing the rule ser doesn't make business sense.

I don't think 5E is an Evergreen game and I don't see 5E existing for a fraction of the length Settlers have existed (not to mention Monopoly).

Overthrowing the rules is the standard in the business and WotC will do precisely that once sales are tanking sufficiently that a mere coat of paint (like with the upcoming 5.5) will no longer suffice.

 

[CapnZapp]

I think something should be said for incremental innovation as well. 4e was too radical a 180 from 3e. I wager a world where 5e comes after 3e (a stripped down and simpler game that borrows heavily from classic aesthetics) followed by Essentials (4e style rules with a classic aesthetic) followed by 4e Classic (new lore, new mechanics) would have been easier for many to accept. There is something to be said about the frog on the slowly heated pan...

As I see it, 5E is a worthy successor to 3E.

However, in their frenzy to simplify and streamline they threw out a few genuinely useful sub-systems, most notably a proper gold economy. The weak monster design can be considered another example, but it is at least slowly (very slowly) being rectified. The other weak spot is the shallow customization options.

(The less said about 4E the better.)

 

[Parmandur]

Yes, 4E is one of the five editions that weren't created by committee, and it failed. Your point?

You keep usingg this phrase, "design by comittee," but the current revision isn't any more or less a comittee design than pre-modern D&D ever was (more lile 20 Editions than 5, BTW). The designers are just iteratimg their design in a manner that gathers public feedback as a way to test the appeal of their designs, which will naturally be conservative for a popular and functional game. Why should a game company design a product any other way than to maximize appeal to players...?

 

[Parmandur]

I don't think 5E is an Evergreen game and I don't see 5E existing for a fraction of the length Settlers have existed (not to mention Monopoly).

Overthrowing the rules is the standard in the business and WotC will do precisely that once sales are tanking sufficiently that a mere coat of paint (like with the upcoming 5.5) will no longer suffice.

It really isn't standard in RPGs, let alone games in general. Call of Cthulu has gone 40 years without once "overthrowing the rules": CoC 1E products and 7E products are interoperable still. I see no reason to imagine that modern D&D, which has a good 10 year run prior to these revisions, can't last another 50+ years along similar lines.

 

[Parmandur]

And a game maintained by the majority of fans won't ever evolve.

On the contrary, we can see the evolution happening now. It is just careful and iterative, rather than throwing out any babies with the bathwater.