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.

​

 

[Neonchameleon]

Us too. Players write the stat blocks on index cards and they're at their fingertips. No flipping through the Monster manual during the game!

Reminds me of my Pathfinder Summoner ... who ended up with a 33 page character sheet in Google Docs (including all the summone I might want with their variant stats calculated).

 

[Parmandur]

Both of these would be terrible, for different reasons.

This also seems terrible. Why on earth would your PHB have just half the school specialists? Why not just one specialist subclass, and take the rest of the design space for something more interesting?

Whatever schools they leave out are going to tick off somebody.

I mean, how many Abjurerer Stan's can there be...? But as it stands, the old Subclasses are definitely still viable, and it gives Wizard something to hang their pointy hat on for the inevitable Big Book of Everything, along with Clerics.

 

[Gradine]

I mean, how many Abjurerer Stan's can there be...?

 

[Kurotowa]

There's also a little something jarring about some of the simulationist changes accompanied by gamist changes - in particular, Weapon Mastery. Great, we get interesting differences in weapons that someone with the proper training can take advantage of. But then they can forget that training and replace it with having training for a couple of completely different weapons each day if they want. It's a minor thing, but it kinda irks me.

I picture it as "You were trained in all the weapons, but you can only stay at peak performance with a couple of them at once. The rest of them, the ones you're not using regularly, you're just a little rusty with. Not so much you lose proficiency, just enough that you can't perform at the absolute pinnacle without taking a day to refresh your memory and do a few drills to shake off that rust."

Mastery is what is says, the true master level of performance. You can't be a swordsman for a year, then pick up an axe and expect not to need even a little time to reacclimate yourself. I mean, a high level Fighter might be able to, because they get enough additional Mastery slots they can stay in practice with a wide range of weapons at once. But someone low level, or who isn't a Fighter? You gotta run some drills.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

Both of these would be terrible, for different reasons.

This also seems terrible. Why on earth would your PHB have just half the school specialists? Why not just one specialist subclass, and take the rest of the design space for something more interesting?

Whatever schools they leave out are going to tick off somebody.

It would take too much book space to provide the 32+ unique class abilities to adequately represent 8 sublcasses in one subclass. It just doesn't work. And yeah, some people who want the updated "schools" will grumpy that they still have to use the 2014 versions until they release the others.

 

[Remathilis]

My real-world comparison of the current D&D game.

Poor taste. Do better.

 

[Remathilis]

How they're not passing this off as 5.5, or even 6e, is the biggest joke of these playtests entirely.

It's barely more than 5e with Tasha's and MotM. It's 5.11 for workgroups. It doesn't even rise to the level of 5.5, let alone 6.

 

[Mull Ponders]

Cunning Strike is too good. At the cost of 1D6 sneak damage, you can try to Disarm/Poison/Trip the enemy. And you can do it at range, no risking your precious hide. How much damage is the Big Bad going to do without their weapon, or at disadvantage? What is to prevent you from disarming at range, and one of your allies just picks that weapon up?

 

[Vincent55]

Poor taste. Do better.

 

[overgeeked]

I'm testing right now what would the game look like if I used only the Basic Rules + no archetype + no ASI+ the following rule variants: Background/Race Skills, Ability Score skills, Spell Points and Slow Natural Recovery.

I think it would leave me enough space to go crazy on magic items and consumables, like in 2000 when I was 10 yo and played hours upon hours of BG 1-2-ToB just to gather awesome magic items.

Sweet nostalgia

That’s an idea I’ve been toying with, too. Stripping 5E down to the core and seeing what it looks like, then maybe building it back up a bit from there.