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.

​

 

[Parmandur]

In fact, that's probably the decision that they came to rather than changing the rule: Make it a clearly defined optional rule and see what people do with it.

Honestly, Perkins video laying out the new DMG was way more exciting than any PHB playtest packet to me personally.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

ok, if the players want to avoid a short rest then yes, the two cases are different. I was looking at it from the perspective of the players wanting one.

It works either way. You just give them reasons to push on, and reason not to rest, and sometimes provide no safety unless they work for it.

I am cool with any short rest duration and whatever is getting recharged by it, as long as my players never take one

Yeah that ship sailed a long time ago. I don’t think you could even reasonably make 5e a long rest only game without massively rewriting it.

I have no idea what about less than long rest partial resource recovery is so anathema for you, though. Like other than tradition I can’t think of any reason to take issue with it?

 

[I'm A Banana]

I think the general thrust of your argument has merit, but I also believe that many DMs would consider Short Rests more easily into their narratives if the were actually short. Like, short enough that you don't feel the need to have the guards change shifts during them.

The thing that I don't like about this is that taking a rest of any sort is a chance for an interesting choice by the players. There's a cost/benefit analysis involved. We get this, but we have to sacrifice that.

If a short rest has some dang teeth in it, it becomes worth doing - the benefit is just too large to leave on the table (or not doing it is so punishing that they really can't ignore it), so the party will want to create and take opportunities for short resting. The 1 hour length is valuable there, because it means the party might lose something. There's a risk there that the guards will change or they'll be discovered or something. As it is now, the short rest just isn't often valuable enough.

If the short rest is extremely convenient, it becomes just an assumed thing. Everyone get your powers back, the fight's over. Then, everyone is taking a short rest, but it's not ever really actually much of a decision. In that case, why don't we just get rid of 'em as an assumed element of play?

 

[mamba]

Yeah that ship sailed a long time ago. I don’t think you could even reasonably make 5e a long rest only game without massively rewriting it.

Yes, it needs a bit of a rewrite. For a while it looked like 2024 might tackle it, but then they dropped the ball

 

[Stalker0]

Then, everyone is taking a short rest, but it's not ever really actually much of a decision. In that case, why don't we just get rid of 'em as an assumed element of play?

I would argue the decision then is for the DM.

The baseline narrative is "PCs have an encounter, rest and recover". However, by still requiring some "rest mechanic" it gives the DM the narrative window to "throw curveballs" that disrupt the party's refresh, forcing them to start a new combat or some other encounter less than their best.

That narrative troupe is very important so I think you want the DM to have access to it, its just that 90% of the time I am fine with the party just recovering abilities and moving on. I just want the lever to mess with them that other 10% of the time to spice things up.

 

[Parmandur]

Yes, it needs a bit of a rewrite. For a while it looked like 2024 might tackle it, but then they dropped the ball

The only "need" a game has is to facilitate people having fun. If the rules succeed at doing so, and are liked as is, changing for the sake of change is not necessarily going to achieve that end.

 

[Vael]

Honestly, Perkins video laying out the new DMG was way more exciting than any PHB playtest packet to me personally.

Same. There is some good stuff in the DMG, but good luck finding it. Like starting equipment at higher levels? I know it's in the book, but finding in the index ... it's never under what I think, and then finding in the book, it's maddening.

Ultimately, for me, while all the stuff about PC options is interesting, the real selling point for the 2024 books is if the new MM and DMG make the game easier to run.

 

[Parmandur]

Same. There is some good stuff in the DMG, but good luck finding it. Like starting equipment at higher levels? I know it's in the book, but finding in the index ... it's never under what I think, and then finding in the book, it's maddening.

Ultimately, for me, while all the stuff about PC options is interesting, the real selling point for the 2024 books is if the new MM and DMG make the game easier to run.

For real.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

The thing that I don't like about this is that taking a rest of any sort is a chance for an interesting choice by the players. There's a cost/benefit analysis involved. We get this, but we have to sacrifice that.

If a short rest has some dang teeth in it, it becomes worth doing - the benefit is just too large to leave on the table (or not doing it is so punishing that they really can't ignore it), so the party will want to create and take opportunities for short resting. The 1 hour length is valuable there, because it means the party might lose something. There's a risk there that the guards will change or they'll be discovered or something. As it is now, the short rest just isn't often valuable enough.

If the short rest is extremely convenient, it becomes just an assumed thing. Everyone get your powers back, the fight's over. Then, everyone is taking a short rest, but it's not ever really actually much of a decision. In that case, why don't we just get rid of 'em as an assumed element of play?

I think what I generally see asked for makes the most sense: Short rests that are shorter than an hour, but longer than "per encounter". The best solution, IMO is 10-20 minutes. I'd say 15, but I think 10-minute increments are a thing in 5e (Rituals, etc) and therefore the choice is: 1 or 2 "old-school Turns"?

20 minutes is probably the best possible middle-ground. Long enough that you could get caught doing it, and short enough that if the party really needs the rest, the DM can probably justify giving it to them without interruption, but also without feeling like the monsters are just standing around waiting for them.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I would argue the decision then is for the DM.

The baseline narrative is "PCs have an encounter, rest and recover". However, by still requiring some "rest mechanic" it gives the DM the narrative window to "throw curveballs" that disrupt the party's refresh, forcing them to start a new combat or some other encounter less than their best.

That narrative troupe is very important so I think you want the DM to have access to it, its just that 90% of the time I am fine with the party just recovering abilities and moving on. I just want the lever to mess with them that other 10% of the time to spice things up.

This is essentially saying it should be an optional rule. As a DM, I am not looking to make more decisions! If the baseline narrative is that the PC's basically immediately recover from an encounter, then that's the world I'm gonna live in, and chaining together combats will not be something that really happens (we design "chains" as one combat to get a sense of their actual dange rlvel)

I think that's definitely a viable way to go. It's cinematic, it's story-forward, it's cutting away things that aren't going to be interesting decisions.

I would prefer, I think, a short rest that is good enough or necessary enough that the PC's want it. Because I prefer the narrative of combat being something with some lasting consequences. D&D hasn't really been on my side for a while on that note, though!