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.

​

 

[Hussar]

I Don't think I could even begin to explain without a complaint about jargon or theory crafting. It's been covered and covered recently how short rest nova class design like 2014 warlock and monk coupled with a rest system designed to guarantee a successful rest is a problem. Going any deeper into that explanation without using jargon or references to the system elements involved is an unreasonable hurdle

You may have covered it. Fine. I haven't honestly been paying much attention to the monk or the warlock, partially because I don't really care that much, but mostly because, again, the idea that either a monk or a warlock is a problematic class is such a made up issue. Ten years and NO ONE has ever complained about monks or warlocks being overpowered. And, the number of presumptions in "a rest system guaranteed a successful rest" is just staggering.

Here's a thought though. Instead of using short forms and neologisms like "coffeelock" or "sorcadin", why not simply use English words or, I dunno, words that ACTUALLY appear in the books?

Look, @tetrsodium, you have made some very, very strong statements about "how the game is played" that in no way resemble what I have seen at the table. And, I have a sneaking suspicion that these problems are far more theoretical than real. First off, we have pretty strong evidence that casters are generally single classed. People aren't playing multiclass casters very often. According to the stats we have:

https://www.enworld.org/threads/whos-multiclassing-with-who-more-d-d-beyond-stats.666122/

"
It turns out that 11% of level 2+ characters are multiclass and 27% of level 20 characters are multiclass. This varies by class, of course, with the fighter being the most common, with 33% multiclassed at levels 2+ and nearly 40% at level 20.

In the graphics here, the light blue is characters of level 2+, the dark blue is characters of level 20. The fact that you can take more than just two classes means that these won't add up to exactly 100%.

Fighter/Rogue is the most popular combo, followed by Barbarian/Fighter. Warlock/Bard is the least popular."

If, again, after ten years, only about a quarter of high level characters at most are multiclassed, then any complaints about multiclassing being broken is something that most tables aren't seeing at all. Monks, again from the stats we have, are one of the least played classes. The only class that's played less is a druid. If monks are breaking the game, not a whole lot of tables have apparently figured this out.

So, yeah, this is just theory crafting. It's not a real problem.

 

[mamba]

If, again, after ten years, only about a quarter of high level characters at most are multiclassed, then any complaints about multiclassing being broken is something that most tables aren't seeing at all.

that does not follow… if every 4th char is multiclassed and the average table has 4 players… that gives you a 2/3s chance of at least one player being multiclassed per table

My main complaint about SR is that it is so uneven who benefits how much from it, making some classes either too weak or too OP due to their reliance on it and the number of SRs they get. That should be fixed, regardless of multiclassing issues with it.

 

[MockingBird]

I'm trying to follow the complaint. So is the issue players taking a short rest whenever they can? Like constantly taking a SR to recharge?

 

[CapnZapp]

This all evolved out of conversations from a dozen pages back about the idea that WotC using 70+% acceptance to determine which changes to go forward with were a mistake in some people's opinions.

It is pretty obvious that

a) the majority isn't always right
b) that WotC only goes with the majority when it suits them

The point is that the people arguing that making and following surveys is the future of D&D (or something) have pretty heavy blinders on. They ignore that the algorithm "we always do what 70%+ want" is pure crap, and they also ignore that WotC knows it is crap (and ignores it whenever they need to).

Basically the only real value (for us) is to be able to hand-pick Internet discussions to win, when you happen to agree with the majority but when you're arguing with someone who doesn't. The value for WotC is to be able to point to "see, we're doing what you guys want" (though only when WotC wants that too).

If we really wanted a game designed by a majority committee, let's ask chat GPT. Its bland and mediocre output probably is a good representation of what a game designed by majority committee would result in. This "72% of people totally agree so this direction is the best" mentality won't achieve what you think you want.

What really is going on is that a game needs to be hand-crafted by an experienced team of developers with a clear vision. Then you can dislike what they craft, or argue the game should go in another direction.

 

[Hussar]

that does not follow… if every 4th char is multiclassed and the average table has 4 players… that gives you a 2/3s chance of at least one player being multiclassed per table

My main complaint about SR is that it is so uneven who benefits how much from it, making some classes either too weak or too OP due to their reliance on it and the number of SRs they get. That should be fixed, regardless of multiclassing issues with it.

Every fourth character by 20th level . At lower levels, it's about 1 in 10. Makes sense I suppose. The more levels you have, the more you can multiclass. But, when you look at what the multiclasses actually are - most of them are mixing and matching fighter/rogue and barbarian. There's a bit of warlock and bard tossed in there. But, the majority aren't casters and rogues, barbarians and bards aren't short rest characters.

IOW, the whole short rest thing isn't a big deal. Let's be honest here, the 5e classes, up to about 10th level, are pretty well balanced. And it certainly isn't the short rest classes that are too powerful after 10th level.

 

[Hussar]

I'm trying to follow the complaint. So is the issue players taking a short rest whenever they can? Like constantly taking a SR to recharge?

Thank you for this. I'm glad I'm not the only one who's having trouble following the trail.

 

[mamba]

Every fourth character by 20th level . At lower levels, it's about 1 in 10.

you mentioned 2nd level and 20th, clearly it increases with time / levels, it is not just jumping from 19 to 20

Give me the 10th level % and we can do that math

IOW, the whole short rest thing isn't a big deal.

as far as exploiting multiclassing is concerned.

I don’t like it even for single classes. As I said, it unbalances SR or LR chars, depending on how many SRs there are in a day. It takes away agency and attrition. Nothing but downsides

 

[mamba]

Thank you for this. I'm glad I'm not the only one who's having trouble following the trail.

you do not have trouble following, you disagree

 

[Remathilis]

I'm trying to follow the complaint. So is the issue players taking a short rest whenever they can? Like constantly taking a SR to recharge?

It's a mismatch of expectations. DMs control (to a degree) narrative flow and can determine if a short rest is possible. They also know that some PCs ability to Nova is based on rest frequently. Players know their ability to recharge is governed by it and want to rest as often as possible. Well, some players do. Others don't care as their abilities don't recharge except on long rest.

Long story short: there is unnecessary conflict between players who want frequent SR, players who don't need or care for SR, and DMs who don't want SRs to be used to Nova every encounter and impose some pacing control.

 

[Hussar]

you do not have trouble following, you disagree

Fair.

Although I honestly do find Tetra’s posts incredibly opaque.