D&D (2024) New One D&D Playtest Includes 5 Classes & New Weapon Mastery System

The latest playtest packet for One D&D has just landed, and features five classes (Barbarian, Fighter, Sorcerer, Warlock, and Wizard) and the new Weapon Mastery system.

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 the rules on the Weapon Mastery property, updates to weapons, new and revised spells, several new feats, and five classes: Barbarian, Fighter, Sorcerer, Warlock, and Wizard. You will also find an updated rules glossary that supercedes the glossary of any previous playtest documents.

Claim Unearthed Arcana now! - D&D Beyond

www.dndbeyond.com

​

 

[gorice]

Its going to be interesting when the next few months roll around and the indecisive and vague feedback people are going to give on the survey end up negatively impacting the game...again.

People sure have a lot to complain about yet they have a hard time saying what it is. Its like a large majority of the thread is ripe for a monkey's paw incident.

"The weapon masteries aren't enough for the fighter," congrats, we now have three more masteries. Problem solved, you're welcome.

"The warlock shouldn't be a half-caster! We miss pact magic!" Congrats, pact magic is back but you get 1 spell slot that recovers on initiative once per turn. Very unique, right?

Oh, mystic arcanum should be a feature? Okay, but for that, we'll tack off 3 invocation slots.

"Modify spell is overpowered! Wizards can now do anything for free!" Okay, we removed modify spell and changed nothing else about the wizard.

It won't be exactly like this, but if the community doesn't actually think about what they want and learn how to explain it, then we're just going to re-invent the changes from DnDNext to 5e.

That's really on WotC for setting themselves impossible design goals like 'please everyone' and 'don't rock the boat'. If you don't have a clear design vision, all feedback is useless.

That's assuming that the playtests are actually about feedback, and not PR.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I think people would enjoy the video they put out in association with this video. In it they explain a lot of choices including this champion choice. It makes sense, and is worth listening to / watching.

If anyone here is a BTS fan they will know the analogy of this champion ability being like how Jungkook in his competitiveness seems to be good at everything in the moment, provided the other members are watching and he has a desire to win or impress someone. That's likely an obscure reference from me though, but I've known that kind of guy. It's a psychological effect of some who can really step up their game when winning is on the line. A lot of athletes have this as well. In the NBA, a lot of players can be quite mediocre during the regular season but seem to have a switch they flip for the playoffs or when the game is on the line in the final two minutes. Some stats even measure player "clutch" ratings. Literally a player can be a bad free thrower, and then when the game is on the line nail their free throws every time. And viewers are often "What? But how? Every time!" It's not magic, it's just this winners mindset in some...champions.

Simon the Sorcerer!!!

 

[Parmandur]

The 2014 DMG guidelines are, to put it politely, hot garbage.

If you don't think a Fireball only hitting enemies, not friends, shouldn't affect spell level, make it a house rule that the spell works that way in your game today. Even better, give out some Wands of Fireball.

As an illusionist player, I will be thrilled if the new spell creation rules go in as-is.

As a DM, I will definitely be putting in some stop gaps in the system.

And I think that's fair. Since these changes don't touch on the aspects that WotC measures for Spell Level, I think DM control for table flavor makes sense. My feedback will be positive, but suggest some more strict guidelines might be appropriate.

 

[Mistwell]

Simon the Sorcerer!!!

I hadn't considered that but yes, that nails the concept in one!

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

That's assuming that the playtests are actually about feedback, and not PR.

They've already made changes based on feedback -- remember when the changes to inspiration were the most controversial thing they were pondering? -- so they're definitely about feedback.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

There's actually a lot of controversy about whether it's really him or not. I go with not, but it was more funny to go with it in this thread and I like humor.

I agree that it's not "really" him. Still. In character.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

That's assuming that the playtests are actually about feedback, and not PR.

If they're about "PR"....

 

[CM]

Warlocks choose their patron at 3rd level? So what exactly is a first level warlock? Where does their magic come from? Why do they need a patron at all?

A dabbler in the dark arts, who is only beginning to learn about the easy path to true power.

 

[CM]

There's actually a lot of controversy about whether it's really him or not. I go with not, but it was more funny to go with it in this thread and I like humor.

I always assumed that, as horny as the old coot was and how long he's been around, at least 10% of sorcerers were descended from him by now, like Genghis Khan. Scion of Elminster sorcerer subclass, anyone?

Back on topic, quite pleased with berserker, a bit disappointed in offhand attack rules changing again.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I always assumed that, as horny as the old coot was and how long he's been around, at least 10% of sorcerers were descended from him by now, like Genghis Khan.

Back on topic, quite pleased with berserker, a bit disappointed in offhand attack rules changing again.

None of that stuff is in the gamebooks or the Avatar trilogy (the only novels he appears in that I've read). Happy to live in ignorance.