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

​

 

[kenmarable]

Capital A vs lower case a, huh? This is EXACTLY the kind of analytic reading that more explicit wording in the text of the rules should enable us to avoid. This isn't the Advanced Squad Leader rule book with differences between 'adjacent' and 'ADJACENT', nor should it be. A few extra words here and there to make the difference more obvious is a better use of their time.

Possibly, but it's also been that way for 9 years with 5e. Current PHB has always had the Attack action allowing you to make an attack. They are also consistent in being "Attack action" as a whole phrase, not just "Attack" and "attack." I just mentioned the capitalization to make it clearer. But throughout 5e, there have always been rules that applied to the Attack action that did not apply to every attack. I don't recall ever seeing confusion whether the Extra Attack class feature allowed you to make additional attacks with the offhand bonus attacks, but that has the exact same terminology issues. This is nothing new to this playtest document.

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

God, Book of Shadows.

It's a spell you cast to get spells.

Spell-ception.

Weren't we supposed to be fetishizing simple? In what way is this less simple than 'pick spells, know spells'?

it is the weirdest thing... if you make it a spell why not make it so others can take it? if it's a class feature that makes more sense.

 

[TwoSix]

I don’t mind that, honestly, especially since Counterspell and Dispel Magic only work on spells. Making most magic into spells makes the rules governing magic more consistent, which isn’t a bad thing in my opinion.

But next, they'll start formatting all special abilities into little blocks that look like spells, and we all know where that leads.

 

[Weiley31]

Bold added. This is something that comes up a lot when discussing the warlock, and I just don’t understand… The DM isn’t the one in control of when the PCs rest. If you want a short rest, just take one.

DM: I mean, I question why you're taking a short rest in the middle of a raging waterfall, Anon Warlock, but if you insist.

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

That would be seven out of the nine invocations you get as a warlock (it used to be eight). And an eighth if you want Agonizing Blast (which admittedly the Book of Shadows doesn't need).

So yay! Two invocations total!

why are the warlocks getting hit this hard?

 

[Charlaquin]

The biggest con is it makes everything spells and magic and nothing innate knowladge.

My wizard isn't smart enough to keep spell formulas, he knows a spell that copies it.

Well, “memorize spell” is poorly named. It should really be “replace spell” or “transmute spell” or something, since what it actually does is change out a spell you did memorize for one you didn’t. Keeping that in mind, changing one spell into another, changing what a spell does, or creating a new spell by modifying an existing one all make sense to me as magical processes, and so it makes sense for them to be affected by antimagic, which in 5e means they need to be spells.

It does bother me a bit that they’re making more magical features into spells on the player side and making fewer of them spells on the DM side though.

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

I don’t mind that, honestly, especially since Counterspell and Dispel Magic only work on spells. Making most magic into spells makes the rules governing magic more consistent, which isn’t a bad thing in my opinion.

oh so counterspell the wizard scribing a spell into his book is cool in your mind?

 

[Charlaquin]

But next, they'll start formatting all special abilities into little blocks that look like spells, and we all know where that leads.

To the best-designed edition of D&D to date?

 

[Fallen star]

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?

 

[billd91]

The idea that you should assume an ambush is going to be manageable is metagame thinking of the bad sort. You're making decisions thinking the game is going to act like a game. That's wrong for one because your character doesn't know that to be the case, and wrong for two because the DM doesn't have to do that at all.

I don’t believe metagaming thinking of any sort is bad, but moreover, I’ll reiterate that if the DM would rather TPK the group than allow the warlock to function as intended, it’s time to find a new DM.

Gonna take an opportunity to point out that you can have a relationship with your players so that you aren't screwing over the intended function of the short rest classes (like the warlock) while still having specific situations in which a short rest is difficult or even impossible to take (without taking significant measures to enable it) - like a riled up goblin stronghold.