D&D (2024) New One D&D Playtest Shows Us The New Druid & Paladin

WotC has released the fourth One D&D playtest document. This 29-page PDF includes the druid and the paladin with Circle of the Moon and Oath of Devotion subclasses.

Druid. The Druid class and Circle of the Moon subclass are ready for playtesting here.

Paladin. The Paladin class and Oath of Devotion subclass are ready for playtesting here.

Feats. Several revised feats appear here for your feedback, with more revised feats coming in future articles.

Spells. More spells are ready for playtesting, with a focus on smite spells, Find Familiar, and Find Steed.

Rules Glossary. The rules glossary has been updated again and supersedes the glossary in previous Unearthed Arcana articles. In this document, any underlined term in the body text appears in that glossary, which defines game terms that have been clarified or redefined for this playtest or that don’t appear in the 2014 Player’s Handbook.

Claim Unearthed Arcana now! - D&D Beyond

www.dndbeyond.com

 

[Ruin Explorer]

The Druid is just absolutely terrible, WoW-inspired drivel, frankly. In the worst possible way - i.e. all the bad ideas and none of the good. It's the first 1D&D class which just trashes the existing class, rather than simply adjusting/tweaking it. It's lazy, it's unevocative, and it's not even fun. Not letting people have a tiny form until L11 is, as I said in the other thread, honestly one of the dumbest things I've ever read in a D&D product, and I've read 34 years of these things! This is trash-tier design. I almost wonder if they're intentionally trolling/checking we're awake.

Paladins have probably the dumbest lore we've ever seen for them, with a lot of vague chatter about "standing against annihilation" and "standing against oblivion", which means exactly nothing, and doesn't really seem to match up with Paladins from any edition, and particularly not with Paladin subclasses from 5E.

However, at least with Paladins they're mechanically very similar, without absolutely no drop in power (!?!? but Druids needed a huge nerf? Bizarre), and the Breaking Your Oath lore is a distinct improvement, especially in clarity.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Thoughts:

1) People who have stated repeatedly they have no interest in 1D&D jumping in to argue incessantly about whether it's a new edition feels like threadcrapping.

It is but the best response is to flat out ignore them (IMHO)

2) New wildshape approach is good. Standardize the mechanics, free the fluff. Am I reading this correctly that you can speak in wildshape from the jump?

Yes, you have your languages.

3) That said, moon druids could use some cool ways to tweak the templates. It feels like they could use a buff, but it would also make them feel more moon-druidy with the standardized templates. You can add some more complexity there without overloading the non-moon druids with complexity. Two elemental-themed powers doesn't feel moon-druidy to me.

I would agree and I think that they should clarify if the Wildshape forms attacks are magical or not.

4) Glad they're not set on PB times per day for everything, multiclassing balance be damned.

I like it also .

5) Paladin changes look good across the board. Love the smite spells. Surprised aura survived. That said, I feel like players might be making fewer saving throws with the new monsters (including [not] spellcaster monsters).

I also like the new pally stuff. Really like that there is now some incentive to cast the smite spells.
Love the new steed rules.
And the familar rules.

I also noticed that not all underlined spells have their definitions reprinted like barkskin. I presume that the defintion in the last playtest packet is to be used.
I am also not a fan of the new Inspiration rules. Preferred the previous version where you could pass it around if one had one already.

 

[Loren the GM]

except two spells that have the same name work diffrent, some conditions only apply to one not the other... how the feats work alone.

Last time my example was a dwarven bard that need so many adjustments it might as well just be making the character over

i mean great, if spells work differently, fine. Different classes have different features they can use. And they have various resistances and ways to mitigate.

It isn't my job as the DM to handle all of that, it is the player who watches their character sheet and lets me know what they do with their spell, or if they resist a condition, or whatever.

I'm not sure what exactly you are pointing out with your dwarven bard?

 

[Zaukrie]

I agree the fluff for paladins is awful. That's what happens when your sort of, almost, somewhat, try to make a champion, but only give them paladin powers..... Either give us a paladin with paladin fluff, or give us champions with various powers.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

D20 Test (rolling a 1 on a d20 no longer awards Inspiration, which is now called Heroic Advantage)

I am finally getting to the point where I remember to award inspiration to people who do especially good roleplay or come up with amazing ideas, and they're turning it into something more focused! (Which is a fine idea, but come on!)

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I agree the fluff for paladins is awful. That's what happens when your sort of, almost, somewhat, try to make a champion, but only give them paladin powers..... Either give us a paladin with paladin fluff, or give us champions with various powers.

Yeah it's so vague and incoherent. It's like, who the hell came up with this? Not a D&D player, I'd suggest. Both that lore and the Druid design make this look like the intern was allowed to write this playtest packet. The essence of the Paladin is the holy warrior, some weird-ass nonsense about "fighting against oblivion", which sounds more like struggling with personal issues than anything else.

 

[Scribe]

The Druid is just absolutely terrible, WoW-inspired drivel, frankly. In the worst possible way - i.e. all the bad ideas and none of the good. It's the first 1D&D class which just trashes the existing class, rather than simply adjusting/tweaking it. It's lazy, it's unevocative, and it's not even fun. Not letting people have a tiny form until L11 is, as I said in the other thread, honestly one of the dumbest things I've ever read in a D&D product, and I've read 34 years of these things! This is trash-tier design. I almost wonder if they're intentionally trolling/checking we're awake.

Paladins have probably the dumbest lore we've ever seen form them, with a lot of vague chatter about "standing against annihilation" and "standing against oblivion", which means exactly nothing, and doesn't really seem to match up with Paladins from any edition, and particularly not with Paladin subclasses from 5E.

However, at least with Paladins they're mechanically very similar, without absolutely no drop in power (!?!? but Druids needed a huge nerf? Bizarre), and the Breaking Your Oath lore is a distinct improvement, especially in clarity.

Its that good eh? I'll have to look after work as Paladin is a go to default for me...

 

[dave2008]

The Druid is just absolutely terrible, WoW-inspired drivel, frankly. In the worst possible way - i.e. all the bad ideas and none of the good. It's the first 1D&D class which just trashes the existing class, rather than simply adjusting/tweaking it. It's lazy, it's unevocative, and it's not even fun. Not letting people have a tiny form until L11 is, as I said in the other thread, honestly one of the dumbest things I've ever read in a D&D product, and I've read 34 years of these things! This is trash-tier design. I almost wonder if they're intentionally trolling/checking we're awake.

Paladins have probably the dumbest lore we've ever seen form them, with a lot of vague chatter about "standing against annihilation" and "standing against oblivion", which means exactly nothing, and doesn't really seem to match up with Paladins from any edition, and particularly not with Paladin subclasses from 5E.

However, at least with Paladins they're mechanically very similar, without absolutely no drop in power (!?!? but Druids needed a huge nerf? Bizarre), and the Breaking Your Oath lore is a distinct improvement, especially in clarity.

Well, all I want to say is a lot of people (on this thread alone) don't agree with you.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I'm not sure what exactly you are pointing out with your dwarven bard?

if 2 people new to D&D showed up to a game one night, one with the 2024phb, and one with the 2014 PHB and both made dwarf bards they would look like they were made with diffrent systems/editions... and not only would they be shocked to see the diffrence, but even inplay you can't use both books condition list.

 

[Remathilis]

sorry but no. You can't really play 2024 characters with the same class/race as the 2014 characters (atleast no more or less then you could run a 2nd 3rd or 4th edition character next to one)
the change to base rules (status, and spells) the change to where you get what... you have to update a character from 1 book to the other to play at most tables

So by this logic.

1. 3.0, 3.5 and Pathfinder are incompatible with each other.
2. AD&D 1e and 2e are incompatible with each other.
3. Black Flag, Level Up, and 5e are incompatible with each other.
4. 4e and Essentials are incompatible with each other.

Basically, if a book changes the abilities of a previously established class/race/whatever, it is no longer compatible.

...


Oh Pelor, that makes every 2e setting that changed how classes or races work (Dark Sun, Ravenloft, Dragonlance, even Forgotten Realms) incompatible with each other and with Core AD&D!