D&D (2024) New Unearthed Arcana Playtest Includes Barbarian, Druid, and Monk

The latest Unearthed Arcana playtest packet is now live with new barbarian, druid, and monk versions, as well as new spells and weapons, and a revised Ability Score Improvement feat.

Claim Unearthed Arcana now! - D&D Beyond

www.dndbeyond.com

​

WHATS INSIDE

Here are the new and revised elements in this article:

Classes. Three classes are here: Barbarian, Druid, and Monk. Each one includes one subclass: Path of the World Tree (Barbarian), Circle of the Moon (Druid), and Warrior of the Hand (Monk).

Spells. New and revised spells are included.

The following sections were introduced in a previous article and are provided here for reference:

Weapons. Weapon revisions are included.

Feats. This includes a revised version of Ability Score Improvement.

Rules Glossary. The rules glossary includes the few rules that have revised definitions in the playtest. In this document, any underlined term in the body text appears in the glossary.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

So the high strength character becomes the party's pack mule? And that is how they envision their character? I hope I don't have to explain to you why that is not an appealing part of the fantasy of playing someone like Grettir the Strong, ghost puncher and outlaw from the Saga of Grettir of the Icelandic Sagas.

And you have told me nothing of your games to make me think yours are any different, other than smug assertions that you are too clever and skilled a DM to allow that to happen. Give some concrete examples then, instead of just accusations that the people pointing this out must obviously be doing it wrong.

I believe you have a wonderful game where you have fun despite the imbalance of dex vs str. I can imagine such games and we had them too.

Please just believe me, when I say in our games there is no problem (anymore).

I am sad that you feel, I accuse you of badwrongfun in the same breath where you tell me how some part of fantasy are totally unappealing (in your perspective).

So my proposal, again, is to just let this be. Lets stop accusing each other of badwrongfun and have a merry christmas.

 

[Chaosmancer]

The use of very strong magic. You can blow those things up with magic. Spellcasters would prefer to not expend that spell slot though.


That's a hypothetical I've never seen or worried about and the game has never broken down that I am aware of due to this hypothetical problem, never seen it on this board or Reddit or FB or anywhere else with people saying this happened, so yeah I don't think the game needs to solve a problem that doesn't exist.

So, you've never worried about a challenge the party isn't equipped to handle? A dexadin, Ranger, rogue and bard party might lack strength and magic to explode things. It may not be something discussed on Reddit, but any DM with even minimal experience is going to realize that a task that requires magic the party doesn't have or skills they don't have is going to need adjusted.

 

[Mistwell]

So, you've never worried about a challenge the party isn't equipped to handle? A dexadin, Ranger, rogue and bard party might lack strength and magic to explode things.

You find a way or you just don't solve that problem and move on. Despite claims to the contrary WOTC published dungeons don't have many "single path" problems. You might lose out on some treasure or an encounter or something, but it's not the end of the world.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I believe you have a wonderful game where you have fun despite the imbalance of dex vs str. I can imagine such games and we had them too.

Please just believe me, when I say in our games there is no problem (anymore).

I am sad that you feel, I accuse you of badwrongfun in the same breath where you tell me how some part of fantasy are totally unappealing (in your perspective).

So my proposal, again, is to just let this be. Lets stop accusing each other of badwrongfun and have a merry christmas.

I'm not accusing you of having badwrongfun. I'm stating how the game has been presented, the challenges of the game, and the current meta understanding of the various rankings of types of characters.

You respond by telling me I'm playing the game wrong, that the problem is ignoring rules, but that those rules don't change anything about the functional and practical aspects of the game.

And all of this based on a single argument I actually made. It is nothing but your own personal aesthetic that says halflings should not wield greatswords, and the game is better for allowing it. Not because your aesthetic is wrong, or bad, or fundamentally destructive, but because the option existing is good for people who have different aesthetics, and limiting possible strength builds is not helping anything.

 

[Chaosmancer]

You find a way or you just don't solve that problem and move on. Despite claims to the contrary WOTC published dungeons don't have many "single path" problems. You might lose out on some treasure or an encounter or something, but it's not the end of the world.

Again, that was not how you presented the challenges from WoTC's adventures. You presented as though they were blocking significant paths, not bonus paths for loot or a special encounter. AGAIN, if you could be more clear on the examples, that would prevent these misunderstandings.

 

[Mistwell]

Again, that was not how you presented the challenges from WoTC's adventures.

I assumed you've read at least one or two WOTC adventures before commenting on it and didn't need every detail laid out for you to intelligently discuss this topic. If you were that lacking in knowledge of the subject matter you were jumping into, you could have asked or just not commented, rather than making assumptions and then getting upset nobody told you some basic level knowledge about the topic you decided to jump into.

But even then your clue was my saying they work basically like the other checks I mentioned, which were perception or diplomacy/intimidate/deception or knowledge skills or pretty much any other check based on a skill. If you somehow thought strength challenges were unique after I said they were not, that was on you and your biases.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I'm not accusing you of having badwrongfun. I'm stating how the game has been presented, the challenges of the game, and the current meta understanding of the various rankings of types of characters.

Same in reverse for me. You also jumped on a single statement I made.

So lets stop. And walk away. And both have fun with our games.

Merry Christmas.

 

[Pauln6]

Is it? Let us say that we have a dungeon, and we find a stone door. None of us are strong enough to lift it. Is there no other option? Well... no. We do have another option. Take a pick or a hammer and break it. Now, you will say you have alerted the whole dungeon by doing this... but less so than if you lifted a stone slab, while it ground against other stone?

And, let us take the more common scenario. Not a heavy or sealed door, but a locked door, with enemies on the other side. The means at which you avoid alerting the entire dungeon in this case is not being strong enough to rip the door from its hinges, it is using lockpicks to unlock the door.

Strength is often the loud option. You need strength to lift a portcullis because it rusted shut. That isn't quiet. You need strength to knock a stone pillar over a ravine. That isn't quiet. And given enough time and determination, even "weak" parties will be able to get past those obstacles, because even with a -1 to the damage, 2d6 is going to eventually deal 23 damage to something, which breaks most medium sized objects in the DMG.

It's almost like different abilities help out in different scenarios, so that the absence of one in a particular group doesn't automatically mean the end of the adventure? This is how the game is supposed to work, but strength can still often be very useful, blocking doors with furniture, moving statues, and pushing enemies off cliffs.

 

[CapnZapp]

Every acrobat and dancer who has plenty of strength and endurance has trained to be that strong and enduring. It doesn't mean that their Dex should be used in place those abilities.

Want your 18 Dex character to be able to do well at Str-based athletics? Put points into Strength. Or play a class that has a class ability that bypasses certain aspects (like a monk, or a thief granting a climb speed).

Point-buy systems do not easily allow a character to have a very high Dexterity for basic numerical effectiveness, while also allowing a Strength to be a good jumper, swimmer and climber, and a good Wisdom for perceiving the threats around you, and a good Charisma to influence others, and a good Constitution to endure the physical punishment of an adventurer's life, plus a good Intelligence so you can play a decent critical thinker.

If you dump an ability like Strength, be prepared for the penalties, rather than complain that your super good stat like Dexterity can't be used in its place. Otherwise create a more well-rounded character.

Or use higher stat arrays or other ability score generation methods.

Like martials are so OP they "need" to be kneecapped by having to invest in all three Strength, Dexterity, Constitution... shakes head

No martial wants to put points in both Strength and Dexterity. You simply don't get enough in return. The overlap is considerable - but nigglingly enough, it isn't complete. You have your offense and defense settled already. And you're certainly not taking points in an ability score just to get one skill, and not even a skill in a completely new area (such as social or exploratory) - you'd be taking that skill mostly to patch up your already good physical movement skill... except for some weird gaps.

Putting points in Strength mostly to be able to... swim?
Putting points in Dexterity mostly to be able to... balance?

Nah.

No, the elegant solution is to allow a martial to use either Athletics or Acrobatics for most movement-related purposes. The basics. The climbing and swinging and jumping and somersaulting.

Then if you specialize in strength (=you actually take Athletics) you get the non-essential "showoff" stuff: bending bars, lifting gates.

If you specialize in dexterity (=you actually take Acrobatics) you get... not much more, but since you're likely a Rogue, you have skill points over to be able to do stuff related to physical movement that perhaps should have been included in Acrobatics (dancing, picking pockets) but for whatever reason are separate skills (Performance, Sleight of Hand)...

 

[CapnZapp]

It's almost like different abilities help out in different scenarios, so that the absence of one in a particular group doesn't automatically mean the end of the adventure? This is how the game is supposed to work, but strength can still often be very useful, blocking doors with furniture, moving statues, and pushing enemies off cliffs.

Exactly. You don't put points in Dex as a Fighter. You expect someone else (a Rogue, a Monk, etc) to do the specialized Dexterity stuff for you.

No point in me as the DM asking the Fighter to invest points in Dex when he already has everything he needs combat-wise from Strength, except some pesky but basic movement related stunts.

Likewise but in reverse for the Dex Rogue.

You don't need it for the group. You need it to feel competent without strange holes (a Rogue that can't jump or climb, for instance. Wut?) That you should get without paying much.

Being asked to invest attribute points is definitely paying too much.

Much better and easier and cleaner to simply consider Athletics and Acrobatics as two sides of the same coin; they're mostly interchangeable; they're mostly one skill: every time you need your body in a new place and position, you roll your Acroletics or Athlobatics