D&D (2024) One D&D Cleric & Revised Species Playtest Includes Goliath

"In this new Unearthed Arcana for the One D&D rules system, we explore material designed for the next version of the Player’s Handbook. This playtest document presents the rules on the Cleric class, it's Life Domain subclass, as well as revised Species rules for the Ardling, the Dragonborn, and the Goliath. You will also find a current glossary of new or revised meanings for game terms."

Claim Unearthed Arcana now! - D&D Beyond

www.dndbeyond.com

WotC's Jeremey Crawford discusses the playtest document in the video below.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yes. 9 * 9 * 12 * 18 = 17,496 combinations. No need to make it in the hundred thousands at level 1.


I'd be happy if they trimmed gear too. It's too much extra steps and trap options (like padded armor and blowguns). Just pick from the final answer.

Choose one of the following.

• 19 AC a deal 1d8 damage
• 17 AC and deal 2d6 damage.
• 17 AC and 1d8 ranged damage

That seems distinctly less fun to me.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yea, but I'd definitely argue that the "animal" part is more important than the "celestial" part. Sort of like how being Fey is a kind of hazy backstory for Goblins/Hobgoblins/Bugbears now, but it doesn't really change the overall racial tropes you'd use during character creation.

And the hazy Fey backstory is also unnecessary, imo.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I agree with encounters, every enemy that is somewhat intelligent should have a good ranged option in it's arsenal.

but flying can and does invalidate lot's of environmental challenges.

difficult terrain? negated
obstacle to climb? negated
trigger traps? negated
travel at max speed in most direct way? Yes.

permanent flight might be good as 10/11th level class/sub-class feature or 5th level spell that lasts 24hrs and uses concentration.
at that level,characters should stop worrying about mundane obstacles.

The way I see it, if you don't want flying PCs in your game, ban flying heritages.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I agree with encounters, every enemy that is somewhat intelligent should have a good ranged option in it's arsenal.

but flying can and does invalidate lot's of environmental challenges.

difficult terrain? negated
obstacle to climb? negated
trigger traps? negated
travel at max speed in most direct way? Yes.

permanent flight might be good as 10/11th level class/sub-class feature or 5th level spell that lasts 24hrs and uses concentration.
at that level,characters should stop worrying about mundane obstacles.

The thing is, they're still with a party. The rest of the party still has to deal with these.

Plus traps can have non-groundbased triggers like trip wires, light/shadow puzzles, etc. And like I said, trees and vines and pillars can function as aerial terrain

The game just... doesn't consider it in terms of giving advice or rules.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

that is why I said that every class needs a subclass that has simple mechanics for starting players or those not invested in D&D as much as others.

That just robs the base class of any semblance of complexity. Silo them off in their own class, with NO subclass options. The fighter is currently shackled to be potato simple because people demand it be the noob class (and for some reason, the ONLY noob class). If you create the warrior, you free the fighter AND all it's subclasses to have mechanical depth. Or we give the fighter over to the noobs, and create a mechanically engaging class based on maneuvers. I frankly don't care, but the need for a bare bones noob class has robbed me of a mechanically engaging martial warrior like I had in 4E.

They could make a base Warrior, Expert, Mage and Priest as the simple class for each archtype. Model them after sidekicks, no choices in build other than maybe spell selection. Because, in my experience, new players want magic or to do something cooler than poke things with a stick, and only having the option of the fighter is essentially this:

This nonsense started with Gygax, who asserted that the "real players" will move on to magic users once they understood the game. Why are we still only offering one flavor of introductory class 40+ years later?

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Anyone else feel cloud's jaunt is clearly the best of the options for Goliaths? The piddly damage options don't even scale. A bonus action teleport is useful at all levels. Dealing d8 damage as a reaction is barely worth it at level 1. Scaling them like cantrips wouldnt even be worth it IMO, but at least you could make a case for them.

 

[Horwath]

Anyone else feel cloud's jaunt is clearly the best of the options for Goliaths? The piddly damage options don't even scale. A bonus action teleport is useful at all levels. Dealing d8 damage as a reaction is barely worth it at level 1. Scaling them like cantrips wouldnt even be worth it IMO, but at least you could make a case for them.

yup scaling them at 5th, 11th and 17th level would bring then close to bonus action teleport.

 

[Zaukrie]

Can someone explain why it says what spell an Ardling gets, if you can replace it with any 0 level divine spell? Is it to make things easy (and, who would use that spell over another?)?

I kind of like the idea of the ardling, which I get others don't.

 

[Greg Benage]

Anyone else feel cloud's jaunt is clearly the best of the options for Goliaths?

Yeah, not even close.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

I understand subclasses starting in 3rd level could be necessary to abuses by munchkins about multiclassing but I would like the subclasses should give some special trait in the first level to show they are different and with an unique style, for example to unlock some exclusive option. Why not special background for each subclasses?

My theory about ardlings is Hasbro would rather PC lineages with animal heads for no-Caucasian players. I don't say it was wrong. No everybody wants to be a blonde+blueyed elf.

The goliaths look like the nerfed version of giants, cousins of the increible Hulk. I like the idea of subraces/bloodlines for each type of giant.

No outsiders as monster creature?