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.

 

[Incenjucar]

There is certainly a conflict between the writing for Setting as Story and Setting as Game elements. There's a whole genre of fictional histories that are not themselves novels which were a major part of how some settings got popular. Both are very valid to enjoy, but they hit this conflict rather often.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I'm going to assume you don't have children. If you did, you'd be numb to being told the stuff you like is old and lame. Heck, I used to work with children and I wasn't that old (30) and I was tragically unhip. It's part of growing old. It's not the same world man. Tastes change. Attitudes change. Your chinos and Blink 182 CDs aren't in style. It can be hard realizing you aren't the target demographic anymore, but that's life.

Put another way

I feel that quote every day. I do have kids, but they're not old enough to give me a hard time yet.

 

[Faolyn]

It's hard to ignore stuff you don't like if people are constantly talking about how great it is on the site you use to engage with your hobby.

And it's hard to ignore metaplots if all the game books are filled with them.

 

[Parmandur]

I'm not sure that's what's implied there. That more strongly suggests a commitment to publishing updated versions of all existing subclasses, or to providing conversion guidelines. Particularly as they've said they plan to harmonize the subclass feature schedule this time around.

It's not an implication at all, it's explicit that the finalnpublished version of any revised Class will have a process in place to use any existing Subclass from a 5E book: so, Subclassand Races will still be usable, and we already know thanks to Mosnters of the Mulriverse that all Monsters will be backwards and forwards compatible...so, the new books as such will be backwards compatible.

 

[Micah Sweet]

There is certainly a conflict between the writing for Setting as Story and Setting as Game elements. There's a whole genre of fictional histories that are not themselves novels which were a major part of how some settings got popular. Both are very valid to enjoy, but they hit this conflict rather often.

Yes, exactly. My enjoyment was valid, darn it!

You can't tell me that all those campaign settings, with their enormous histories and detail, were just intended to help people play their games. They were at least in part creating worlds to be enjoyed for their own sake, just like any fictional worlds that weren't explicitly game material.

And in any case, if a setting like Eberron really was, "objectively better" as some people say, why have they continued to support other settings like the Realms, or retread old settings like Ravenloft, Spelljammer and soon enough Planescape. Clearly WotC doesn't see Eberron as the best possible D&D.

 

[Micah Sweet]

And it's hard to ignore metaplots if all the game books are filled with them.

They haven't been filled with them for quite some time, but they didn't explicitly tell us they're abandoning them until very recently.

 

[shadowoflameth]

I'm not sure that's what's implied there. That more strongly suggests a commitment to publishing updated versions of all existing subclasses, or to providing conversion guidelines. Particularly as they've said they plan to harmonize the subclass feature schedule this time around.

Yes, and I appreciate their commitment to do that. The races though, Goliath and Dragonborn particularly have elements that aren't just an adjustment. Should we just pretend that dragonborn could always fly? It's easily fixed by making winged dragonborn an option just like winged tiefling. Options for the Goliath are mostly fine too, but a Goliath able to change size is fundamentally different. They already have the carrying capacity of a large creature. If that isn't enough for an ancestral ability, add grappling like a large creature, reach or even weapon size, but the 'hulk' option feels both goofy and unnecessary. There are races that now have small or medium size as options, so make goliath medium (with large perks) or just make them large but pick one.

 

[Incenjucar]

Easy to just say that they rediscovered a lost power if you're changing mid-campaign. Permanent Large breaks things.

 

[Parmandur]

Yes, and I appreciate their commitment to do that. The races though, Goliath and Dragonborn particularly have elements that aren't just an adjustment. Should we just pretend that dragonborn could always fly? It's easily fixed by making winged dragonborn an option just like winged tiefling. Options for the Goliath are mostly fine too, but a Goliath able to change size is fundamentally different. They already have the carrying capacity of a large creature. If that isn't enough for an ancestral ability, add grappling like a large creature, reach or even weapon size, but the 'hulk' option feels both goofy and unnecessary. There are races that now have small or medium size as options, so make goliath medium (with large perks) or just make them large but pick one.

The options in question still look like they are following the Tasha's rules with building a Species around a Feat and a half of stuff, though it may beed aomr more finetuning. That's what matters, not a 1-to-1 with older versions.

 

[Faolyn]

Yes, exactly. My enjoyment was valid, darn it!

You can't tell me that all those campaign settings, with their enormous histories and detail, were just intended to help people play their games. They were at least in part creating worlds to be enjoyed for their own sake, just like any fictional worlds that weren't explicitly game material.

Yes, they really were.

If anything, they were a reaction to games like Vampire, which were very florid in their writing and were heavy in metaplot, in contrast to the much drier, more encyclopedia-esque way 1e had been written, where history was written in the form of long, dull timelines. I don't think I've ever managed to read a timeline in even Ravenloft without getting bored halfway through. Vampire and similar games changed the way games were presented, and TSR had to keep up--because gamers want to enjoy the game books they're buying, not just stick them on a shelf and only read them when they needed a rule clarified.

But they were still intended to be used to help people play their games. That's why game companies also put out novels and comics--and in the case of Vampire, a TV show--for people who wanted to enjoy the world as a story and not a game.

And in any case, if a setting like Eberron really was, "objectively better" as some people say, why have they continued to support other settings like the Realms, or retread old settings like Ravenloft, Spelljammer and soon enough Planescape. Clearly WotC doesn't see Eberron as the best possible D&D.

You yourself constantly talk about how WotC is doing things just for the money. That's why. People have nostalgia for old games. People want to see the setting-specific rules officially updated. WotC can produce those books and sell them.