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.

 

[Pedantic]

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.

But that's not compatibility. Publishing updated subclasses and/or providing conversion guidelines both mean the old material is incompatible by definition. That's still a good thing to do, mind, and I don't think I have any problem with it, but they're proposing that they'll provide updated versions of (guidelines to update) existing content, not that the existing stuff will still be usable as is.

Which, is I think good from a design perspective? It frees them up to do a lot more with subclasses and species abilities and all that.

 

[Cadence]

Which of the campaigns used to regularly appear in Dragon Magazine (I'm guessing between issues 63 and 105) with dates of events that were happening in it? Or am I misremembering something into existence?

 

[Faolyn]

If that's true (and I will admit you make a fine argument), why hasn't WotC either re-made a more traditional setting, like the Realms or Greyhawk) or re-introduced an appropriate setting (like Nerath) or produced a new setting that adheres to the design aspects and values you are so convinced are objectively better? Greyhawk in particular would be a great candidate for that treatment, as it's metaplot was always pretty thin. Nerath would work great that way too.

Why would they want to have another traditional setting when they already have the Realms? Traditional settings are easy to make by even people who have no interest in worldbuilding and would be in competition with the Realms.

If they're going to put out brand-new settings (as opposed to MtG settings converted to 5e/One), they're going to put out settings that aren't Generic World #497.

(Also, traditional =/= no lore, and interesting lore is not necessarily easy to make.)

 

[Micah Sweet]

Hasn't Levistsus repeatedly said that their opinions on what's better isn't the same thing as what's best to be published? Or am I confusing them with someone else? There's a lot of people on the thread, but I know I've seen people say things like "In my opinion, X is better" and you respond with "you're saying it's objectively better."

But anyway, I also think they've said that Eberron takes the rules of the game into account better than other settings do, which quite probably is objectively true. For example, it was built with the magic item creation rules taken into account, allowing for magic items to be a more prominent part of the setting and to take the place of technology--as opposed to the Realms, which still can't decide if magic items are common or rare but whichever they are, they have no actual bearing on the setting's history.

They have repeatedly said that Eberron is an objectively superior setting to others. If they had just said it was their favorite and they liked the way it did this and that, and didn't out down other settings explicitly, I would have had no objection.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Why would they want to have another traditional setting when they already have the Realms? Traditional settings are easy to make by even people who have no interest in worldbuilding and would be in competition with the Realms.

If they're going to put out brand-new settings (as opposed to MtG settings converted to 5e/One), they're going to put out settings that aren't Generic World #497.

(Also, traditional =/= no lore, and interesting lore is not necessarily easy to make.)

If Eberron is made better than other settings, then why not "upgrade" one or more of those settings to comply with those improvements? The claim is that Eberron is better designed. If WotC believes that, they should want to bring their other settings up to that standard.

 

[Incenjucar]

A traditional setting with Eberron-level consistency could be interesting, but it's going to struggle to get attention over anything else unless it's attached to another system that doesn't already have several generic fantasy worlds.

I also don't think they're up for supporting new settings from scratch on a large scale, just focused books like Radiant Citadel or things based on popular works like Critical Role. WotC hasn't even been visibly pulling anything from the setting submissions that came in with Eberron after all these years, unless I missed it.

 

[Hussar]

I'm talking about now. 4e design elements are starting to creep back in to the game, I suspect because the designers want them there. Given the apparent popularity of the playtest packets, most of those elements will likely stick. This site is certainly more 4e friendly than it was. Obviously not everyone likes it, but I think things are better in 2022 if you're a 4e fan. I played and ran 4e for over a year, and followed it throughout, and while it wasn't what I wanted, it was a solid game that obviously had a lot of fans.

Again, it took TEN YEARS to get to the point where you could talk about 4e design ideas and not get dog piled for it. And, even now, suggesting things like Skill Challenges or damage on a miss will see the usual responses. The only way to get 4e material into 5e is by steal thing them in and pretending they aren't from 4e in the first place. Too many cooties.

 

[Aldarc]

If Eberron is made better than other settings, then why not "upgrade" one or more of those settings to comply with those improvements? The claim is that Eberron is better designed. If WotC believes that, they should want to bring their other settings up to that standard.

Points of Light, IMHO, was one such attempt. It built the setting in accordance with the 4e rules while also making the setting usable for adventure and player options. As PoL is built around its themes and hooks rather than lore particulars, it's pretty easy to add things into the setting based on those themes. As such PoL/Nentir Vale and Eberron are probably my favorite two D&D settings. I haven't really seen any character options in 5e that wouldn't work in Nentir Vale or the wider Points of Light setting.

I suspect that the new 5e Ravenloft setting book was also meant to update the setting to increase its usability for adventure and similar improvements.

Again, it took TEN YEARS to get to the point where you could talk about 4e design ideas and not get dog piled for it. And, even now, suggesting things like Skill Challenges or damage on a miss will see the usual responses. The only way to get 4e material into 5e is by steal thing them in and pretending they aren't from 4e in the first place. Too many cooties.

Or via D&D influencers with enough 5e clout: e.g., Matt Colville.

 

[Hussar]

Which of the campaigns used to regularly appear in Dragon Magazine (I'm guessing between issues 63 and 105) with dates of events that were happening in it? Or am I misremembering something into existence?

I believe that would be the Voyages of the Princess Arc stories from Mystara. Although, to be fair, most of that wasn't really meta-plot but simply setting exposition dressed as fiction. Fun reads. But, AIR, there wasn't much connecting one story to another - they went to this place, saw these things, did those things and then moved on to the next place.

And, to be fair, both Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms saw a HUGE amount of setting development in Dragon magazine. But, again, no meta-plot. It was mostly just setting exposition - this town/region has this or that in it with these or those bad guys doing bad things. It was largely a 2e development that you get all the big meta-plot stuff. Dead Gods, Faction Wars, Greyhawk Wars, etc. And, again, to be totally fair, most of the 2e material wasn't meta-plot based. There was tons of stuff that didn't move the campaign setting forward but simply fleshed out existing parts. One of my favorites was the Faiths and Avatars books for Forgotten Realms. Those were fun reads.

But, all that aside, we have to remember that WotC isn't publishing libraries anymore. You get 5 (ish) books a year, 3 of them will likely be modules. There just isn't space to get into meta-plots, nor is there space to present an entirely new setting.

That's what DM's Guild is for.

 

[Cadence]

I believe that would be the Voyages of the Princess Arc stories from Mystara. Although, to be fair, most of that wasn't really meta-plot but simply setting exposition dressed as fiction. Fun reads. But, AIR, there wasn't much connecting one story to another - they went to this place, saw these things, did those things and then moved on to the next place.

And, to be fair, both Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms saw a HUGE amount of setting development in Dragon magazine. But, again, no meta-plot. It was mostly just setting exposition - this town/region has this or that in it with these or those bad guys doing bad things. It was largely a 2e development that you get all the big meta-plot stuff. Dead Gods, Faction Wars, Greyhawk Wars, etc. And, again, to be totally fair, most of the 2e material wasn't meta-plot based. There was tons of stuff that didn't move the campaign setting forward but simply fleshed out existing parts. One of my favorites was the Faiths and Avatars books for Forgotten Realms. Those were fun reads.

But, all that aside, we have to remember that WotC isn't publishing libraries anymore. You get 5 (ish) books a year, 3 of them will likely be modules. There just isn't space to get into meta-plots, nor is there space to present an entirely new setting.

That's what DM's Guild is for.

Thanks!

I could have sworn it was things that happened year by year in either GH or FR, but the first half dozen Dragons I randomly flipped through didn't have that.

I did find lots of Deities of Greyhawk stuff in my flipping