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]

Fair enough. Who  are they trying to appeal to with the ardling?

I would assume mythology fans.

 

[Remathilis]

Ironically, this would be clearer if they left tabaxi as jaguar people only. Homogenization of related concepts makes everything smudged and indistinct, and then it gets even less distinct because new ideas are clumped in with old ones.

That said, which would you pick if you were trying to play something like a rakshasa instead of a cat furry?

I like the tabaxi as generic cat people. I liked the old Rakasta of Mystara, and so tabaxi being a mix of both is fine by me.

I think this is one of the areas I want to see what WotC has in store beyond "is this balanced?" UA design. Are we supposed to be looking at this as animal-headed humanoids, humans with animalistic features, or humanoid shaped animals? Give me a concept sketch WotC! Because the last one is full of races like lizardfolk, tabaxi and tortles, and the middle is the home of the shifter, so I need a little more help understanding the need for the first.

I'm also very sure that if this was a race for a specific setting, I'd be more open, but in the "generic" PHB, you really gotta sell me on what niche this is filling.

 

[Incenjucar]

The original ardent description gave them the option of having normal human-like bodies with skin, but then the feedback apparently said "we want furries".

 

[Maxperson]

I would assume mythology fans.

Or furries.

 

[Incenjucar]

Or furries.

Only if they know nothing about what furries like.

 

[Faolyn]

My problem with ardling is they feel like they are now sharing a design space with the shifter (humanoid with vague animalistic qualities) that doesn't really give the impression you're some sort of animal folk. I'm not sure how you fix that. I can't imagine any reason I'd pick a cat-ardling over a tabaxi, for example.

I can see some reasons, but they're purely thematic. Like, if your world was very human-centric, you might not want anthros but are fine with "cynocephaly"-type people.

In standard D&D, though, no. There's not a huge reason.

 

[Incenjucar]

I imagine a big part of this is that, for most players, this is entirely out of the blue. Guardinals were never the best-known, Egyptomania is long gone - the recentish movies didn't help, the living systems that use it are off-limits, and the other usages are pretty obscure knowledge for most people, PLUS the whole furry dichotomy thing.

They make all the sense in the world to me, but I get why most people would need more context to care. Maybe if they were introduced in a big adventure involving guardinals, animal lords, and other old school ideas brought to new life, then people could see Oh that's why this is cool.

 

[Faolyn]

Fair enough. Who  are they trying to appeal to with the ardling?

I have no idea. I like animal-headed humans (as you could tell with the therolians in my LU book) and I still think the aardlings aren't done very well. Maybe they think people who like anthro animals will like discount anthro animals just as much. Or maybe they're planning on an adventure that takes place in the Beastlands and this is a tie-in that may or may not actually be in the PHB.

 

[Incenjucar]

"people with animal heads" on GIS actually comes up with some fascinating examples, though mostly in modern clothes.

I think a bit more lore might help, but the degree to which they've changed their abilities makes me wonder how coherent their vision is. Taking the pieces they've given I can come up with a dozen fun ideas and designs, but that's drawing from decades of experience, not just a direct line from what they've presented.

A big part is that the animal and supernatural parts are not connected. This works if the animal portion is purely cosmetic and metaphorical, but if they are truly animal beings, the magic and animal parts should probably connect more.

Perhaps they could speak with animals of their type and be able to heal those animals more easily, making them a bit like low-grade animal lords without making it an overwhelming element. Perhaps their senses can be briefly enhanced at level 5, too.

I still really like the flexible cantrip, especially if that gets used to split them into arcane and primal types while maintaining the divine default.

 

[Cadence]

Fair enough. Who  are they trying to appeal to with the ardling?

My own limited survey says the triceratops headed one hits a lot of the approx. 13 yo boys range. (It may well hit other ages and non-boys too, but they weren't in the room when I asked).