D&D (2024) One D&D Expert Classes Playtest Document Is Live

The One D&D Expert Class playest document is now available to download. You can access it by signing into your D&D Beyond account at the link below. It contains three classes -- bard, rogue, and ranger, along with three associated subclasses (College of Lore, Thief, and Hunter), plus a number of feats.

Unearthed Arcana Playtest

Unearthed Arcana Playtest Materials Get Unearthed Arcana playtest content, try it out in your game, and provide feedback! Check back regularly for ...

www.dndbeyond.com

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Just noting that Jon Snow is a fighter full stop. He's not a ranger, not even close. Jon has little ranger training, he's not a particularly good tracker or forager. He's a noble raised soldier.

Hmmh. Probably a multiclass ranger that did not chose survival as his expertise skill. I mean he started out as fighter and probably multiclassed a bit later.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

The Ranger genuinely needed a rework (and I think at the very least a level 1 Ranger no longer feels remotely like a poor man's level 1 Fighter), and there are a few other changes I think actually addressed problems or seem to serve some sort of discernible purpose (I'm not sure I like the new two weapon fighting, but it's attacking a needlessly complex system so I'm glad to see them working on it). But to me mostly this seems like a lot of change for change's sake.

That doesn't make the changes terrible per se (although I think spells prepared being tied to spell level, and making memorized casters prepared, spellcasters are genuinely terrible changes). But my overall impression is that this all seems pretty aimless and pointless. If this is all OneD&D is going to be, than it really is nothing but a refresh to force me to buy new core books.

If they seemed to be going through everything with a few clear (preferably stated) goals in mind, whether they were simplification, or addressing common complaints, or even something I have no interest in like fixing the CR system I would have a lot more respect for the process even if I didn't like or agree with all the changes. But at this point I think goal one for the bulk of changes (if not for the most important ones) is to change things just enough that you can't use your old 5e PHB in a 5.5e game.

 

[Thommy H-H]

All characters in fiction are actually NPCs and have statblocks like monsters that don't have to follow the rules for PCs. Aragorn has the Ranger tag, Gandalf has the Wizard tag (but in Middle-earth this is also a race tag and his creature type is Celestial). Thank you for coming to my TED talk.

 

[cbwjm]

Burning hands used to be transmutation in 2e. Flame arrow was conjuration back then.

I hated it, when 3e put all damage spells in evocation.

Which I feel is fair enough, however in current edition, it seems spells are changing schools just because otherwise a class that you'd otherwise think should be able to access them can't because of the restrictions they've put on the class in regard to spell schools.

 

[Bolongo]

I saw that...still scratching my head over it. What do you think the reason was for this change?

Cuz anyone can chop with a Seax or a Messer.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I agree. I don't know how it's possible, but they made the class less desirable. They need to hire an outside consultant/developer since they cannot get it right.

. . . They buffed the class a ton. This version of the class is objectively more powerful than the 2014 PHB version. The new version gets Cantrips and 1st level spells, get to change all of their spells on a long rest (except Hunter's Mark, which is automatically prepared), concentration-less Hunter's Mark, and 2 Expertise at level 1. The 2014 Rangers didn't get spells until level 2 (and never got cantrips), only got to change a single spell when they leveled up, and got two very campaign-dependent abilities that required you to talk with the DM in order to get the most out of your abilities (which just lets you ignore most parts of the Exploration Pillar).

And that's just level 1. The newer rangers are just objectively better in how usable their features are and in pure numbers. How in the world did they become "less desirable" to you?

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

In all seriousness, not using 3PP or homebrewing yourself is tragically neglectful of one of 5e's greatest strength; its ease in being modified.

I've seen people joke that 5e is the Skyrim of TTRPGs, in that people change it so much that it becomes practically a different game.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

I've made my peace with spellcasting rangers some time ago. I think they would benefit from a feature similar to the Artificer's spellcasting-with-tools feature.

Huntsman's Mysticism:
You must cast you spell using either a component pouch, a herbalist kit or hunter's tools. At the end of a long rest in the wilderness, you can make a DC 10 (or higher if the DM declares the terrain as barren) Wisdom or Intelligence (Survival) test. On a successful test, you can ignore the material components of your spells as long as they are not consumed until the end of your next long rest.

 

[Islayre d'Argolh]

If only there was a version of ranger in some awesome 3pp of 5e that didn't require magic at all...

Yeah... Something like the Scout archetype for the Rogue in Xanatar's...
Or a Dex/Bow Fighter with the Outlander Bakground and Expertise in Survival (Prodigy/Skill Expert)...

 

[Sir Brennen]

On the plus side, heal spells became abjurations so rangers can cast them, and spells like thunderwave power chord became transmutation so bards can cast them. Great times!

FTFY