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

 

[DEFCON 1]

It kind of is a game design issue. As @Micah Sweet says, the game assumes a lot of magic--a large number of races have built-in magic, there are far more magical classes than nonmagical, and even nonmagical classes have lots of magical options. And that's without magic items.

As a side note, you mention monks... but monks are inherently magical--ki--and the vast majority of monk archetypes are overtly magical. And a large number of barbarian, fighter, and even rogue archetypes are magical as well. There are really only three barbarian archetypes (out of 8), five nonmagical fighter archetypes (out of 10), and six rogue archetypes (out of 9) that are truly nonmagical

Which isn't bad, just not to the tastes of a lot of people. (And is another good reason to plug Level Up, since it has seven nonmagical classes and most of those archetypes aren't magical, either.)

I've got no issue with Level Up... I think it's great that another option is out there for people who have a need to play 5E differently. But I also don't believe WotC needs to go out of their way to change their game beyond their design choices to try and placate those people who want to play 5E differently. There are so many ways a DM can put together a non-magical 5E game right now... both by using the WotC rules themselves, and also with all the different 3rd party stuff you can find on DMs Guild and hell... even here on EN World in just the message board itself... if they just do some work to make the game their own.

We hear complaint after complaint after complaint that D&D doesn't have a Warlord class. Well, I kid you not... there have probably been over a DOZEN different Warlords made just here on EN World alone. Full Warlord classes by various posters. Done so many times that we've had completely separate Warlord subforums made here just to house them all. Any number of those designs of which could be plopped down into someone's "non-magic" game right now if they only bothered to look.

But they don't look. They don't find all the work that others have already done for them, at least one of which would probably give them exactly what they wanted. Or if they DO look, and DO find these options... they don't want to bother putting in the time to either do their own pass to see if its balanced (if that matters to them), or at the very least try it out in their game one time to see how it plays (and then edit it later as need be.) Nope! They'd rather just get bent all out of shape that WotC isn't doing it for them.

It's not that hard as far as I'm concerned... if you want to run a game that is "low-magic", you can do that right now. If you want to run a game in Dark Sun, you can do that right now. If you want a Psion class in your game, you can have that right now. If you want a Warlord class in your game, you can have that right now. If you want orcs in your world to be unrepentantly evil, you can have that right now. All that stuff is possible and you can have the game the way to want it if you just put in the work yourself, rather than waiting for WotC to write it up for you and print it in one of their books instead.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I've got no issue with Level Up... I think it's great that another option is out there for people who have a need to play 5E differently. But I also don't believe WotC needs to go out of their way to change their game beyond their design choices to try and placate those people who want to play 5E differently. There are so many ways a DM can put together a non-magical 5E game right now... both by using the WotC rules themselves, and also with all the different 3rd party stuff you can find on DMs Guild and hell... even here on EN World in just the message board itself... if they just do some work to make the game their own.

We hear complaint after complaint after complaint that D&D doesn't have a Warlord class. Well, I kid you not... there have probably been over a DOZEN different Warlords made just here on EN World alone. Full Warlord classes by various posters. Done so many times that we've had completely separate Warlord subforums made here just to house them all. Any number of those designs of which could be plopped down into someone's "non-magic" game right now if they only bothered to look.

But they don't look. They don't find all the work that others have already done for them, at least one of which would probably give them exactly what they wanted. Or if they DO look, and DO find these options... they don't want to bother putting in the time to either do their own pass to see if its balanced (if that matters to them), or at the very least try it out in their game one time to see how it plays (and then edit it later as need be.) Nope! They'd rather just get bent all out of shape that WotC isn't doing it for them.

It's not that hard as far as I'm concerned... if you want to run a game that is "low-magic", you can do that right now. If you want to run a game in Dark Sun, you can do that right now. If you want a Psion class in your game, you can have that right now. If you want a Warlord class in your game, you can have that right now. If you want orcs in your world to be unrepentantly evil, you can have that right now. All that stuff is possible and you can have the game the way to want it if you just put in the work yourself, rather than waiting for WotC to write it up for you and print it in one of their books instead.

As you say, it's so little work in most cases. Just look around.

I keep pushing Level Up because there clearly are a good number of people here who don't like WotC's design philosophy, and I believe that Level Up is a great base for your homebrew because it addresses so many issues people have, IMO.

 

[Maxperson]

Sure, which is why they expect the pkaytest to run up to 18 months from the start thisnpast August, but that includes a half year of flex time: their base roadmap isnto get everything outlined in Packet 2 out within the year.

The anniversary is January 2024. That timeline doesn't release 5.5 in time for the anniversary. It would put it out in August(or later) in 2024, which is more than half a year late.

 

[Parmandur]

The anniversary is January 2024. That timeline doesn't release 5.5 in time for the anniversary. It would put it out in August(or later) in 2024, which is more than half a year late.

Who ever said they were aiming for the anniversary to the month...? In fact, we know explicitly that they aren't, because Crawford openly said in the first playtest video that he expects the UA to run to maybe February or March of 2024. 5e was a 40th Anniversary Edition, and the rules were released in the second half of 2014.

 

[Maxperson]

Who ever said they were aiming for the anniversary to the month...? In fact, we know explicitly that they aren't, because Crawford openly said in the first playtest video that he expects the UA to run to maybe February or March of 2024. 5e was a 40th Anniversary Edition, and the rules were released in the second half of 2014.

Okay. So a year and a half to put out all of the huge amount of stuff that they just announced, playtest it, get feedback, correct and re-release it, play test it, get feedback, and if 5e was any indication, test it again, is still not enough time at their current rate of packet releases.

It took them 1 month and 10 days to get us the second packet. At that rate they will get get 13 or so packets done.

That leads me right back to my post a few pages ago. The only way within the time frame given that they can get this done right is if they release packets much more frequently.

 

[Faolyn]

As you say, it's so little work in most cases. Just look around.

I keep pushing Level Up because there clearly are a good number of people here who don't like WotC's design philosophy, and I believe that Level Up is a great base for your homebrew because it addresses so many issues people have, IMO.

I keep seeing people over on r/dndnext or r/onednd talking about things they'd like to see and at least 60% of them are things that Level Up has done.

 

[Parmandur]

Okay. So a year and a half to put out all of the huge amount of stuff that they just announced, playtest it, get feedback, correct and re-release it, play test it, get feedback, and if 5e was any indication, test it again, is still not enough time at their current rate of packet releases.

It took them 1 month and 10 days to get us the second packet. At that rate they will get get 13 or so packets done.

That leads me right back to my post a few pages ago. The only way within the time frame given that they can get this done right is if they release packets much more frequently.

They might not need 13, but that sounds about right. Consider what their roqdmap consists of:

• Revised versions of every Class from the 2014 PHB [which should take up 3 more packets, through to the end of 2022]
• 36 additional Subclasses [probably another 4 UA, later]
• New and revised Spells [probably spread across the Priest and Mage Class drops]
• New and revised Feats [which Crawford outright says in the videos from this week will be spread across the Class Group UA]
• New weapon options for certain Classes [which Crawford seems to hint is the bread and butter of the Warrior Group in one of the videos]
• New Home Base system for PCs [probably worth a full packet]
• Encounter building rules [definitely a distinct packet]
• New and revised Monsters [probably in the same packet as the new encounter building rules]

So, I'd guess the plan before any revisits is for about 9 more UA packets to cover what they've committed to, bringing them to aboutba year after the start. Then, they can make any revisions suggested by testing for another round, and prepare the final book way before the Holidays in 2024.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I like it as a special ability of subclasses like bladesinger.

I agree. I’d go a step past that even, and say it should remain unique. Let the EK cast a cantrip as a BA when they use the attack action, or something, or just give them magical “weapon attacks” that aren’t even spells, just an attack they can make any time they’d normally make a weapon attack.

 

[Minigiant]

Which isn't bad, just not to the tastes of a lot of people. (And is another good reason to plug Level Up, since it has seven nonmagical classes and most of those archetypes aren't magical, either.)

The issue with Level Up is it uses special rules to allow so many nonmagical PCs that the common fantasy table wont support.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

You miss the most important part.

The 4e ranger wasn't that especially great at wilderness exploration. It didn't have rituals and other classes has higher Wisdom or Dexterity. The 4e ranger is a fighter in 5e.

The biggest disappointment of 4e, for me, was the ranger. Until Essentials, at which point I finally made what felt like an actual ranger.