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

 

[Bill Zebub]

So are we just spouting game design for discussion's sake?

Yes.

Although sometimes it seems like people believe that bludgeoning the opposition into submission will sway WotC.

“So have we decided what to do about guidance?”
“Nope. Still waiting for things to play out on Enworld.”

 

[MNblockhead]

Just change the spell list to "powers". A wizard/cleric/druid/sorcerer can cast any powers on their powers list with spell slots. A ranger / fighter get some of the powers as an at-will or x per short/long rest. Monks use ki points. Certain monsters (and perhaps certain future class options) can cast them psionically, etc.

For certain classes the power wouldn't be treated as magic. Wizards continue to benefit from being able to draw on a wide variety of supernatural powers by weaving magic with spells. Others achieve certain powers through force of will or because they are supernaturally gifted.

I like how in Flee! Mortals (by MCCM) they distinguish psionic vs magic power and use "supernatural" to apply to both. Psionic powers are not affected by dispel magic, counterspell, anti-magic fields, etc. Similarly, in my ideal system, a power used by fighter, monk, or ranger would be similarly unaffected by anti-magic. Only if a power specifically states immunity or the ability to counter psionics, or any supernatural power, will it affect non-spell powers.

I would go one further. I would like more granularity in anti-magic. I would like to see some anti-magic only affect arcane magic and not divine magic. You need clerics to counter clerics as a battle of faith. Wizards are better and countering wizards, because they know each other's tricks. I don't know how well that would go over with the wider gaming community but I'm thinking of making some homerules for this. It really wouldn't make the rule much more complex in terms of being able to remember them but it would add to complexity in terms of strategizing and tactics, which would make combat and certain challenges more interesting in my opinion.

 

[Zaukrie]

Just change the spell list to "powers". A wizard/cleric/druid/sorcerer can cast any powers on their powers list with spell slots. A ranger / fighter get some of the powers as an at-will or x per short/long rest. Monks use ki points. Certain monsters (and perhaps certain future class options) can cast them psionically, etc.

For certain classes the power wouldn't be treated as magic. Wizards continue to benefit from being able to draw on a wide variety of supernatural powers by weaving magic with spells. Others achieve certain powers through force of will or because they are supernaturally gifted.

I like how in Flee! Mortals (by MCCM) they distinguish psionic vs magic power and use "supernatural" to apply to both. Psionic powers are not affected by dispel magic, counterspell, anti-magic fields, etc. Similarly, in my ideal system, a power used by fighter, monk, or ranger would be similarly unaffected by anti-magic. Only if a power specifically states immunity or the ability to counter psionics, or any supernatural power, will it affect non-spell powers.

I would go one further. I would like more granularity in anti-magic. I would like to see some anti-magic only affect arcane magic and not divine magic. You need clerics to counter clerics as a battle of faith. Wizards are better and countering wizards, because they know each other's tricks. I don't know how well that would go over with the wider gaming community but I'm thinking of making some homerules for this. It really wouldn't make the rule much more complex in terms of being able to remember them but it would add to complexity in terms of strategizing and tactics, which would make combat and certain challenges more interesting in my opinion.

Overall, imo, the game needs more restrictions like this. But I get that's not the direction.....

 

[Vaalingrade]

Just change the spell list to "powers".

Tried that. People just said 'everyone is casters' for ten years straight.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

Just change the spell list to "powers". A wizard/cleric/druid/sorcerer can cast any powers on their powers list with spell slots. A ranger / fighter get some of the powers as an at-will or x per short/long rest. Monks use ki points. Certain monsters (and perhaps certain future class options) can cast them psionically, etc.

For certain classes the power wouldn't be treated as magic. Wizards continue to benefit from being able to draw on a wide variety of supernatural powers by weaving magic with spells. Others achieve certain powers through force of will or because they are supernaturally gifted.

I like how in Flee! Mortals (by MCCM) they distinguish psionic vs magic power and use "supernatural" to apply to both. Psionic powers are not affected by dispel magic, counterspell, anti-magic fields, etc. Similarly, in my ideal system, a power used by fighter, monk, or ranger would be similarly unaffected by anti-magic. Only if a power specifically states immunity or the ability to counter psionics, or any supernatural power, will it affect non-spell powers.

I'm very against Psionics not being dispellable by dispel magic or invalid against magic resistance. Even if more core classes in the PHB use it because that's the sort of thing that gets Psionics banned from tables. Even if it's the most balanced system ever, it will lead to a widespread ban against Psionics because "it's overpowered".

 

[pantsorama]

Who wants to try it? Via discord and owlbear.

I'm in. PM me!

 

[Micah Sweet]

I'm very against Psionics not being dispellable by dispel magic or invalid against magic resistance. Even if more core classes in the PHB use it because that's the sort of thing that gets Psionics banned from tables. Even if it's the most balanced system ever, it will lead to a widespread ban against Psionics because "it's overpowered".

Not if psionics is treated equally (or replaces) magic. The problem is that it's always treated as an add-on.

 

[Remathilis]

I'm very against Psionics not being dispellable by dispel magic or invalid against magic resistance. Even if more core classes in the PHB use it because that's the sort of thing that gets Psionics banned from tables. Even if it's the most balanced system ever, it will lead to a widespread ban against Psionics because "it's overpowered".

Exactly.

If anyone wants to test this: house rule that the sorcerer (usually considered the weakest full caster) no longer has to worry about their magic being counted, dispelled, subject to VSM components, or antimagic, and isn't even affected by magic resistance. See how long it takes for them to break the game.

 

[MNblockhead]

Exactly.

If anyone wants to test this: house rule that the sorcerer (usually considered the weakest full caster) no longer has to worry about their magic being counted, dispelled, subject to VSM components, or antimagic, and isn't even affected by magic resistance. See how long it takes for them to break the game.

Yeah, I can see that. Unless you are creating a heavily home-brewed world with sufficient NPCs and monsters with psionics, I could definitely see the issue. In my current campaign, only certain monsters have psionic abilities and I've ruled that these are not magic and are not affected by anti-magic abilities and spells. It just mixes things up a bit.

I've given some thought to divine vs arcane magic. I would like them to feel different. I would like the clerics and arcane casters to feel more different than just having access to different spells. At the same time I don't want to make things overly complex. I've been toying with the idea of counter spell only working against arcane casted spells and giving clerics & druids something similar that counters divine spells cast by followers of another faith/god. I also have toyed with ranger "spells" not being treated as "spells". I think this would work well without breaking the game, but in the divine vs arcane example, it does involve basically tweaking the rules/wording of individual spells. I would rather have an elegant rule that covers this.

I am fairly certain that One D&D would not go done this route for the base rules, but it would be nice if they would come up with some more creative and interesting variant rules for the new DMG to give different flavors to magic in different campaigns.

 

[Hussar]

It feels like names have a lot of power to some/many people when discussing psionics too. Whereas as some/many others find it much ado about nothing.

Does calling them knacks, prayers, spells, whatnots depending on class but having them all work the same as spells work for you just as well for you mechanically and for ease of play?

I get it. I mean, that's what D&D has generally done in the past. And, it does work.

But, it's making needless distinctions for the sake of trying to make things different. As was mentioned, if we call everything "powers", then people lose their poop and that doesn't work.

Apparently though, if we call everything "spells" it's more acceptable - 10 (ish) years of 5e has proven that. To the point where even non-casters like barbarians and elemental monks get abilities (speak with animals for example) which just reference the actual spell. So, if we're going to give them spells anyway, why not just give them a casting ability, and let the player choose what "abilities" they can do?

IOW, why piddle about with Elemental Monks having a unique casting system that doesn't really work (apparently since everyone bitches about the Elemental Monk) when you can just make them half casters like rangers or paladins, grant them a selection of spells and poof, end of problem. I mean, the Way of the Four Elements Monk is literally (as per the text in the PHB) casting spells. Flat out dropping spells up to and including using the rules for spellcasting. But, instead of just making me a half caster and giving me a selection of spells and let me build my own elemental monk, I have to use this wonky ki system casting that doesn't really work.

There are very, very good reasons for standardizing things. When things are standardized, they work a lot better.