D&D (2024) Upcoming One D&D: Unearthed Arcana 'Expert' Classes (Bard, Ranger, Rogue)

WotC has posted a video describing the upcoming Unearthed Arcana playtest document which will feature three of the core character classes, each with a single subclass.

This document is the second in a series of Unearthed Arcana articles that present material designed for the next version of the Player's Handbook. The material here uses the rules in the

2014 Player's Handbook, except where noted. Providing feedback on this document is one way you can help shape the next generation of D&D!

Inside you'll find the following content:

Expert Classes. Three Classes appear in this document, each one a member of the Expert Group: the Bard, the Ranger, and the Rogue. Each Class appears with one Subclass. More Subclasses will appear in Unearthed Arcana in the months ahead.

Feats. Feats follow the Class descriptions, particularly feats available to the classes in this document.

Spell Lists. Three Spell lists-the Arcane, Divine, and Primal lists-are featured here. The Ranger uses the Primal list, and the Bard potentially uses all three, thanks to the Magical Secrets feature.

Rules Glossary. In this document, any term in the body text that is underlined appears in a glossary at the end. The glossary defines game terms that have been clarified or redefined for this playtest or that don't appear in the 2014 Player's Handbook.

 

[WarDriveWorley]

I don't like bards. Except for one. My 2e blade bard. I really liked that one.

That's too bad. Some of my favorite characters I've played have been bards. But then again I rarely play into the trope of the horny bard.

 

[Parmandur]

There's nothing in that paragraph that means backwards compatible at all, let alone a final major clarification. All it says is that while playtesting, you can go ahead and use the 2014 subclasses. That doesn't say or imply that they are backwards compatible, or what the final disposition is going to be.

On what basis for you have anynsuspicion this is not meant for final text in the PHB...? Per WotC own FAQ, their goal is to keep all 5E Supplements viable with OneD&D, and after 2 packets we see that both Races and Subclasses remain perfectly usable by design.

 

[Parmandur]

WHERE'S THE BEAR!!!

I mean, by the logic they expressed there, the animal companion should be be part of the base class, not an "optional extra", if it's really "what the people want" that matters.

My contention is WotC values "WotC's own confused ideas" over "What the people want", which often is fine, but is not working for them with Ranger.

The animal companion is less generally desired than the magic, apparently. But magic is core to the Rangers identity.

 

[Maxperson]

On what basis for you have anynsuspicion this is not meant for final text in the PHB...?

On the basis that it clearly and only says playtest. There's not one single word in there that implies that this will go past the playtest, or if it does, in the form it is currently in.

Per WotC own FAQ, their goal is to keep all 5E Supplements viable with OneD&D, and after 2 packets we see that both Races and Subclasses remain perfectly usable by design.

That's the goal, but they said the same thing about 3e and didn't deliver. I have my doubts and the playtest paragraph doesn't say anything about beyond the playtest.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I loves Rangers with spells.

My gripe is that WOTC keeps giving Ranger's Druid spells and doesn't make Ranger spells and this playtest Ranger is another continuation of it.

Well, now it’s more that the two share a spell list, but yeah.

I am at work, what school is lightning arrow?

Are there really no evocations that fit the ranger? Really!?

Overall I think that power source lists make sense, and automatic prep spell lists make sense. I’m just skeptical of the “except XYZ schools” bit.

 

[Minigiant]

Well, now it’s more that the two share a spell list, but yeah.

Yup now 2 classes will be better rangers than rangers

what school is lightning arrow

Transmutation.

Are there really no evocations that fit the ranger? Really!?

Yup. No wind spells.

It's 3e ALL over again.
Druids and Bards better rangers than rangers.

 

[Parmandur]

On the basis that it clearly and only says playtest. There's not one single word in there that implies that this will go past the playtest, or if it does, in the form it is currently in.

That's the goal, but they said the same thing about 3e and didn't deliver. I have my doubts and the playtest paragraph doesn't say anything about beyond the playtest.

But they have already delivered a Race system that incorporates all 5E Races easily, and Classes that allow for all 5E Subclasses easily. If anything, I expect they may have expanded guidance on conversion in the end, since they have already delivered a working design.

 

[Maxperson]

But they have already delivered a Race system that incorporates all 5E Races easily, and Classes that allow for all 5E Subclasses easily. If anything, I expect they may have expanded guidance on conversion in the end, since they have already delivered a working design.

Maybe. It's just to early to tell what form the races, classes and any conversion/usage of 2014 subclasses will look like. We can't go by what they are saying is playtest. They HAVE to allow it the way they are, really. There's too much not covered by the playtests not to.

 

[darjr]

Maybe. It's just to early to tell what form the races, classes and any conversion/usage of 2014 subclasses will look like. We can't go by what they are saying is playtest. They HAVE to allow it the way they are, really. There's too much not covered by the playtests not to.

I think that’s on purpose. This playtest is different than nexts, not being close to complete games, because it can not be but also because they want you to test it against older 5e stuff.

 

[Maxperson]

I think that’s on purpose. This playtest is different than nexts, not being close to complete games, because it can be but also because they want you to test it against older 5e stuff.

Yeah. Both reasons are valid for why they are doing it. Either way, though, it's too early to think that the language being used is going to be the same or even resemble what will be used when 5.5 is released.