This post is crossposted to /r/onednd here . Please feel free to upvote it there for higher visibility.

This post is a brief overview of my takeaways from running a playtest game which included the latest 1 Arcane Rogue and 2 Monk(Mercy & Elements).There was also a Frenzy Barbarian, rounding out the group to a solid 4 characters, but since the Barbarian’s playtest came and went, I’ll be only touching on them briefly. All characters were level 6

The game was cut a little short, so we didn’t get too much combat in. However, what little we did had a great set of fascinating moments.

This is written mostly from a GM (my) perspective, but I will be peppering in player takeaways wherever I can.

Elements monk = FUN

The Warrior of Elements Monk was a skirmishing speed demon. With the +15 movement speed from their monk feature and the +10 movement speed from their level 4 feat, this character had 55 feet of movement. There was some theory crafting that the max possible speed could be 70 feet of movement, with Wood Elves +5 movement bonus and Longstrider, but that seems like gilding the lily.

But even with just 55 feet of movement, the ability to have 10 minutes of 15 foot ranged strikes let this Monk contribute fully without needing to put themselves at risk. Additionally the ability to make enemies struck move backwards or forwards by 10 feet on each attack roll means that they were able to punt enemies around the battlefield, sometimes chasing targets down on follow up attacks to send them careening 20-40 feet across the map.

This also translated to being able to take enemies that had closed distance to push them well away, before disengaging beyond their movement. Without ever having to spend a ki point on ‘step of the wind’ this Monk was fairly untouchable, and was only ever in melee range of enemies at the beginning of a surprise combat.

Mercy Monk is situational

The Mercy monk had a bit less of a rip-roaring time. The one notable enemy in the playtest so far had poison immunity, which made their lives a bit harder. However, it was agreed that the ability to simply inflict Poison without a saving throw seems strong. Further playtesting will tell, but it feels like a hold-over from 5e.

This monk took the Charger feat, which let them deal upwards of 5d8+Mod(4) unarmed attack damage on a perfect round of combat. If they use their Way of Mercy 1/turn damage boost, this rises to 6d8+Mod(4), which felt hefty and contributed well at the table.

Ranged Rogue feels solid, but not exciting

While the Ranged Rogue didn’t have much time to shine, the new Cunning Attacks combined with Shortbow Weapon Mastery allowed them to trip enemies while reducing their movement speed. This effectively nailed most enemies down to only having a 10 foot range on their turn, making the loss of 1d6 damage feel more than worthwhile when it worked.

However, this simply resulted in the enemies attacking people who had already closed to melee instead. It hemmed me in as the DM, and did force me to attack the party’s preferred frontliners, so it wasn’t without impact, but the rogue player themselves didn’t really feel too excited by their contribution. This would have been better if the rogue wasn’t at the bottom of the initiative, and the most threatening enemies at the very top of the order in our combats, as the Rogue couldn’t delay their turn to go just after the enemy to make sure they were prone for the rest of our melee damage dealers.

Also to be honest, our table isn’t sure what the utility of Disarm is supposed to be. If there’s a MacGuffin, it’s quite clear that it’s a great way to take it off an enemy. But to take the weapon off an enemy has a few problems.

1. If another player doesn’t use their free object interaction to pick up the weapon, AFAIK the disarmed creature can just pick it up with a free object interaction. This isn’t a new issue, it’s been a problem with Disarm since the beginning of 5e.
2. If you do allow disarming-and-swiping of a weapon, as a DM I don’t know how to feel about that. For verisimilitude, it feels fine, but from a CR balance perspective it means that I have to contrive reasons why the target’s damage output doesn’t immediately crater, thus throwing off the CR fight balance.

It feels like Disarm needs to have a more well defined mechanical consequence if this will be a common effect achieved by any Rogue player.

Otherwise, the rogue felt like they fell far behind in damage, which is a known issue.

Barbarians have toolkit & a high damage floor

The Barbarian in our group was able to swap between Cleave, Graze, and Topple weapon masteries as required. The end result is that they were able to feel like they were making conscious decisions each round of combat. And even on the round of combat where all they could do was throw hand-axes, they were able to deal an impressive amount of damage on what would have otherwise been an unimpressive turn.

Before factoring in damage die, the Barbarian deals 2d6 (avg 7) Frenzy +2 Rage +4 STr Mod damage on a hit. If they use graze, then that’s a guaranteed +4 if they miss once, raising a single-hit damage round’s damage floor to an average of 17 damage. Simply put, our Barbarian did not feel bad about a single round of combat. This player is typically quite loss averse, and gets annoyed when they whiff on their turn, and they felt like they never had a ‘down’ turn.

Musings on Damage Resistance

One notable fight was with a Water Elemental Myrmidon. The Myrmidon deals Force Damage, and it has resistance to Bludgeoning/Slashing/Piercing (BSP). The legacy version of the Myrmidons had magical weapons, which specifically mentioned how they pierce through magical resistance to BSP. Also note that none of my players had magical weapons.

It was rated as a medium encounter, and it felt like a medium fight. It lasted 3 rounds, and everyone was able to contribute to its defeat in a number of ways, each player making conscious tactical decisions. The rogue and Barbarian were dealing half damage, while the Monks were cutting straight through the damage resistance. Even though the Monks would be doing less damage than the damage optimized Barbarian typically, they were the number 1 & 2 contributors to the total damage on the creature, and this served as a GREAT spotlight moment for those players.

This made me wonder: SHOULD every martial character get magic weapons that bypass BSP resistance? I could use more datapoints, but this combat came in solidly at a Medium fight by general eyeballing and feel at the table. It didn’t feel like a token encounter to blast through, and while the Monks weren’t lighting the world on fire with their fight contribution in other combats, this one made them feel rather impactful. Additionally, the Barbarian didn’t feel like they were laughing off the damage, and I was able to make sure everyone felt suitably tested without flirting with rocket-tag like I would otherwise have to do in 5e.

I have a theory that could use more testing, but I believe that Damage Resistance is currently an underutilized tool in 5e, and that we should not expect that all Martials will be able to bypass it. Additionally the ability of some creatures to bypass Barbarian Rage BSP resistance seems like a net positive for the game.

Edit: I had forgotten my other takeaway! Full disclosure for this next section, one Monk player is my spouse, and we really workshopped optimizing their Mercy Monk. We tried finding a way to get Weapon Masteries integrated into their build, but none of the options really seemed like a better choice than simply using the d8 Martial arts die.

Weapon Mastery feels vestigial on Monks

The only weapon that can match the d8 in damage output is the Staff, and the Flex mastery that it possesses is incredibly dubious in terms of potential impact. You cannot use an offhand attack with the Light or Nick properties unless the mainhand is Light. So you will never have a moment where you wouldn’t be able to wield a Staff with two hands.

In fact, the only weapon mastery that seemed to have any purpose at all was a dart’s Vex mastery allowing their monk to have limited ranged options while setting up their next melee attack roll with advantage.

Additionally the other monk saw no need to have any masteries whatsoever. The only masteries that MIGHT fit into their kit are Offhand Nick and Vex from a mainhand light weapon, but by level 5 you are lowering your damage of your mainhand attack (necessary to trigger offhand) in order to unlock a +1d4 nick attack. With an average of 2.5 damage, that is a net increase of 1.5 raw damage, which is so little for a lot of bother.

This discussion has been linked on the r/OneDND subreddit. Please feel free to upvote it there for more visibility over here.

I had made a previous post in this community regarding how I predict that the 2024 revision of D&D5e will be vastly improving CR. In that post, I laid out a lot of ideas on how I think the future playtests will go, and so far I haven't been wrong yet.

If you want to read it all, you can find it here. For everyone else, I will now provide a brief summary.

All the changes so far should not be looked at in terms of individual abilities and their power compared to each other individual ability, because that has not been the focus of the playtests so far. Instead, the focus has been in standardizing how damage output functions, with the purpose of closing loopholes.

This includes making par (or arguably sub-par) spells like 'Spiritual Weapon' now requiring concentration. THis isn't because Spiritual Weapon was doing too much damage, but because it was a persistent spell that dealt damage each turn, and did not require concentration. It doesn't matter that the damage was low, because it functioned in a non standard fashion, so balancing it was needlessly harder to do and it was a potential loophole to place more damage than intended into a Divine spellcaster's round.

Other examples can be found in the previously mentioned post.

However, I'm making this post now to unpack what I see as frustraitingly shallow takes on how the playtest is progressing. I will link the following PackTactics video not as endorsement of the views (altho he has several observations I agree with), but as an example of what I'm talking about.

https://youtu.be/40D0-Ezxlho

This is a rigorous look at Monk in isolation, and in this video he is obsessed with the idea that each ability needs to be assessed in terms of a buff or nerf. I believe that focus immediately stops him from considering further on what the possible motives behind the changes are.

The best example of this tunnel vision, is his assessment of the level 6 feature, Empowered Strikes. This allows the Monk to deal force damage instead of normal damage types with their unarmed strikes. He calls this a nerf, because it is now a damage type that can sometimes be resisted where before it was damage that could go through resistance trivially. He makes this judgement, without acknowledging that this is the new system standard. All features that once would go through magical Bludgeoning/Slashing/Piercing (BSP) resistance, both on Monster statblocks and UA material, now change the damage type away from BSP. So this isn't a nerf, it's the new normal for everyone and a sign of a shift in system design.

I'm writing this post with the hopes that someone who is performing this same reflexive reaction to changes in a strict comparison of higher or lower performance will now take a moment to consider. Why would intelligent game designers who want to do a good job and like the hobby make a bad decision on purpose? Because I don't think it's a rational position to think that the development team at WotC are not earnest.

As a closing thought & followup on my previous post, I believe that what will come next are spell nerfs that will bring their effects and capabilities in line with the current slate of controller abilities we've seen introduced. Most afflicted conditions will become 1 turn in duration, or will end on a repeated save. This will rein in how warping to fight balance controller spellcasters are on the battlefield.

After this is done, numeric balancing will begin, at about the dead-end of the playtest. This is in part because I don't think WotC devs require the internet's opinion on what is essentially a set of Math problems. Additionally, they couldn't know how much to really change the numeric content of abilities and spells until they had standardized how damage and conditions are applied, because the non-standard methods that we have in 5e are rife for optimization abuse (say hello to my Gloomstalker/Fighter build).

Like, I know it’s better that it was, and it’s probably quite strong mathematically. But… just getting to add extra to your attack and damage rolls doesn’t feel very cool flavor-wise or mechanics-wise. I’m a 20th level character; I want a power that makes me feel like some kind of demigod. Not something that just makes number go up.

I think it stems from a lack of class identity in the base ranger: nobody, least of all WotC, can quite decide what it should be. If your idea of the ranger is focused on having a pet, then an ability that helps with fighting monsters isn’t very good. But if you are a monster hunter, then something that boosts companion animals is useless.

So what’s the solution? Given that so much of the ranger’s identity comes from the subclass, I think the ranger should take a page from the paladin’s book (er, chapter) and make the capstone ability a subclass feature.

So Monk is the one class we didn't get a prior UA for, which means all the changes are totally new. I'm still wrapping my head around it. Martial Arts die increase: good. Martial Arts die not affecting weapons: bad. Step of the Wind buff: good. Stunning Strike nerf: bad but reasonable?

I feel like they knew Monks needed help, but it doesn't really seem like they made as much effort to fix that as I think they really needed to. Anything I might be missing that saves the Class here?

I told people that this would happen! But now we just have a precious small amount of time to SPECULATE as to how extensive the revision of the spells in the next UA.

There are spells that I hope they simply remove (or drastically change) without comment or recourse for feedback. Such is my distaste for Shield, Counterspell, and many others.

Shield should just give resistance to damage if it has to stay around. The +5 to AC is a problem.

If Counterspell has to hang around, it should either impose disadvantage on the spell attack, and have saving throws be performed at advantage for the duration of the spell while causing no damage to be taken on a successful save.

Forcecage, Hypnotic Pattern, and other crazy powerful spells need to come down in potency as well. I hope we see it, as this is another big step towards getting a CR system that works.

The next playtest material drops tomorrow, largest one so far!

A meticulous look at how OneD&D will be more balanced between different classes & loadouts.

Welcome back to Advent's Amazing Advice! The series where I take popular One-Shots, Adventures, Campaigns, etc. and fully prep them for both New and Busy DMs. This prep includes music, ambiance, encounter sheets, handouts, battle maps, tweaks, and more so you can run the best sessions possible with the least stress possible!

The Genius Creator Richard Jansen-Parkes of A Wild Sheep Chase, The Wolves of Welton, and To The End of Time is back at it again with another amazing One-Shot! A Most Potent Brew brings together a group of rookie adventurers on a classic adventure; clearing out a cellar from some rats. Things take an unexpected turn though and lead them to their first dungeon! This level-one adventure will take your players into the depths of a brewery, that turns out to be connected to an abandoned mage towers basement. Will your players survive their first adventure slaying giant rats, centipedes, and more?

Coming in at approximately 2 hours of play, this is the perfect one shot to show new players what D&D is all about, without overwhelming them with a 6hr+ sessions!

Thanks to this One-Shot's popularity, countless maps have been made. I took the time to collect the best ones that I could find. My notes currently work best for the original map and Alternate Maps 2 and 4; however if you would like me to adjust the notes to be able to run smoother with the other maps, please let me know in the comments below! If enough people are interested, I'll begin work on those immediately!

*Average Session Length: 1.5 - 2hrs

Without further ado:

• Google Docs Notes for A Most Potent Brew: DM Notes
• Link to: A Most Potent Brew PDF + Original Map and Mosaic Puzzle Handout(Credits: Winghorn Press/Richard Jansen-Parkes)
• Link to: A Most Potent Brew Playlist
• Link to: The AAA Collection (Art: KarmaKamikaze)

Included in The AAA Collection is:

• A Word document with all my notes including links to music tracks for ambiance and fights
• Special PDF for the encounter. This includes the enemy stat block organized neatly along with an initiative tracker and a spot to mark HP
• Multiple Custom Maps!

Index:

Other Fully Prepped One-Shots, Adventures, and More:(Credits in each post)

• The Wild Sheep Chase - Click Here
• Death House - Click Here
• We Be Goblins - Click Here
• The Egg of Estyr - Click Here
• Wolves of Welton - Click Here
• To the End of Time - Click Here
• A Most Potent Brew - Click Here
• Moon over Graymoor - Click Here
• A Wild West One-Shot - Click Here
• The Drunken Treasure - Click Here
• A Grimdark Adventure - Click Here
• D&D vs Rick and Morty - Click Here
• The Tavern at Death's Door - Click Here
• Dragons of Stormwreck Isle - Click Here
• Shadow of the Broodmother - Click Here
• L'Arsène's Ludicrous Larceny - Click Here
• The Night Before Wintermas - Click Here
• The Lost Mine of Phandelver - Click Here
• The Secret of Skyhorn Lighthouse - Click Here

As always, If you see something you think I can improve, add, change, etc. please let me know. I want this to be an amazing resource for all DMs and plan to keep it constantly updated! If you'd like to support me, shape future releases, and get content early feel free to check out my Patreon!

Cheers,

Advent

Reposting the June 8th, 2023 D&D Community update below:

As we continue playtesting and discussing materials for the upcoming Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master's Guide, and Monster Manual, and even release updates on the D&D Virtual Tabletop and evolving D&D Beyond toolset, it's important to clarify the language we use around these projects. One D&D is the overarching initiative shaping the future of the game. The updated fifth edition rulebooks, VTT, and D&D Beyond updates are housed under this initiative. When talking specifically about the revised fifth edition core rulebooks and their predecessors, we'll identify them by their year of publication. So, if we're talking about the barbarian class in the upcoming Player's Handbook, we'll refer to the book as the “2024 Player's Handbook.”

When the 2024 core rulebooks release, we'll drop the “2024” and simply refer to them by their title. (e.g., the 2024 Player's Handbook will just be the Player's Handbook). At that point, we will only clarify the publication date of the books when we're comparing the 2014 and 2024 versions, or simply referring back to the older version.

We recognize that the term “One D&D” has caused confusion around the updated rulebooks. The 2024 core rulebooks aren't ushering in a new edition of the game; the books you enjoy today will be compatible with the updated core rulebooks, because it's all the same edition of D&D. If you're a casual reader, though, this may not have been clear with how we've used the One D&D term in the past. That said, we'll be updating the language we use here on D&D Beyond and elsewhere so as to eliminate confusion around our continuing support for fifth edition.

This is a link to the full list of Unearthed Arcana playtest material on DnDBeyond. The most recently released material (as of June 22, 2023) is the Playtest 5 packet, featuring Weapon Masteries, updates to weapons and spells, as well as new versions of the Barbarian, Fighter, Sorcerer, Warlock, and Wizard. The survey period for this packet closed on May 17th.

Additionally, a Youtube playlist for the developers to talk about all UA releases can be found here.

Challenge Rating (CR) as it stands, is not a useful tool for GMs. At the very least, it’s much less useful than the difficulty calculations in PF2e. Those who defend CR^1^ will be quick to point out that it’s decent at determining if you have a fight that can down a player or not. However, CR should be able to calibrate a challenge, and at the moment it isn’t great at that. So why is that?

The ability for CR to accurately create a threat to downing a player means that the system IS working in having monsters generally do enough damage. What’s missing here is that Monster statblocks die too quickly, and thus don’t actually stand up against optimized players who make use of optional rules, such as feats and multiclassing… And monoclass Paladins.^2^

So what has WotC done so far?

Damage boosts are now once a turn.

Every single place that a feature can deal damage, WotC has reduced the number of times it can deal that damage to once per turn/round. This can be seen in the following changes so far:

1. Paladins can only smite, or cast a spell, once a turn. And never both.
2. Rogue change was targeted at making sure they couldn’t double-stack sneak attack in a single round.^3^
3. Twinned Spell no longer gives an advantage of two actions worth of spellcasting in a single round.
4. Action surge can no longer cast spells, or perform any action outside of specifically straightforward ‘martial’ actions.
5. All damage boosting features and spells are limited to 1 attack/Turn.
6. Great Weapon Master & Sharp Shooter no longer give big boosts to damage per attack will not incentivize burst damage by stacking as many attacks as can be managed into a single turn.^4^

The Forest for the Trees.

I see so many posts looking at each one of those changes above, and state ‘how dare they nerf this class!’ I think those commenters are not seeing these changes as necessary for the health of the game. More specifically, this will patch the biggest weakness and challenge for GMs: Setting up well calibrated fights.^5^ That’s good for the game!

Tl;dr - The promised changes to higher level CR creatures combined with the changes to limit player damage output will result in the necessary conditions that allows WotC to make CR much more accurate. These nerfs aren’t aimed at individual classes, but are part of a system-wide revision to fix CR, which everyone should keep in mind when they see a class or spell nerf.

^1^ I am one of these people!

^2^ 3 smites in one turn without any min-maxing? Seems legit.

^3^ Jeremy Crawford said this was to 'speed up the game' as things that occur while off your turn slow down the game. This is also true, but I don't think that was the only reason for the change. I expect this to be rolled back due to the poor reception in its current UA form, but altered to become a ‘once per round’ ability while they add more damage and utility in other rogue features.

^4^“My level 11 Gloomstalker-EchoKnight-Assassin just autocrit on their 9 attacks on their first turn... Why is CR so busted?!?”

^5^ But if that gets fixed, what will PF2e players bang on about?

When you give us playtest feedback, we take it seriously.

Already more than 15,000 of you have filled out the survey. Here's what you said:

88% do not want to publish TTRPG content under OGL 1.2. 90% would have to change some aspect of their business to accommodate OGL 1.2. 89% are dissatisfied with deauthorizing OGL 1.0a. 86% are dissatisfied with the draft VTT policy. 62% are satisfied with including Systems Reference Document (SRD) content in Creative Commons, and the majority of those who were dissatisfied asked for more SRD content in Creative Commons. These live survey results are clear. You want OGL 1.0a. You want irrevocability. You like Creative Commons.

The feedback is in such high volume and its direction is so plain that we're acting now.

We are leaving OGL 1.0a in place, as is. Untouched. We are also making the entire SRD 5.1 available under a Creative Commons license. You choose which you prefer to use. This Creative Commons license makes the content freely available for any use. We don't control that license and cannot alter or revoke it. It's open and irrevocable in a way that doesn't require you to take our word for it. And its openness means there's no need for a VTT policy. Placing the SRD under a Creative Commons license is a one-way door. There's no going back.

Our goal here is to deliver on what you wanted.

So, what about the goals that drove us when we started this process?

We wanted to protect the D&D play experience into the future. We still want to do that with your help. We're grateful that this community is passionate and active because we'll need your help protecting the game's inclusive and welcoming nature.

We wanted to limit the OGL to TTRPGs. With this new approach, we are setting that aside and counting on your choices to define the future of play.

Here's a PDF of SRD 5.1 with the Creative Commons license. By simply publishing it, we place it under an irrevocable Creative Commons license. We'll get it hosted in a more convenient place next week. It was important that we take this step now, so there's no question.

SRD 5.1-CC

We'll be closing the OGL 1.2 survey now.

We'll keep talking with you about how we can better support our players and creators. Thanks as always for continuing to share your thoughts.

Kyle Brink

Executive Producer, Dungeons & Dragons