Low Level Spelljammer Is Hard to Write

 Perhaps because I've been running a campaign in tier 3 for maybe a year at this point, but man is it hard to create low-level adventures!

Spelljammer is out, and there are tons of aliens and weird things, but it really feels hard to use any of these in tier 1. When I was a new DM, I'd often use the highest-CR monsters when building an encounter, but the result was usually that the one monster I could use wound up getting killed instantly and the fights were over too fast to be exciting.

As such, I think even at low levels you want to really use a large number of monsters, but this means that you need to scrape the bottom of the CR scale, populating encounters with lots of CR 1/8 and CR 1/4 monsters.

Boo's Astral Menagerie only has one CR 1/8 creature (a Hadozee Shipmate, so not really an "alien" so much as a playable race NPC) and five CR 1/4 creatures.

But most of the really exciting monsters are CR 2 or higher. Space Clowns and the base Vampirates are CR 2. Using Xanathar's encounter building tools, a CR 2 monster is only really viable as part of a larger encounter at level 4 and above.

I think it's telling that the Light of Xaryxis starts at level 5.

Still, I'm cobbling this adventure I'm writing together, and it's turning out decent, I think, though much longer than I'd initially intended.

As usual, I think tier 2 is D&D's real sweet spot in terms of flexibility for players and DMs. In a lot of ways, that 5-10 level range seems like the "quintessential" version of D&D, and I think a lot of monster supplements reinforce that.

Going Deep on Backgrounds

 I summed it up in three posts, but there's just so much to discuss in the new Character Creation UA, with its 21 pages of fundamental revision to the way that 5th Edition D&D works. Impressively, as broad and deep as these changes are, they're still fully compatible with other 5E content, swapping out bits while still allowing the fundamentals of 5E to look the same.

One of the biggest things to change is Backgrounds. Character creation in 5E has always had three primary choices - race, class, and background. We've seen race shift over time with the introduction of Tasha's alternate rules, and the new versions of the PHB races reflect shifting philosophies that make it clear it reflects physiological differences rather than cultural ones (I'd happily see the word "race" replaced with Lineage, Ancestry, or Heritage, personally, though admittedly the latter might seem to imply more of a cultural side of things).

Backgrounds have always been the least impactful of the character creation features in 5E - you basically pick one that gives you skill proficiencies you want but can't get through your class and then move on. Background features almost never come up in the games I run.

And so, of the three options (though we haven't seen anything for Classes yet,) the approach to Backgrounds has changed the most.

The most important change is that Custom Backgrounds are now the default choice. They've always been a part of 5th Edition rules, but now the assumption is that you're going to build out your background to reflect your backstory (and, let's be honest, the bonuses you want).

When you build your background, you make the following choices:

Ability Score:

This has been moved from race to the background, and honestly, it makes way more sense here. Not only does it fully divorce the idea of, say, certain races being inherently smarter (which thankfully was mostly eliminated with the Tasha's rules) but it now suggests that the bonuses you have reflect your own life experience, not just who your parents were. Your +1 to charisma is due to the fact that you had to be a fast talker to survive on the streets of Baldur's Gate, or your +2 to strength is that you spent twenty years chained to a mill-wheel (for old-school Barbarian fans).

This change, of course, is totally semantic and doesn't actually change the way the game plays in any way, but the concept behind it makes more sense, and really enshrines the customizable ability score bonuses as we saw in Tasha's. Like there, you can choose a +2 to one stat and a +1 to another, or +1s to three different stats.

Skill Proficiencies:

As with the old backgrounds, you pick two skill proficiencies that make sense for your backstory. Here, the customization is particularly welcome because hey, what if you were a hermit but not for any religious reasons? All old backgrounds had two skills, so this fits fine, and means most characters will have 4 skill proficiencies.

Tool Proficiency:

You gain proficiency with a tool. This includes Artisan's Tools, Gaming Sets, and Musical Instruments, and as we saw in the Rules Glossary, the functionality of Tool Proficiency now has a clearer definition. Many backgrounds included tools of this sort - like Entertainers getting a musical instrument, Nobles getting a gaming set, and Guild Artisans getting an artisan tool.

Language:

You get a total of three languages in most cases - everyone gets Common, then you can pick one language related to your Background and a third simply chosen from the Standard Language list (which includes Common, Common Sign Language, Dwarvish, Elvish, Giant, Gnomish, Goblin, Halfling, and Orc). Your background, thus becomes the way you can know rare languages, which include Abyssal, Celestial, Deep Speech, Draconic, Druidic, Infernal, Primordial (including its four dialects), Sylvan, Thieves' Cant, and Undercommon. Personally I'd put Draconic on the standard language list - if Giant is on it, and we have Dragonborn, Draconic can't be that rare.

This does, of course, mean that my Eldritch Knight Sage wouldn't get his four languages (Common, Draconic, Celestial, and Giant). Rogues and Druids will automatically get a fourth language as part of their class features, of course, in the form of Druidic and Thieves' Cant.

In most existing 5E backgrounds, there's a bit of a trade-off between tool proficiencies and languages. The Sage, for example, gets an extra language but does not get any tool proficiency. What I'm not sure about is how they want to treat vehicles. The recent Wildspacer background from the Astral Adventurer's Guide includes proficiency in Vehicles (Space), which is in addition to Navigator's Tools.

Feat:

Here's the biggest thing: Each background comes with a feat, but feats now have level requirements. So no, you can't start off with Great Weapon Master. But you can start off with Savage Attacker if you want those useful martial feats.

The feat seems to stand in place of the background features that existed in the old version. For example, my Sage could always find a library to research important information. This was nice to have, but was also completely subject to the DM's discretion, making it more of a flavorful thing than a mechanical one. Building that character now, I'd probably pick up Tough both because of its mechanical use (he was the party's tank) but also to reflect how he had always been thick-skinned and that ingratiated him to the ancient wizard who trained him to be an Eldritch Knight.

Equipment:

Backgrounds always came with a bit of gold and a few odds and ends, which were flavorful but sometimes felt like plot hooks that most players ignored. Now, instead, you get 50 gold to spend on equipment, keeping any change left over.

What I do not know is whether this is in addition to the class starting gear or not. I would have to assume not, given that a set of chain mail is 75 gold, and would thus be outside the price range of any Fighter, Paladin, or Cleric who wants some heavy armor to start with. Thus, this is more of an opportunity for players to be creative and figure out what stuff their background would provide them with.

Before we get into the sample backgrounds (I'm not going to go through all of them, just a few to demonstrate the concept,) I think that these are going to be way more impactful on a character's build than they were previously. At the same time, I think you need to have a conversation with players about how much they want these to be min-max-y versus flavorful.

This is especially the case with the ability score bonuses and feats. The way I'd prefer to work with players on this is to make sure that the choices taken reflect the backstory created. That said, I also would encourage the player to craft a backstory that reflects choices they might make - if you want to have Savage Attacker and are playing a Monk who has never been in a real fight before, maybe think about where that feat is coming from. Obviously, it's a good feat to take as a martial class, but encourage such a player to find a way to justify it. For example, maybe the Monk has dreams of their dead master warning them that they possessed within them a legendary demonic power that had been kept in check at the monastery until it slipped into the Monk's soul. Or perhaps, this mild-mannered disciple is actually descended from some legendary warrior called Bloody Fist Zho, and carries that violent capability passed down through generations.

Going backstory to mechanics is fine, but for those who want to play powerful characters, building a backstory to fit the mechanics is also a valid and often rewarding way to go.

So, let's take a look at a few of the samples. As a reminder these are not the "defaults," but are instead just examples of how you could build your background. Much as ability score bonuses on race became customizable with Tasha's, and now most people (I'd think) customize them, I think most people will simply build their background on their own.

Acolyte:

This one's a classic from the 2014 PHB. Here, the build works this way:

Ability Scores: +2 to Wisdom, +1 to Intelligence (a good option for a Cleric who might want to also know more about the workings of the divine).

Skill Proficiencies: Insight, Religion (both make sense, and match the ability scores)

Tools: Caligrapher's Supplies (good for someone devoted to copying religious texts)

Language: Celestial (naturally)

Feat: Magic Initiate (Divine) (even if you're not a spellcaster, your devotion now might give you a hint of divine power, and if you're a Cleric or Paladin, you're boosting your spell selection this way).

Equipment: Book (of prayers), 10 sheets of parchment, Caligrapher's supplies, Robe, a Holy Symbol, and 3g left over.

Laborer:

By contrast, this doesn't really have any equivalent in the 2014 PHB, except maybe Guild Artisan. But while that reflects an independent businessperson, here you can be a true salt of the earth working person, rather than a salesperson for your own goods.

Ability scores: Constitution +2, Strength +1 (you've spent long days working hard, and you've got the resilience and strength to show for it).

Skill Proficiencies: Athletics, Survival (Survival here I like to think is that you know how to keep a work site safe, and Athletics naturally reflects your history of physical labor).

Tool Proficiency: Mason's Tools (Naturally, any artisan's tools make sense here. Here we've probably got a Stonemason working on construction sites.)

Language: Dwarvish (Dwarves' history of legendary stone masons means that probably most of the traditions and techniques are based in dwarvish tradition).

Feat: Tough (I mean, obvious, right? From all these factors, I'm getting a really strong image of some tough-as-nails worker with callused fingers, a sunburn, and muscles like corded rope.)

Equipment: Bullseye Lantern, Mess Kit, Common Clothes, Oil (1 flask), Handaxe, Shovel, Light Hammer, Waterskin, Mason's Tools, and 15g left over. (And yeah, these are all things that would be handy on a worksite).

    I'm going to hold off on any more of these backgrounds - these are just examples, after all, and you could easily mix and match them. Maybe you've spent your pre-adventuring life building temples as part of a holy mission. You might have the Strength from Laborer and the Wisdom from Acolyte, and some mix of their other traits.

The sample backgrounds I think are primarily to help players who might feel overwhelmed (especially when picking equipment, which is like several different tables) and just want something quick and easy to choose.

But for players who are more familiar with the game (and have spent the last seven years blogging obsessively about it?) the flexibility here is very nice to see, and doesn't break the game in any serious way.

This is one of those changes that I'll likely start implementing in any future games I run. I think books can still present new backgrounds, but they'll probably serve a bit more like the Battlemaster Builds in Tasha's - not anything mechanically new, but suggestions on how to build something like this. (I would expect us to get new feats, both level 1 and higher, such as the ones introduced with the Planar Philosopher background).

In fact, to cite the previous hypothetical: I think the one area where this change can potentially take something from the game is the way that WotC has played with backgrounds in the past. For instance, I am running a Ravnica game, and in it, every player character has one of the Guild backgrounds. These backgrounds grant the usual bonuses, but they also create an expanded spell list, giving any spellcasters of those guilds additional options for cantrips through 5th level spells. (Granted, most players have generally played into the "type" of the guild, like our Rakdos Bard, Izzet Artificer, and Golgari Spore Druid, so they have most of those spells anyway).

Should that extra bonus of expanded spells count as those backgrounds' level 1 feat? Or is that not enough?

One D&D is meant to be backwards compatible, and so far what I've seen of it looks very much like it will be, but it seems that there might be a few edge cases where the compatibility glitches out, like this.

Still, in the long run, I think this change is likely to be very good for the game.

Going Deep in the Rules Glossary

 The latest UA, the first to detail the big revision changes coming in 2024's Player's Handbook, have got a lot of people talking. Some are vocally very, very angry with them (this being playtest material, on one hand, I think it's a bit early to get mad. Granted, usually things don't change all that much, but remember that the 2014 PHB isn't going away, and there are people who still play 2nd Edition).

My thoughts have been mostly positive, actually. I love the idea of level 1 feats (and that these feats are limited to a curated selection) and making backgrounds more impactful (though switching ability score bonuses to them is really only a semantic change) and prioritizing custom backgrounds. Also, two of the options, Farmer and Laborer, are very nice proletariat additions whose absence was baffling (though of course, with custom backgrounds these are just examples).

However, while all the race and background stuff was big, I think the easiest part to overlook in the UA, and the one that might wind up having the biggest impact on the game is the Rules Glossary. This defines a lot of terms, but importantly, the definitions include some changes to how those rules work.

To start, a clarification, as I understand it: the Arcane/Divine/Primal spell lists should not be misconstrued as class spell lists. These are simply another tag, like the spell's school of magic, that can interact with other features, such as the new version of Magic Initiate. Until we get details on class updates, we should assume (and indeed playtesting this new stuff assumes it) that classes retain their old lists - meaning that Bards and Sorcerers are going to have access to different spells, despite both being "Arcane" classes. And class lists will, presumably, not be limited to one category or another. While Warlocks, Sorcerers, and Wizards won't get Cure Wounds, Artificers and Bards, we can assume, will still be able to pick them up.

But I think a subclass like Divine Soul sorcerer might, for example, be able to pick up any Divine Spells, rather than calling out Cleric spells specifically.

Now, let's get into the other things.

Tool Proficiency has had its rules clarified. Tools are a cool concept, and a big part of the Artificer class (which I hope will see print in the new PHB to allow it to get new subclasses in other books). Essentially, tools (which include gaming sets, artisan's tools, and musical instruments) aren't tied to any specific ability score, but if an ability check doesn't have a skill proficiency associated with it, but does use the tool, you can add your proficiency bonus to the check. However if it does use a skill - for example Performance to draw attention from a crowd or earn the favor of a noble - as well as a tool - for example, a lute - that you're using, you get advantage on the check. Here's where the wording is a little ambiguous. It says you benefit from proficiency from both the skill and the proficiency (if you have both,) which would seem to imply that you have both advantage and, essentially, expertise. I'm not sure if that's the intended meaning - especially because a Bard with Expertise in Performance would get to triple their Proficiency bonus and get advantage (my friend's Goblin Bard in my Ravnica campaign would thus get a bonus of +21 with advantage - he has a 22 Charisma - which is a bit insane.)

I like that this makes the use of tools a bit clearer - there's been some confusion, for example, over whether picking a lock is a Sleight of Hand check, etc. I'd say it's probably just a Dexterity check, but it involves Thieves' Tools and thus can benefit from that proficiency. Picking a lock quietly, though? That could involve both (though as DM I'd set a higher DC).

D20 Test is a useful term so we don't have to constantly say "attack roll, ability check, or saving throw." I think the term is totally fine, though I've seen people complain about how it sounds (though I think people just like to complain.)

The big changes here are threefold.

The first is that they're embracing the idea that a natural 20 always succeeds on a test and a 1 always fails. A lot of people already play this way, and a lot of players assume it's the case. I actually love it, personally.

Here's the thing: DMs should only call for a check if there's some chance of success or some chance of failure. If someone goes up to a cliff face and says "I want to try to punch the cliff apart to make a path," you are fully in your power as DM to say "No, you can't do that."

The caveat here is that players need to understand that it is not their place to call for rolls. If you decide to go to the emperor of a continent-spanning empire and demand that she abdicate the throne and give it to you, you cannot then roll your own Charisma (Intimidation) check and claim that you're emperor now because you got a natural 20. The DM has the right (and responsibility) to say that the emperor cannot be intimidated in that way.

Nat 20s and Nat 1s are meant to represent an extraordinary moment. It could be a spark of genius by an otherwise simple-minded character, or it could be an absolute expert totally eating shit at the thing they're best at (other than a high-level rogue, whose reliable talent is all about preventing said shit-eating).

This already works in combat, and I see no reason why not to use it for all d20 tests.

Ok, now the second thing about d20 tests: Critical hits.

Here, I'm sympathetic to those who don't like the change, though I think we need to wait and see to get the full picture. This change is, itself, multifaceted. First off, only player characters can critically hit. This, on its own, is a pretty massive nerf to monsters, and makes effects like paralyzation a lot less scary. Apparently the plan is to lean into things like Recharge abilities as the randomized, big, "scary" abilities for monsters. I think this sort of change is very welcome at low levels of play - I don't want to fully kill a level 1 character with an unfortunately-timed crit. (Playing the House of Lament, a friend came a session after we started with her Yuan-Ti Bard. In the first combat of the adventure, we faced a group of Gremishkas in the basement. The Cleric cast Faerie Fire (a perfectly reasonable thing in most scenarios) that caused two of the Gremishkas to turn into swarms, who then crit the bard before their first turn in combat and insta-killed them. Which was hilarious, but also not ideal from a gameplay balance experience.) Still, this is one of the scary dangers of combat. On top of that, this change would make things like adamantine armor and the Grave Cleric's Sentinel at Death's Door worthless.

Really I think that this is mostly just an issue at very low levels.

The second of three change to crits (yeah, the d20 test section is a big deal) is that only weapon attacks and unarmed strikes can crit. Even if a spell uses an attack, like Guiding Bolt or, I believe, an Artillerist's Force Ballista, it doesn't crit on a nat 20 (though it will hit any armor class as it always did). Given that Eldritch Blast is likely becoming a class feature rather than a spell, it might be an exception, but for other spell-attack-based gameplay (such as the Artillerist) this is a pretty mean nerf. However, the other thing that's easy to miss is that this is also a huge nerf for Paladins and Rogues, as it's now only the weapon damage whose dice are doubled. One of the best things about Divine Smite is that you can wait to see if you hit or not before you choose to smite, and thus you can wait for a critical hit to do utterly massive amounts of damage. Having played a paladin through about 3/4 of Curse of Strahd, I can honestly say the most satisfying thing in D&D combat might be smiting on a crit. This would prevent that.

So yeah, this is the part that I'm not really on board with. Yes, player damage is pretty high, and this could potentially rein in some of the insane burst damage of a lot of classes. A crit on a Guiding Bolt is a bigger deal than a crit on a Longbow. But crits are one of those things that feel good, and ultimately I think the game should try to make those explosive moments feel really cool.

The final change to d20 tests, though, is one that I'm 100% on board with. Now, whenever you roll a natural 20, you get inspiration, and if you have it already, you can pass it to another player. Again, like I said in the first second on d20 tests, this means DMs will have to rein in players who roll tons of d20 tests unprompted. But this makes a natural 20 feel exciting and fun. It also means that players might feel better about liberally spending inspiration, which is good. Inspiration also now fades after a long rest, rather than at the end of the session, which I think is much better. (This is also covered in the Inspiration rules in the glossary).

Phew: that's a big one, and probably the most controversial of the rules changes they're proposing.

Lastly, I wanted to talk about Conditions, which have gotten some changes.

Grappled works differently. The current version says that your speed is reduced to 0 and can't benefit from bonuses to that speed. The grapple ends if the grappler is incapacitated. It also ends if an effect moves the grappled creature out of the grappling range of the grappling creature (or grappling effect), like being blown away by a Thunderwave.

The new version says that while grappled, your speed is 0 and can't change (effectively the same). You also have disadvantage on attack rolls against any target other than the grappler - which is new (and works like being kind of half-restrained). The grappler can also move with you but has the new Slowed condition if you aren't Tiny or two or more sizes smaller than the grappler (so a Fire Giant can easily haul you around, but an Ogre will move slower dragging an elf or minotaur). We'll cover the Slowed condition later. Finally, and this is maybe the biggest deal: at the end of your turn, you can make a Dexterity or Strength saving throw against the grappler's escape DC, which is 8 + their Strength modifier + their proficiency bonus, ending the condition on a success (the other causes to end the grapple are also included.

This is actually huge. Currently, escaping a grapple requires you to use an action to make an Athletics or Acrobatics check to escape. A lot of players I've seen just don't bother and fight on while grappled, especially because the condition doesn't really harm you if you don't intend to move (grappling the Barbarian isn't going to help you very much). Now, players are more incentivized to get un-grappled, but they also don't have to waste a precious Action to do so.

It also provides a way for players (or monsters) to protect their allies. "Tanks" in D&D other than Armorer Artificers and Ancestral Guardian Barbarians don't really have a strict way to use their attacks to make allies harder to hit. This way, your Fighter can grab the monster and keep it focused on them while the Monk pummels them in the kidneys in relative safety.

Incapacitated in the current rules only says you cannot take actions or reactions. Interestingly, I think this technically means that bonus actions and legendary actions are still ok.

The new version includes the ban on actions and reactions, but also says concentration is broken. You're also unable to speech, and you are Surprised - which says you have disadvantage on initiative rolls. That latter seems to also provide a new definition for Surprised.

I wonder if this means we're going to see more features and abilities that relate to the Incapacitated condition. I think one reason the Monk is held back in terms of damage output and survival is the insane power of Stunning Strike. Perhaps changing it to Incapacitating Strike would make it slightly less powerful but thus allow them to have, for example, more damage and (please) a higher hit die (I've seen arguments that Monks should actually have a d12 hit die, given that their whole thing is mastery over their bodies, and honestly? That actually makes a lot of sense to me).

Slowed is a new condition that will presumably see a lot of use.

The condition imposes limited movement - requiring one extra foot of movement to spend on each foot you move using your speed - the wording here being a bit of an elaborate way of saying your speed is halved, though I suppose that this can clear up ambiguities with spells like Longstrider (do we go by PEMDAS order?). Additionally, while Slowed, attack rolls against you have Advantage. Likewise, your Dexterity saving throws are at disadvantage.

This seems fairly elegant and could be a cool effect to work into class features, monster abilities, and spells. As we see with the new Grappled, dragging a creature you've grappled slows you, which covers the fact you can only move half your speed while dragging them, and it also makes sense that you'd be easier to hit and less able to dodge harmful things while doing so. This only happens while you're moving with the grappled creature, of course, so it's mainly going to affect opportunity attacks (and the grappled creature is coming with you, so no worries from them, I assume).

One more thing! Unarmed Strikes are given a somewhat different definition:

First off, it's a melee attack, and covers damage dealing, grappling, and shoves. This is actually a big deal for Monks, as it will allow them to much more effectively grapple and shove using their Martial Arts trait, which allows them to use Dexterity rather than Strength to make these.

The damage is still 1 + your Strength (except for Monks). But you can also choose to do other things.

Grappling requires a free hand (which might actually make using versatile weapons two-handed more appealing) and only works on a creature that is no more than one size larger than you (can't grapple an adult dragon).

Shoving pushes the target 5 feet or knocks them prone - notably, there's no save or contested check here. It just happens if you hit, which could be a huge deal - I want to jump off an airship as a Monk and punch a dragon between the wings, knocking them prone and sending them plummeting to the ground. Again, like grappling, the size limitation is in effect (but hey, that'll work on Young dragons as long as I'm Medium).

A lot of these aren't huge changes, but I think are worded more clearly.

Again, I think the biggest controversy here is about d20 tests and critical hits in particular. I think we're likely to see some iteration on that. But I think most of this could be fun, and I'm eager to test them out.

Representing Mixed Heritage in D&D

First off, some background to give you an idea of what my perspective on this is: my ancestry is, on both sides of my family, what would today be considered "white," (a racial designation that has shifted over time, though usually defined through exclusion of those who aren't rather than any shared experience - that's a whole other can of worms) but on my father's side, we're Ashkenazi (which is basically Central/Eastern European) Jewish, more ethnically than religiously, whereas my mother's side is a mix of northwestern European ancestry.

Race in the real world is a construct. Humans are, on a genetic level, extremely similar, regardless of what color their skin is, the shape of their eyes, or any other superficial signifiers. And there's no category within human races that cannot reproduce with another - which would be the definition of a different species. Certainly, different cultures exist, and the experience of people who are identified as members of different races can be very different depending on their perceived race and the society's racial biases, but it's all ultimately a construct that is not empirical fact.

In the fantasy genre, borrowing from figures of mythology, race is the word used to refer to what are essentially similar but separate species. But they have also, in a way, come to represent, writ large, the idea of separate ethnic groups in a world.

Much as a diverse country like America can have people with different traditions living together, the mixing traditions of, say, Dwarves and Halflings, could be represented in a bustling fantasy metropolis like Waterdeep.

And with a diverse setting like that, it's inevitable that members of different races would wind up pairing up and having kids.

But here's where it gets complicated from a gameplay design side of things:

First off, "race" in D&D can refer to a profound range of distinctions. If you compare a Dwarf and an Elf, these are both basically humans with a few tweaks. Dwarves are short and stocky, with a historical (and magical) connection to the earth, while Elves are tall (actually in D&D they're also a bit shorter than humans) and lithe, with pointed ears and with a connection to other environments, like forests. But they're basically both humans with some of the proportions stretched or squashed in various ways.

On the other hand, races can be quite different from humans. Spelljammer: Adventures in Space gave us Plasmoids, Autognomes, and Thri-kreen, which are, respectively, a sentient goo, a robot, and a sapient, human-sized insect.

The problem is that race as a character-building category in a game, with mechanical implications, forces a certain clear delineation. Races in D&D are built with a set of mechanical features that are meant to come as a package, and are indeed balanced in an effort to make sure that no one is at a disadvantage for picking any given race. For example, in the new Character Creation UA, Dragonborn are given Darkvision, likely stemming from the fact that their existing racial features aren't quite powerful enough in comparison to races that already had Darkvision.

In the 2014 PHB, two mixed-race options are presented: the Half Elf and the Half Orc, the latter of which is the only option presented to have any orc ancestry (Orcs would show up as playable in later books). Both of these imply that the other half is human. However, there is no corresponding option for Half Dwarves, Half Gnomes, Half Halflings, etc.

And I can understand why, from a design perspective, one would want to limit how many of these half-options one introduces. This would create an exponential growth of how many options one would have to produce with each new introduction, and new questions of how to represent, for example, the child of a half orc and a half elf, could produce an infinite number of potential race options.

WotC's proposed solution in the 2024 version of D&D (not one set in stone, as this is only in playtest material) is to eliminate these Half- race options and instead embrace the idea that there's tons of mixed heritage characters, but that they'll still be represented by one of the base races. So, for instance, your character with Human and Orc parents could be represented with the Human or Orc traits. In a story and, if you have character art, visual way, you can indicate the mixed ancestry by blending the physical features of your ancestries, but from the perspective of the rules, you just pick one or the other.

This has pros and cons. The biggest pro is that it's simple to implement. However, it does seem to double down on the idea that race has these clear-cut distinctions - and again, the problem of using race to refer both to "humans that look a little different" as well as "peoples made by different gods" is really at the heart of the issue here. Likewise, I think the wording in the UA could have been more carefully written. It's unclear if the implication that having children between races is only possible through magic or miracles, or if it's natural and just uncommon for some reason.

The most radical solution to this issue would be to get rid of races entirely, and have biological features and traits exist in a more customizable manner. As I see it, though, the problem with this solution is when we get to the more outlandish race options. I can 100% imagine a world where elves, gnomes, dwarves, orcs, and halflings are basically all just humans with shapes and sizes we don't see in the real world. But it seems to me that part of the D&D fantasy is to be able to play as characters who are pretty far beyond mundane reality - playing as a Warforged, or a Centaur, or a Plasmoid, or a Tabaxi. Here, we want to see those radically non-human elements represented mechanically. If I'm a sentient blob of goo, I should be able to squeeze and stretch in ways that would crush the bones of any elf, human, or orc.

In other words, I don't think that getting rid of race as a mechanical choice at character creation is necessarily the best option (though I'd happily see us retire the term "race" to describe it).

All in all, I think that there's no solution here that is going to please everyone. However, as with a lot of these issues, one of the best ways to arrive at the most acceptable outcome is to get diverse voices to design or at least consult on these designs. Getting it perfect on the first pass isn't necessary, and again, perfect might not exist for this.

Honestly, I think the mechanical choice they've made is probably the most elegant. And as I said in my initial impressions of the UA, I like that this opens up the door to more diverse characters. In a lot of ways, it follows the way I've already been approaching this issue, and by removing Half Elves and Half Orcs, it could actually wind up making more mixed-heritage characters show up now that the rules don't imply that these two examples are the only ones.

I'm hoping we'll see lots of examples of mixed-race NPCs in published adventures moving forward, to make it clear to players and DMs that this is something you can do, and that D&D worlds can reflect the diversity of our own world.

But this is just my take. Thankfully, they have about two years to work on this.

MTG Sets Through 2023 Announced

 While the preview season for Dominaria United is ramping up, WotC announced the next several sets covering the next year and a half of Standard.

Beginning in earnest with Dominaria United, we're going to have a year-spanning plot surrounding the Phyrexians' attempts to take over the multiverse.

Dominaria United, as we've been seeing, takes us to modern Dominaria where Karn uncovers an infiltration by the Phyrexians led by Sheoldred. Like the other non-Elesh Norn praetors, she's managed to travel between planes (though her organic bits burned away in the Blind Eternities). Dominaria is flooded with sleeper agents, and it looks like we know our next Compleated planeswalker: sadly, it looks like Ajani is playing for team P now, and might even kill Jaya Ballard. I guess when people complained that there weren't enough big deaths in War of the Spark, the folks at MTG took that to heart...

Brothers War, later in the year, will apparently be split between the war that was depicted in Antiquities as well as struggles on modern Dominaria. Expect lots of artifacts. (I'm really crossing my fingers for an actual Urza planeswalker card).

Next comes Phyrexia: All Will Be One, which will take place on the former Argentum/Mirrodin, which is now New Phyrexia. But this is apparently not the end of the saga.

March of the Machine will be about the Phyrexian war on the multiverse... which makes me wonder if the planeswalking rules that changed after Time Spiral might be shifting again?

Then, we get another set called March of the Machine: The Aftermath. Presumably we're going to see the Phyrexians defeated (otherwise the game's going to be permanently grimdark) and this will depict what comes after the war.

Next, in fall of 2023, it looks like we're going to be able to take a breather. First is a return to a new but very cool plane in Wilds of Eldraine, which will apparently focus on the more fairy-tale lands in the outer reaches of Eldraine. Hopefully not as overpowered a set, but also hopefully as fun of one.

Finally, in winter of 2023, we're getting The Lost Caverns of Ixalan, checking in on that plane now that the Immortal Sun isn't there anymore, with what looks to be a somewhat adventure-based set.

Given that I'm running a D&D campaign with the Phyrexians as the villains, I'm curious to see how my campaign's story compares to the one WotC is telling.

Character Origins UA Part III: Spell Category Lists and Summary of Thoughts

 One of the things about a modular, exception-based rule system like D&D is that it can be very useful to have various tags. Does my Plasmoid being an Ooze instead of a Humanoid mean anything inherently? No. But once a spell like Hold Person comes around, I'm going to be able to point to that Ooze nametag and tell that spell to go to hell.

In the 2024, OneD&D rules, spells will now have a tag that goes beyond what school of magic it is in, and which class lists it's in. Three new categories are being created: Arcane, Divine, and Primal.

These categories can make other features a bit more elegant. For example, the old Magic Initiate feat specifically allowed you to get spells from certain class lists. When the Artificer was introduced, they needed to create the Artificer Initiate feat to allow a similar expansion into that class' list. The new Magic Initiate, however, only asks that you choose spells from one of the three spell categories - Arcane, Divine, or Primal. Arcane spells draw on the power of the multiverse and its structure, and are the territory of Artificers, Bards, Sorcerers, Warlocks, and Wizards. Divine spells draw on the gods and the Outer Planes, and are the territory of Clerics and Paladins. Primal spells draw on raw nature and the Inner Planes, and are the territory of Druids and Rangers.

Notably, spells can exist in multiple categories, much as spells can exist in multiple class' lists.

As I understand it, the goal with these lists is to open up possibilities for subclasses and other ways to expand your spell options. I could imagine, for example, that Oath of the Ancients Paladins might be able to pick up some Primal spells, or a Celestial Warlock might be able to pick up Divine spells. We'll have to wait for the class revision stuff to see how this might be implemented.

I'm not going to write out the full list here (which only covers cantrips and 1st level spells from the PHB, but that's still a lot). But I'll note a few observations:

First off, Eldritch Blast is not found on any of the lists. I suspect that the spell is going to become simply a Warlock class feature. This might also make the sting of removing critical hits from spells hit less painfully, if they make Eldritch Blast its own thing that can benefit from critical hits.

Some overlapping spells include Detect Magic (all three lists,) Thunderwave (Arcane and Primal), Protection from Evil and Good (Arcane and Divine), and Healing Word (Divine and Primal). Clearly some classes are going to be able to move outside of their standard options - Artificers will presumably still be able to cast Cure Wounds, despite that not being an Arcane spell.

And with that, we've made it through the 21-page UA that is our first preview/test of 2024 D&D material. My overall thoughts are very positive - this feels like it strikes a great balance of keeping what works while tweaking what could be clarified and improved.

As someone from a mildly mixed background (both "white" but Jewish on my father's side) I'm really glad to see broader support for characters having mixed heritages, even if in practice the mechanical expression of that has been pulled back. It's a relatively elegant solution, though, to acknowledge that not every Orc you see is purely Orc back to Gruumsh. In my worldbuilding, I've tended to have characters with mixed backgrounds. The paladin-princess who is heir to my world's massive empire is half air genasi, three-eighths human (or rather five-eights, given her genasi mother's human heritage), and one eighth elf. Mechanically, she'd just be presented as human, but with with features that recall her diverse ancestry.

Likewise, I like that Small humans (and Tieflings and Ardlings) are now an option to represent people who exist in the real world, as well as putting Common Sign Language as one of the standard options, which would make sense. Deaf people exist, so why not have Signing be a standard language (not to mention that there are plenty of cultures that use signing even among the hearing).

Dragonborn... I liked the revisions from Fizban's, and given how recent that book came out I'm surprised to see a slight reversion to the older form of Dragonborn, with Darkvision feeling like it's being tossed at them as a consolation (though in fact the PB times per long rest is a buff over once per short rest, and the damage here should be better in most cases, so perhaps it's actually a buff - just not to my Fighter who gets to make two attacks after his Chromatic Dragonborn breath weapon).

The presence of the Crafter feat makes me hope we're going to get clear and consistent rules for crafting items. Honestly, I think the whole treasure and gold system could use a revamp, but I doubt we're going to see much about that until much farther into this process.

Backgrounds' changes make a lot of sense, and the feat lets them carry a lot more weight (also putting ability scores into backgrounds gives them more heft even if this change is really just semantics). I'll be very curious to see how the higher-level feats turn out, hopefully making them solid choices over a full ASI.

There is so much to be tested. Even two years out from these books (give or take half a year) I think it's going to be a lot to get through.

Character Origins UA Part II: Feats and Rules Glossary

 The first of many huge UA articles to test the changes coming in the 2024 Player's Handbook is here. D&D is evolving, but they're not calling this a new edition. The new stuff will be compatible with the old stuff, but with iterative changes to the way the game works.

Still, that's not to downplay how big the changes will be. No, we're not eliminating classes for a fully skill-based system (which I think would just make it not D&D anymore) but we are seeing some major changes to how certain rules work, and changes to some conditions and previously-existing features.

As we saw in Strixhaven, Spelljammer, and the UAs for Dragonlance, Glory of the Giants, and Planescape, backgrounds are now going to come with a level 1 feat. Feats are now arranged by level requirement and potentially prerequisites, and the background you build (or choose from a list of samples) will come with one of these feats as one of its main features. None of the level 1 feats give any ability score improvements - indeed, the old racial ability score bonuses are now part of your customizable background. So, let's go down the list (much of this information you can simply read for yourself in the actual post, but I'll try to pepper in some commentary here for readers' benefits.)

Oh, before we do: one guiding philosophy on the revisions to these feats is that a character for whom it fits thematically should find the feat appealing. For example, Healer was actually pretty useless for actual healer characters, but now gives a benefit that Clerics and other healing classes will want.

Alert: This now lets you add your proficiency bonus to your initiative rather than a flat +5 (a nerf until level 13, and then a buff at 17+) but it also lets you swap your initiative with another party member when combat starts - which can be super useful for tactical purposes. However, it no longer gives you immunity to being surprised.

Crafter: This new feat gives you Tool Proficiency (which has more explicit rules now) with three Artisan's Tools of your choice (should be very popular among Artificers). The other, crazy thing, is you get a 20% discount when you buy any nonmagical item. (Much as Alert has a benefit for the whole party, a party will benefit from having a Crafter there, saving a lot of gold if they let them do the purchasing.) You can also craft items for 20% cheaper if you are proficient with the tool that is used in crafting it (I'm hoping Artificers show up in the new PHB. It should be interesting to see if these stack or if the Artificer's feature is redesigned).

Healer: As before, you can expend a use of a Healer's Kit as an action, and the creature upon whom you use it can spend a hit die to get HP equal to the roll of the die plus your proficiency bonus. However, on top of that, any healing you do with spells or this feature allows you to reroll any 1s you get on the healing dice.

Lucky: You now have Luck points equal to your PB, instead of a flat 3. Interestingly, the wording also suggests that you give yourself advantage on a roll after you make a d20 test (a new catch-all term for attack rolls, ability checks, and saving throws,) which I think might imply that other sources of optional advantage, like Inspiration, might now be usable after your initial roll (probably a good change as that's how players want to use it). The use of luck points is, I think, unchanged, letting you give yourself retroactive advantage or attackers against you retroactive disadvantage.

Magic Initiate: There's no ability score bonus here, but the really interesting thing is that the feat now refers to Arcane, Divine, or Primal spells, rather than the spells of particular classes. You learn two cantrips from that list (which we'll look at below) and one 1st level spell. You can cast the spell once for free per long rest, but you can also now expend spell slots to cast it again (or upcast it). Also, you can swap out one of the spells from this feat once per level-up. You choose Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma as your spellcasting ability for this feat. (This could be tempting for my Wizard to get him something like Cure Wounds or Healing Word).

Musician: Another new feat, this gives you proficiency with three Musical Instruments. When you finish a short or long rest, you can play a song that gives a number of allies equal to your PB Inspiration (which works a little differently now, see below). Again, this could actually be very good for a Bard (though I really think they need to change the name of Bardic Inspiration if they're going to be using Inspiration as a bigger mechanic).

Savage Attacker: I think this used to be a Half-Orc racial trait? Anyway, when you take the Attack Action and hit with a Weapon as part of that action, you can roll the damage dice twice and choose which result to use once per turn. As I understand it, this will not apply to Sneak Attack dice, but there's no limit on how many times you can do this overall, which I think makes it pretty darn good. An obvious choice for martial classes (and makes me wonder about the future of certain Fighting Styles).

Skilled: Works basically the same. You get two new skill proficiencies.

Tavern Brawler: This one's pretty broad. First off, you can now deal 1d4 + Strength with your unarmed strikes instead of normal damage (note that Unarmed Strikes now encompass shoves and grapples as well, but this is just for when you're dealing damage.) You can also reroll 1s when you get them on an Unarmed Strike (which makes this very attractive for Monks, actually). Once per turn when you attack and deal damage with an unarmed strike, you can push the target 5 feet away (perhaps with no save?) And finally, you can wield furniture as a weapon, with Small or Medium objects counting as Greatclubs and Tiny objects counting as Clubs. That means that, rules as written, I believe a Monk can use tiny objects a monk weapons (Greatclubs, sadly, because they have the heavy and two-handed features, aren't monk weapons).

Tough: This works the same, increasing your max HP by twice your level.

As we've seen in UAs, there are potentially a bunch of other level 1 feats, such as Scion of the Outer Planes, that are meant to fit into this mold. We don't know what level or prerequisites other feats will have - when do you get to pick up Great Weapon Master, for instance, and does it have a prerequisite?

Most of these feel simple enough to be relatively easy to pick up for a new player. Feats becoming a core rule rather than technically an option is a big change, but I think probably a good one.

Moving on, we get to the Rules Glossary. Here, a few terms are defined, and you'll note that some have differences with how the current game works.

Arcane Spells: These are spells associated with Bards, Sorcerers, Warlocks and Wizards (they mention Artificers as well, but not as part of that list... we'll see when they put out a class-focused UA). However, the Arcane List is its own separate thing from the class lists, and basically just creates a new tag for other features to tie into (like the new Magic Initiate).

Artisan's Tools: All tools now cost 15 gp a piece, with the same tools as in the 2014 PHB.

Creature Type: This defines creature type as a tag that doesn't carry any inherent rules meaning, and lists the fourteen existing creature types.

D20 Test: Here, ability checks, attack rolls, and saving throws are now given the umbrella term d20 test (they still exist as separate things, but this gives us a quick term for referring to all three). It also suggests that a d20 test should not have a target less than 5 or greater than 30. The huge change here bring in a house rule that a lot of people already use (and maybe think is already true). Rolling a natural 1 will now mean an automatic failure on any d20 Test, not just attack rolls. Rolling a natural 20 now automatically succeeds (though doesn't bypass common sense limitations - getting a nat 20 on a Perception chck doesn't let you see through walls). The other huge thing is that a nat 20 will give you Inspiration.

Critical Hits: Here's another pretty huge change (and one Jeremy Crawford was careful to remind us all is not set in stone). Now, only attacks by player characters with weapons and unarmed strikes can get a critical hit on a natural 20. That's right, the Tarrasque can no longer crit you, but also, a spell like Guiding Bolt can no longer crit either. Regarding monsters, Crawford said that the logic was that Recharge abilities are a much more exciting way for monsters to do a big and terrifying action, and that it's not terribly fun when you first level Sorcerer is taken down by a Zombie who just happened to roll a natural 20 on their attack. Initially, I felt like this was a pretty cruel nerf to Warlocks, but we're going to have more mysteries surrounding them when we get to the spell lists.

Divine Spells, like Arcane Spells, are one of the new spell categories, these typically associated with Clerics and Paladins.

Gaming Sets now all cost 1 gold, and are another thing with which to get Tool Proficiency.

Grappled: The grappled condition now has a few more rules associated with it. As usual, your speed is reduced to 0 and cannot change. You now also have disadvantage on attacks against any target other than the one grappling you. The grappler can drag or carry you, but they suffer the new "Slowed" condition while doing so unless you are Tiny or two or more sizes smaller than the grappler. Also, you now make a Dexterity or Strength saving throw against the grapple's escape DC at the end of each of your turns, ending it on a success (this also happens if the grappler is incapacitated or something moves you out of the grapple's range without using your movement.

So, this is interesting. It makes grappled a more serious condition, but also makes it easier to escape - I've run so many fights where players won't use their action to escape a grapple because that action is so precious. Now, it's easier to get out, but the condition is definitely worse. I think a good trade-off.

Incapacitated: This condition has also gotten some changes. You can't take Actions or Reactions. Your concentration is broken. You can't speak, and if you are incapacitated when you roll Initiative, you have disadvantage on the roll. All makes sense, not as big of a change, but good to have it all laid out.

Inspiration: As we saw in d20 tests, there's a new and much more consistent way to gain inspiration. DMs can still give it as a reward, but you can also get it any time you roll a nat 20. If you have inspiration already and would gain it again, you can give it to a player character who lacks it. And you lose it at the end of a long rest (not just at the end of a session, which is nice). I think I'm going to start playtesting this version of Inspiration in my own campaign right away.

Long Rests are, I think, not terribly changed in this definition, though it specifies you have to spend 6 hours sleeping (obviously racial traits can override that rule) and two hours of light activity. It also specifies that a creature has to have at least 1 HP at the start of its rest to gain the benefits (though a stable unconscious person should, if they haven't changed it, get 1 HP after an hour). A break in a long rest of over an hour interrupts it and requires you to start again, but if you had spent at least 1 hour resting before the interruption, it counts as a short rest.

Musical Instruments are now all 20g a piece, and give you a Tool Proficiency (which we're going to get to).

Primal Spells, like Arcane and Divine spells, are the third category of spells, associated mainly with Druids and Rangers. The idea is that Divine Spells are tied to the Outer Planes, Primal Spells are tied to the Inner Planes, and Arcane Spells are tied to the multiverse entire.

Slowed: This is a new condition. You spend an extra foot of movement for every foot you move with your speed (effectively halving your speed). But also, attack rolls against you have advantage, and you have disadvantage on Dexterity saving throws. I imagine the new version of the Slow spell will simply inflict this condition, but it could also apply to things like Ray of Frost or other effects.

Tool Proficiency: Here, we get the way tools work laid out fairly clearly: If you make an ability check doing something that would use a tool with which you're proficient and you have, you can add your proficiency bonus to the roll. If that ability check would also use a Skill with which you have proficiency, you can make the roll at advantage. So, as I understand this, if you, say, are a Bard with proficiency in Lutes and Performance, and you want to spend some downtime busking on the street, you'd be able to make a Charisma (Performance) check with advantage if you're playing the lute.

Tremorsense: This is definite, I believe, in the Monster Manual, but here for the PHB, it shows that you can pinpoint the location of creatures and moving objects within a specific range provided you're in contact with the same surface. You can't detect creatures in the air this way, and it doesn't count as a form of sight (I'd like to see some clarification about whether that means that this doesn't count as "seeing" for spells that require a target you can see. I guess it means that you'd know that an invisible creature is in that spot five feet to your northwest, but you'd still be at disadvantage to attack it?)

Unarmed Strike: Unarmed Strikes are attacks you can make using your Strength and proficiency bonus to hit. On a hit, you can choose one of the following effects: You can deal bludgeoning damage equal to 1 plus your strength modifier. You can grapple the target, with a DC equal to 8 plus your Strength modifier plus your Proficiency bonus, and only if the target is no more than one size larger than you and you have a free hand to grab the target. Finally, you can shove the target 5 feet away or knock them prone if they're not more than one size larger than you.

This is actually a huge expansion of your capabilities. Merely having to hit in order to knock a target prone is pretty big. I'd also say that this arguable de-values Athletics and Acrobatics as proficiencies, but adds a lot of dynamic options.

Ok, I said we were going to get to the Spell Lists here, but this post is also super long. Let's save it for the last one.