What’s Really Going on With One D&D?

The paradigm shifts once again! Set aside all the crunchy calculations and simultaneous calls of nerfing and power creep. Something else is taking place through Wizards of the Coast’s move towards the One D&D experience. During our recent live chat discussing Unearthed Arcana 2022: Expert Classes we touched on parts of the latest playtest reminiscent of earlier editions of the game. Several people watching along called out stuff bringing to mind third and fourth edition, which for at least one commenter felt exhausting and an oversimplification. In my estimation something deeper than mechanical callbacks seems to be happening and that’s what’s got me fascinated. Let’s get into it.

Gimme that gamist stuff!

Many, many players praise fifth edition Dungeons & Dragons for the game’s support of its Dungeon Masters. “Rulings not rules,” and “you’re in charge, not the rules” get bandied about repeatedly over the last eight years as a refreshing shift from the bloated rules of the past, particularly 3.5 D&D. In other posts and videos I’ve pondered whether Monte Cook’s development of Cypher System sprang directly from this, since it’s a game heavily emphasizing player-centric mechanics and rules.

Something in these One D&D playtest documents and the design philosophy behind the most recent official products is the onus of rules appears to be shifting back into the players’ court. Consider the gameplay loop described in the D&D Basic Rules. A DM describes the situation, the players describe their characters actions in that situation and the DM determines the results. This might be a call for some sort of check but may also not. The key thing here, which is reinforced throughout the rest of the rules, is the DM determines the results of characters’ actions.

Did a character’s actions suggest making a skill check is in order? What skill, what ability score should modify it and what’s the DC? Responsibility for determining such things lay in the DM’s hands and for a while everyone seemed to love this setup and heaped praise upon 5E D&D’s empowerment of DMs to adjudicate things with their own best judgement.

That’s no longer the case in these One D&D playtests.

It might not seem so significant and perhaps it’s just WotC reacting to the very common playstyle that straight up ignores the basic gameplay loop and associated guidance but there is a multiverse of difference between a player describing their character searching around a room and a player stating their character is taking the Search Action. The former scenario leaves it to the DM to determine what happens. Do they make an Investigation check, a Perception check or simply discover whatever there is to find in the room? The latter puts the power in the players’ hands to tell the DM what happens. Taking the Search Action to use Perception means the character will find a concealed creature or object on a success.

Does the DM describe a situation involving a group of other sapient creatures? As it stands now players might describe their actions as attempting to communicate with these NPCs along with their approach to such interaction and maybe some specific messages they put forth. In the future this might change and instead the player states their character is taking the Influence Action. Perhaps they’re aware of the NPCs’ attitudes and they know with mechanical certainty if they succeed on a DC 10 check then these hostile creatures will offer no help but do no harm to them either.

See the difference? By creating many new codified Actions characters can take and whatever rules necessary to get there it becomes the players adjudicating their own characters’ actions. They will tell the DM what happens because with more rules there’s more potential citations for players to rely on, which greatly reduces the paradigm of rolling the dice “when the outcome is uncertain.” Players will choose when to roll dice and they will know the results of their actions because there is no ruling or DM fiat in response.

Letting players see behind the screen

Granted the One D&D playtests are just that and further the rules changes included in these documents may certainly change. Likewise who knows where the material will appear in the final version. Something like the social interaction guidelines already exist right now in the Dungeon Masters Guide, for example, but with the extraordinary ignorance of the book itself I imagine many players — including DMs — saw this Influence Action and thought, “Finally! Some guidance for social interaction.”

Codifying so many things as Actions seems to me the most impactful change I’m seeing in One D&D so far. This is paradigm shifting stuff. I began picking up on this in the first Unearthed Arcana of this series. My impression of the feats and background elements found therein was they look much more clear cut as far as the benefits they provide. Gone is the background Feature, which largely went ignored anyway. Instead backgrounds focus on the more tangible stuff — the specific mechanical benefits provided characters. A feat like Tavern Brawler is a good illustration too. Currently there’s a lot more DM fiat involved if no other way than leaving it in their hands whether an improvised weapon is close enough to an actual weapon to replicate the properties. The One D&D version includes no ambiguity for the player. Only a  piece of furniture can become a weapon and it functions either as a greatclub or a club.

How about all these Actions?

• Attack
• Dash
• Help
• Hide
• Influence
• Jump
• Magic
• Search
• Study

Some of these exist already and One D&D revises their mechanical implication. Notice the new ones though, and consider the paradigm shift to a player-centric focus. In this potential new scenario players won’t have to ask permission as often as state what takes place. The new actions illustrate this most clearly. Do you want to try and influence a group of bandits who approach the party with dangerous intent? Do you remember the name of the lost city you read about a few sessions ago? Can you tell how an NPC feels about what just happened? You’ll take the Influence Action and attempt to change their attitude. You’ll take the Study Action and wrack you brain. You’ll take the Search Action to gain Insight about their state of mind. The player is privvy to the process and exerts a measure of control over the adjudication.

It’s worth noting I’m not making any sort of judgement either way here but rather sharing an observation I had while thinking about One D&D through the lens of these two Unearthed Arcana documents we’ve gotten so far. This is where my perspective lands when I consider past editions. In the 3.5 D&D era the game was incredibly kludgy with rules for many, many things including lots of edge situations. More often than not the players stated what their characters would do and the explicit rules that ensured the result they sought.

Following this we got 4E D&D (my favorite and the best edition!). One of the reasons I like it so much, which this One D&D has only reinforced, is the balance I feel it struck between player and DM control. In lieu of tons of specific rules instead characters had their Powers and these discrete game components indicated what happened. The gamist language in this edition turned many people off but to me it was the best part! I’m wholly capable of getting immersed and roleplaying and I like how when the time came for mechanics there was far less need for interpretation because the rules rightly assume real life humans are using them and not the characters in the game.

A lot of how One D&D will ultimately come together leaves much of this up in the air. For example will something like the Influence Action appear in the Player’s Handbook or the DMG? I sincerely hope it’s the former if no other reason than most DMs themselves don’t even seem to have any familiarity with the DMG, which means so much useful guidance goes to waste and leads to frustrated players turning to social media for answers. (Spoiler alert: a tremendous amount of these questions are answered in your DMGs, folks!)

I very much like the notion of providing players with much clearer rules so they can make better informed decisions when the time comes to describe their characters’ actions. Granted there’s some things in these UA docs I feel very turned off by like the Jump Action but at the end of the day it doesn’t really matter all that much to me. I will continue playing D&D the same way I always have — with friends who like me incorporate the stuff they like and ignore the stuff they don’t. This is perhaps the best wisdom I can offer folks feeling frustrated by their desires not reflecting in official material at any time. The best example I can offer is all the way back in first edition AD&D not a single person I ever played with used the weapon speed factors in their games. Yet here I am decades later, still playing D&D and enjoying the experience.

Featured image — Nerdarchist Dave and Nerditor Doug streamed their reactions to One D&D Unearthed Arcana 2022: Expert Classes a few hours after Wizards of the Coast dropped the document. You can find that UA right here. Make sure to complete the surveys for this UA docs as they release so you can make your thoughts known and help shape the direction of D&D.

New videos all the time at Nerdarchy the YouTube channel