D&D (2024) Bonus Unearthed Arcana Reveals The Bastion System

A 'bonus' Unearthed Arcana playtest document has appeared, and it shows off D&D's upcoming Bastion System.

This October, we’re bringing you a special treat. While we’re continuing to develop and revise public playtesting material for the 2024 Player’s Handbook, we’d thought you’d enjoy an early look at what we’re cooking up for the 2024 Dungeon Master’s Guide.

The coming Dungeon Master’s Guide will be the biggest of its kind in decades and contain an assortment of new tools for DMs and their tables. In Bastions and Cantrips, we’re showcasing one of these tools, the Bastions subsystem. Dungeon Masters and their parties can use this subsystem to build a home, base of operations, or other significant structure for their characters.

And if you’re raring to test out more character options, we’re also including revisions for 10 cantrips in this playtest packet.

Claim Unearthed Arcana now! - D&D Beyond

www.dndbeyond.com

​

 

[Parmandur]

It feels to me like bastion points should have a less mechanical name, as "renown" or something like that.

On the other hand, clear where you vet them and where to look in the book for clarity on use.

 

[TwoSix]

I do admit listening to the show “bastion points?” And thinking can’t we just use gold?

I have to say, considering the lack of utility for gold in the mid-to-end game is such a common 5e critique, adding in a metagame currency like "bastion points" instead of using gold is quite something; especially since that also strains our jargon du jour "verisimilitude" quite a bit.

 

[RoughCoronet0]

I wonder if having a separate system of meta currency like “Bastion Point” exists to encourage/allow DMs to rewards upgrades for the Bastion via these points without having to just give them the gold.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Crap. Hunter's Mark the class is here to stay, then.

At this point I've given up on Rangers entirely. WotC just have no idea what they're doing, and no concept for the class at all. It's just a messy bundle of ill-conceived but technically-balanced mechanics.

It's weird because most classes they do have a good concept, and Sorcerers they even sharpened up the concept for.

Also I just need to burn D&D's designer a little - well, a lot - for the absolutely ultra-gamist idea that you can put a level minimum on owning a pub or a trophy room, but it's too outrageous to have a guy who can heal HP without a magic spell. I mean, come the hell on. This is pure World of Warcraft stuff with these level minimums, and you're still trying to make Rangers into pure-magic guys?

The cantrips are indeed mostly well-improved, though the idea that Shocking Grasp was OP is the funniest damn thing I've ever read. Not once in the 9 years 5E has been out, have I seen a single DM or player complain that Shocking Grasp was overpowered. Not once. This is again WotC proving themselves out of touch, and their priorities are not sensible priorities. They're rebalancing stuff no-asked, nor would ask, be rebalanced, as a priority.

 

[Parmandur]

I still would have liked to have seen one more look at the bard and lore bard with The Bard spell list added. Especially since they went back to such a weak spell list, are they fixing their weapon options back to 2014 too.

Yeah, guess they felt.happy with the feedback they got there?

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I wonder if having a separate system of meta currency like “Bastion Point” exists to encourage/allow DMs to rewards upgrades for the Bastion via these points without having to just give them the gold.

But that's perverse, because they're getting the gold anyway, it's even baked into WotC's official adventures, so why not use up that gold which mostly right now sits in the pockets of PCs? Why add a weird, totally meta, anti-roleplaying system, and a bunch of level requirements to a building? It would literally be better to constrain all this with gold.

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

Speaking of, I thought Bastions would be the gold sinks of the system, but they're not.

Okay, there are ways to spend gold, but they're not universal in any way. Instead, you have to scour every development for it maybe having the option for you to buy more books with gold, or house a manticore for lols, or surrounding your keep with stone walls actually costing a lot why is this hidden in a corner...

I retract that criticism, the gold sinkness is just hidden in minutia, in true WotC fashion. WAIT no-one can afford these alone anyway, omfg now this has to be a party project anyway but they're pretending it's not.

 

[Parmandur]

I like that they are taking another try at the Druid. I’m firmly in the lots of monsters group. So is just about everyone I play with.

Frankly, I don't see why they Cando both: let players pick any Monster stat block that meets the parameters, but if that is intimidating here are three flexible star blocks you can reflavor however you want. No special rules for the templates, just have them printed in the Druid section with explicit permission to reflavor. Let any player use whichever they want.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

And let this renown be used for something other than just bastion: like you gain a powerfull friend or someone gives you a magic item as a thanks.
This way player not using the bastion system would get something useful if the rest of the group decided to using it.

Exactly - that's a much better idea!

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I’m pretty excited. Watched the video but haven’t read the doc yet.

I am bummed that those parts of the ranger are going to go back to the previous UA version, and surprised that the monk is getting high enough scores that they’re talking pain points and not “redesign”, but the more I think on it, and on what he said they’re looking to change, the more sense it makes.

Hopefully they improve the wording on martial arts and weapon mastery and just make those work coherently together. (And add the ability at level 5 to do damage and one other use of an unarmed strike in the same attack or something. Just like…go loud my dudes.