Second 5th Edition Survey! Plus Results of the First Survey: The Ranger Gets Some Attention!

A new survey is up on the official D&D website. It looks like its covering the classes not in the last survey and the recent Eberron material. WotC also reports on what was learned from the last survey. "For our second survey, we’re focused on the final six classes in the game and the Eberron material that we rolled out in last month’s Unearthed Arcana. If you haven’t looked at that article and want to provide feedback, read it over and come back to the survey later. Even if you don’t have a chance to use the Eberron material in your game, your reactions to it are helpful. You can also skip over the Eberron questions if you don’t want to give feedback on that material."

Here's the overall feedback from the first survey:

"So, what did we learn from our last survey? Let’s take a look at some trends:

To start with, there are a lot of you. We had more people respond to this survey than any of our playtest surveys. A lot of people are into D&D these days!

There are a lot of new players and DMs out there. Welcome to D&D!

You are playing the game in droves. Only about 10 percent of you have read the books without yet playing.

Your campaigns are just getting started. Most of you are playing at 6th level and below.

You love the fifth edition of Dungeons & Dragons, and we’re overjoyed to be able to write that. The overall assessment was incredibly positive, surpassing our results from the playtest by a significant margin."
​

The ranger, in particular, is getting some focus:

"To start with, a majority of players and Dungeon Masters are happy with the ranger overall. The game as a whole is grading well, so we don’t want to make a huge, sudden change to that class. But taking a deeper dive into the ranger, we can see that favored enemy and the beast master archetype received the lowest ratings. Our next step is to take a closer look at why that is.

We’ll start with an internal assessment mixed with feedback from our closed circle of testers. From there, we’ll work up some options and present them to you, most likely in the Unearthed Arcana column. That process allows us to determine if the track we’re on answers your concerns with the class.

The critical step is making sure that any changes we make genuinely improve the class. Remember, plenty of people are happy with the ranger, so any changes need to cover a number of options:

People who like the ranger as it is can simply keep playing their current characters.

People who don’t like the ranger should feel as though the new options allow them to play the ranger they want to create.

The new options are exactly that—new choices for ranger players to select from, as opposed to a rewrite of the Player’s Handbook.

DMs should always feel that they can take or leave the new options, just like any other material in the game beyond the Basic Rules."
​

Hop on over here to take the new survey!

 

[I'm A Banana]

I found my responses generally positive. There's a few minor issues here and there with some particular class features, but the classes are overall quite nice.

I did find my responses quite negative in regards to the changeling, but I think that's mostly related to the "only change into things you've seen before" limitation that basically makes you into a mimicer of others, but forbids you from making up a new identity and using that in place of your own or anyone else's, which I think hurts the themes of identity and self-determination that go with an Eberron campaign. It'd be better if it was basically the second paragraph of Change Self, as a racial ability.

I also wasn't enthusiastic about many of the Eberron races. Shifters I was meh on, warforged were kind of "fine."

Artificers I'm cool with as a wizard subclass, but I'd expect that one to be a little more packed with controversy.

It was interesting to hear about the trends from the last survey, especially the bit about the new ranger feature not changing what already is in place....that's interesting, and it makes me wonder how they'd bring down the power of something if it was TOO powerful (like the moon druid...which apparently got off pretty OK in the survey!).

 

[Zardnaar]

It really is just the beastmaster ranger it seems the Hunter one is OK. I have seen a Moon Druid through to level 13 and it is really only at low levels where they are broken.

 

[Jester David]

I found myself dissatisfied with most of the Eberron races. I think they're a bit weak. They aimed low really.
Most of my other ratings were high with a couple outliers, such as the bard.

And I opted not to leave a final comment at the end because they'll be inundated with thousands of them, and I don't need to add to that pile.

 

[Mistwell]

I mentioned "We could use a release schedule and update on what you've done and where you're at on OGL and digital tools" in the comments.

 

[DaveMage]

I mentioned "We could use a release schedule and update on what you've done and where you're at on OGL and digital tools" in the comments.

Sounds good.

That seems to sum up the most-oft-repeated qualms about the edition.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Yeah, I had a bunch of minor things I'd like (like a ki option for shadow monks to see in magical darkness), but the only one I really had a big issue that I mentioned was lack of sorcerer options. I hate wild magic, which leaves you with a dragon sorcerer. No thanks. I just want an option for a regular sorcerer.

 

[Sonny]

It was interesting to hear about the trends from the last survey, especially the bit about the new ranger feature not changing what already is in place....that's interesting, and it makes me wonder how they'd bring down the power of something if it was TOO powerful (like the moon druid...which apparently got off pretty OK in the survey!).

My guess is that they won't actually errata rangers or druids or any other class - they can put out optional rules to replace features without changing the rules in place. If that makes sense. Things change, but only if the group wants to use the optional rules, and thus doesn't invalidate what's written the PHB.

At least that would make the most sense to me, given the way the new edition has been designed.

 

[I'm A Banana]

As someone playing a wild mage, one of my complaints was that there's not much to the class that doesn't depend on the whim of the DM, at least at low levels. Wild surges are fun, but if your DM never triggers one, you're basically the 1/day free advantage guy...which is kind of yawn. Give me more surges, or give me other weird random stuff to do that isn't surging!

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I really had a big issue that I mentioned was lack of sorcerer options. I hate wild magic, which leaves you with a dragon sorcerer. No thanks. I just want an option for a regular sorcerer.

I don't hate wild magic, but I am more or less in the same shoes, I just want a sorcerer with less forced fluff, or more options of forced fluff... I suggested in comments "Child of an Archmage" "Spellfire/Magic mutation" and "God Blood"