D&D (2024) Revisiting Classes from OneD&D

[Remathilis]

I think you might be missing how much the designers desire for high-scores on their feedback. I don't know if you played the D&DNext playtest, but there were a LOT of things there that didn't make the 5e books that were great ideas that just needed a little work, but got scrapped due to low-score feedback.

From experience, I think they are more likely to go back to the 5e version (in particular in light of all the recent PR snafus) then they are to keep what they've offered in place, unless they can find a way to get the numbers up. Personally, I'd like to see a few better attempts at what they were going for before we backtrack, but I know there's quite a bit of pressure to cave. Time will tell.

I think you are overestimating the dislike of either choice.

Pact Magic and Wild Shape scored low on the previous class surveys. For them to go back, the playtest version would have to score A LOT lower than the previous amounts. We don't know what those numbers are, but I imagine that (for sake of argument) if the originals were at 50% and the new versions are at 60%, they aren't going to revert to the 50% version. They will find some version that eeks itself into the upper 70% and call that a win.

And I don't think the new versions are going to rank lower than the old. Vocal minorities on messageboards aside, most of the complaint on new WS was that the generic forms were bad, not that the concept of generic forms was bad. I've seen a pretty split reaction to warlock magic. Escaping the Enworld bubble, I don't think there are enough people who are going to defend the 2014 version of either enough to force them to retreat. If Enworld was at all representative of the larger D&D community, we'd be seeing spellless rangers, half-caster bards and all manner of upgrades to the fighter. We aren't.

And these books will be out in 2024. The OGL, the Pinkertons, all that stuff that seems like WotC should be apologizing for will be forgotten except by the most fervent haters. They are not going to say "We're sorry community. Here is the 2014 PHB with new art and a better index for your trouble." Not happening.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I think you are overestimating the dislike of either choice.

Or at least underestimating the dislike for 2014 versions.

Pact Magic and Wild Shape scored low on the previous class surveys. For them to go back, the playtest version would have to score A LOT lower than the previous amounts. We don't know what those numbers are, but I imagine that (for sake of argument) if the originals were at 50% and the new versions are at 60%, they aren't going to revert to the 50% version. They will find some version that eeks itself into the upper 70% and call that a win.

Yeah, I don't think I was aware that they were as unpopular before as you're implying. I know that I don't like either of them, but I try to keep an open mind to other's opinions.

And I don't think the new versions are going to rank lower than the old. Vocal minorities on messageboards aside, most of the complaint on new WS was that the generic forms were bad, not that the concept of generic forms was bad. I've seen a pretty split reaction to warlock magic. Escaping the Enworld bubble, I don't think there are enough people who are going to defend the 2014 version of either enough to force them to retreat. If Enworld was at all representative of the larger D&D community, we'd be seeing spellless rangers, half-caster bards and all manner of upgrades to the fighter. We aren't.

Well, IMO, that's a good thing. As much as I like 5e, I think that a lot of babies were thrown out with a lot of bathwater. As you say, I think that the 1D&D Wildshape playtest was a disaster, but not because there was anything at all wrong with the concept. It was just the execution. They simply need to make statblocks that are designed for purpose - tiny scout, medium skirmisher, large brute, etc. And balance them around that. Certainly not make turning into a mouse a L11 ability (and the mouse has a 20 STR) - that was ridiculous. Easily fixed, really.

And these books will be out in 2024. The OGL, the Pinkertons, all that stuff that seems like WotC should be apologizing for will be forgotten except by the most fervent haters. They are not going to say "We're sorry community. Here is the 2014 PHB with new art and a better index for your trouble." Not happening.

Yes. They're just more likely to be conservative with all the backlash, and I worry that it will make them cave to certain pressures that they otherwise might make bolder decisions. I mean, obviously, I want them to be much better at PR (and decision-making in general) than they have been lately. But I'd be happy if the game doesn't wind up too "designed by committee".

 

[Horwath]

Hunters mark as a non-spell ability:

Hunter's mark:
Bonus action, range 150ft
You focus your hunting instinct on a target within range.
You have advantage on Int and Wis checks vs your target.
Once per turn you can add your prof bonus to damage vs target.
Mark lasts until the end of your next long rest.
You can only have one target marked at a time.

At 5th level you can have two marks and you can mark two targets with same action within range.
At 11th level you can have 3 marks and you can mark 3 targets with same action within range.
At 17th level you can have 4 marks and you can mark 4 targets with same action within range.

if you mark targets above your limit, chose what mark will you drop when you use this feature.

 

[Emberashh]

I can live with a spellcasting Ranger. I can't live with one that only exists to be a cruddy druid/fighter.

 

[Dausuul]

Pact Magic and Wild Shape scored low on the previous class surveys. For them to go back, the playtest version would have to score A LOT lower than the previous amounts.

That is not consistent with the approach Crawford described. A change has to score significantly better than the original to be incorporated. It is the change that has to prove itself; if it doesn't, the original prevails. That's why they're going back to the old subclass progression.

We don't know what those numbers are, but I imagine that (for sake of argument) if the originals were at 50% and the new versions are at 60%, they aren't going to revert to the 50% version. They will find some version that eeks itself into the upper 70% and call that a win.

If they have negative feedback on both the new version and the old, the logical solution is to consider exactly what is sparking complaints on each, and look for a solution that addresses both sets of problems. That might be an evolution of either version, or something completely new... although, based on the video, it seems likely they would favor the original as a starting point.

 

[Remathilis]

That is not consistent with the approach Crawford described. A change has to score significantly better than the original to be incorporated. It is the change that has to prove itself; if it doesn't, the original prevails. That's why they're going back to the old subclass progression.


If they have negative feedback on both the new version and the old, the logical solution is to consider exactly what is sparking complaints on each, and look for a solution that addresses both sets of problems. That might be an evolution of either version, or something completely new... although, based on the video, it seems likely they would favor the original as a starting point.

To be fair, when I wrote that I assumed that a change was going to go forward unless it was widely panned, rather than Crawford's "if you don't love it, we won't change it" route. For example, I didn't see widespread resistance to standardizing subclass progression, but apparently there wasn't much love either.

That being said, I am less optimistic that larger or more controversial changes will go forward unless there is a HUGE outcry of love for them, and using that metric, odds favor status quo.

 

[Parmandur]

Good thoughts,acouple of speculative nitpicks:

Other possible subs: Light, Knowledge, War. They seem the most Iconic domains. Trickery, Nature, Tempest are little more niche. I imagine them (and Grave) get in the update book.

Per the Beyond data that we have, Forge and Tempest are the 2nd and 3rd most popular Cleric Subclasses, so I think we will see Life, Forge, Tempest (who doesn't love The Mighty Thor?) with some spoiler.

Other Subs: Vengeance, Ancients, Domination. The latter acting as the Oathbreaker replacement.

Conquest is I'm the top 3 Paladin Subclasses, so I think that rounds out the '14 PHB three options.

 

[Clint_L]

I don't think the warlock (or the druid) is going back to the way it was before. They will at best make some adjustments to mystic arcanum and wild shape stat blocks.

I don’t see them going near the stat block/template idea for druids. They’ve just said that only “hell, yeah!” ideas are making the cut, and that one had outright majority opposition.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I don’t see them going near the stat block/template idea for druids. They’ve just said that only “hell, yeah!” ideas are making the cut, and that one had outright majority opposition.

Perhaps. Although another option would be that they'll try a hybrid template statblock that incorporates the special features that many animals have that we got in the 5E14 version and give us a middle ground to look at? Just because their bare bones template version was panned doesn't mean the template idea itself was not feasible in some form or fashion. After all the templating they've done with other classes for companions and such, I have a hard time thinking they'll just completely throw up their hands at using some form of it for wildshape.

I could be wrong of course... but knowing the balance issues with 5E14 wildshape, I have to think they can't / won't just go back to it as-is, they'll find an evolution somewhere.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I could be wrong of course... but knowing the balance issues with 5E14 wildshape, I have to think they can't / won't just go back to it as-is, they'll find an evolution somewhere.

To be fair. The real stinker level which is level 2 for wildshape goes away just by moving subclass down to level 3.

So at least that helps a lot.