D&D (2024) One D&D Expert Classes Playtest Document Is Live

The One D&D Expert Class playest document is now available to download. You can access it by signing into your D&D Beyond account at the link below. It contains three classes -- bard, rogue, and ranger, along with three associated subclasses (College of Lore, Thief, and Hunter), plus a number of feats.

Unearthed Arcana Playtest

Unearthed Arcana Playtest Materials Get Unearthed Arcana playtest content, try it out in your game, and provide feedback! Check back regularly for ...

www.dndbeyond.com

 

[UngeheuerLich]

A couple years ago I emailed him about the question on the Ranger and his general response was along the line of "phantom" people complaining about the ranger class. Phantom implying nonexistent and I take that as a personal attack.

No, it was not his answer. I found it. He did not call you phantom people.

He called the act of trying to please everyone and especially redesigning things, most people are content with "chasing phantoms".
Which is a generally good idea. Chances you annoy more people than you please if you go after each thing a random person does not like are big.
He even said, he wanted to do research to make sure more than a single person has issues. This is actually taking your concern seriously.

My prime example is always this:

4e was on a good way. Then the paladin was playtested on a con. A famous scene that found its way into the echo chamber that is the internet was the paladin using divine challenge and run away to grant disadvantage forever.
That sorted for a lot of noise and the designers added really annoying and complicated conditions so that such behavior is impossible. Resulting in a confusingly annoying ability.
In a very late update, the conditions were removed for the better.
So before liste ing to the loudest voices, they are very well advised doing research first to not chase phantoms (i. e. rules that work ok, but are willfully exploited by 1 out of 1000 people, usually in bad faith).

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Of course players hate exhaustion. What would be the point of having it in the game if it was something they liked?

I mean they hate it ore then damage, more then other conditions...

 

[ScuroNotte]

Sure. Lots of people ask for lots of different things. The fact that they can only please some of them doesn’t mean they are ignoring the rest.

Yes, I agree. But there are better ways of conveying that information

 

[ScuroNotte]

No, it was not his answer. I found it. He did not call you phantom people.

He called the act of trying to please everyone and especially redesigning things, most people are content with "chasing phantoms".
Which is a generally good idea. Chances you annoy more people than you please if you go after each thing a random person does not like are big.
He even said, he wanted to do research to make sure more than a single person has issues. This is actually taking your concern seriously.

My prime example is always this:

4e was on a good way. Then the paladin was playtested on a con. A famous scene that found its way into the echo chamber that is the internet was the paladin using divine challenge and run away to grant disadvantage forever.
That sorted for a lot of noise and the designers added really annoying and complicated conditions so that such behavior is impossible. Resulting in a confusingly annoying ability.
In a very late update, the conditions were removed for the better.
So before liste ing to the loudest voices, they are very well advised doing research first to not chase phantoms (i. e. rules that work ok, but are willfully exploited by 1 out of 1000 people, usually in bad faith).

That is not how I interpreted his comment.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Or only getting 4 subclasses this time around, like everyone else. They need something to make up for that.

I hope wizards have to chose 1 school at level 1 to specialize and need to chose two schools to ban.

 

[CleverNickName]

Watch as Wizards get buffed. I guarantee it. They'll use the spell preparation changes as an excuse to do it.

It's a popular topic in Internet discussion forums, but I never really believed that wizards were overpowered compared to other classes. It looks like Wizards of the Coast didn't either.

The wizards I've played were a bit...lackluster? The Necromancer was pretty dull, but the Diviner was a lot of fun. I really enjoyed the Abjurer also, but I had to MC with Fighter to keep up with the paladin, cleric, and rogue in the group. I think the wizard class could benefit from some buffs, personally.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

That is not how I interpreted his comment.

Yes. This is why I helped you with the interpretation that is not putting wrong words into his mouth.

 

[Parmandur]

He was calling people who questioned were phantoms. By stating that if "someone has a problem might be a phantom in terms of general use," are you stating that if a person goes against what is considered the norm is nonexistent (phantom)? There are many ways to get a point across but one must be cautious about how they word it. The state of the person you are responding to

It's stating that just because 30 out of a million people have a problem doesn't mean they should act quickly to solve thar problem and break the Class foe 900,000 other people. The people aren't phantoms, and what he said was that they needed research to suss the real problema from the phantom problems.

 

[Sacrosanct]

That is not how I interpreted his comment.

Obviously. The point I'm trying to make isn't that you interpreted it one way and everyone else is saying it's a different way. My point is that if there's a decent chance you misinterpreted what he said, then it might be a good idea to not go around saying he has a big ego. Because it's not a good look for you, and that behavior is why we don't see more designers engaged in forums.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Of course players hate exhaustion. What would be the point of having it in the game if it was something they liked?

If it was something that PCs inflicted on enemies some of the time, attitudes to it would change drastically. Add a few PC-friendly rules for doing so and suddenly it'll become both liked and feared, rather than just seeming like a bit of a chore.

It's a popular topic in Internet discussion forums, but I never really believed that wizards were overpowered compared to other classes. It looks like Wizards of the Coast didn't either.

The wizards I've played were a bit...lackluster? The Necromancer was pretty dull, but the Diviner was a lot of fun. I really enjoyed the Abjurer also, but I had to MC with Fighter to keep up with the paladin, cleric, and rogue in the group. I think the wizard class could benefit from some buffs, personally.

LOL my friend, WotC didn't believe Wizards were OP in 3rd edition when LFQW was in full force. So their judgement is proven bad.

In 5E, where the issue is less pronounced, I don't expect them to get it. Right now Wizards are fairly balanced in combat, but OP compared to non-full-casters in the exploration/social pillars (often by negating/sidestepping issues entirely), especially at higher levels.

All the changes we've seen here look overall to continue that.

They're full casters with access to an incredible spell list, and some of the subclasses are extremely strong. MC'ing with Fighter is not letting you "keep up", it's a great way to ensure you permanently lag behind and never see the true power of a full caster. So with no insult intended, the fact that you did that suggest you don't understand the issue on a fairly basic level.