D&D (2024) Playtest 6 Survey is Open

[Kobold Stew]

It is clear to me that they are reading and responding to feedback, and that there is possibility for nuance in our responses.

Where there's risk is in knee-jerk condemnation of things that could be improved but are not there yet. Just being negative or making ridiculously overblown rhetorical sweeps risks losing any improvement. At heart, the designers are going to go conservative and not innovate if new ideas are just slammed down.

We've seen it with the subclass levels: Keeping the different levels for different classes is a conservatism they aren't going to fight for [i.e. fight to avoid], given the desire among a vocal group for "backwards compatibility" (a concept variously defined but raised by many as a sacred cow). And so we lose out on innovation, and the possibility of improvement.

We've seen it with Wild Shape. The proposal for templates was initially weak, and got slammed. So they're giving us what we had before, even though (as discussions on these boards and elsewhere have shown this past week) there's appeal for a few specific templates that can improve as the druid levels up. If we're lucky, and if we provide thoughtful feedback, there's a chance we can get it. But just slamming what they've given us? Then they'll play safe, and just replicate what's in the PHB 2014.

Just knocking things reduces innovation and is a voice for conservatism. I'd much rather see new ideas and improvement, and so my comments will praise what Iike (a lot -- this was the most promising package we've seen yet), but argue for changes on the things that don't work for me.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I think this survey took me 9 hours. Not straight, but still... holy frijoles... I'm tired.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Spare the Cunning Strikes feature folks!

If I had given that ability more praise, they might have filed a restraining order against me. I LOVED the new rogue.

 

[Parmandur]

Took me about 15-20 minutes.

 

[CleverNickName]

I like the format of this survey. Here goes nothing.

EDIT: Took me 44 minutes to complete. I only gave feedback for the Druid, the Monk, and the Feats, and a write-in comment in closing.

Druid: In summary, I told them that it was the best character in the whole playtest packet, and my favorite one that I playtested. I said that I really enjoyed the pacing of the abilities (the level that the abilities are earned), and I especially liked the Circle of the Sea. As for the Moon Druid, I told them that I understood why they changed what they did, but I felt they took the changes too far. It's not as versatile or as interesting as the Circle of the Land now, and I hope they fix it.

Monk: In summary, I told them that I felt it was drifting too far into the Fighter's wheelhouse with things like weapon masteries, extra attacks, etc. In fact, I told them that I felt the only 'weapon' a Monk should be striving to 'master' is their body. I gushed about the Elements monk, though, and how I appreciated the "Avatar: the Last Airbender" vibes. I told them that I'd like to see more options and abilities for the monk that use their Bonus action and/or Reaction, since they are self-limiting and self-replenishing resources--and it's nice to have something to do every round that isn;'t the same old "yet another attack."

Feats: short and sweet. I told them that I liked Ability Score Increase as a feat, and that I felt it probably should have been that way all along.

 

[Horwath]

Spare the Cunning Strikes feature folks!

Oh, I did give it max rank.
One of the best features from this playtest.

 

[Charlaquin]

My Ranger answers were a lot of 'spells are not class features'

...and then I praised them turning Paladin class feature into a spell but that's different.

Well, yeah, there’s a big difference between one class feature that gives you two always-prepared spells immediately and four more over the course of several levels, as opposed to three class features that each give you one always-prepared spell.

Imagine how much better it would be if there an early ranger class feature like “ranger’s arsenal” or some that gave you Hunter’s Mark and barrage spells as always-prepared spells when you reached the appropriate levels, instead of each of those being the features for individual levels.

Damn, now I wish I had said that in the survey…

 

[Charlaquin]

Spare the Cunning Strikes feature folks!

I rated Cunning Strike and all of its associated features as “very satisfied,” and then gave feedback for how I would like to see it improved in the comment fields.

If it makes it into the 2024 PHB completely unchanged from this UA, I will be perfectly happy with it. But, there are some small tweaks they could make to make it EVEN BETTER in my opinion, and I was sure to let them know that.

 

[Charlaquin]

Rogue is good.
Druid is almost all good.
Paladin is almost all good.

I hope people praise the good along with bashing the bad. There is some really good stuff in this packet and I'd hate to see it all thrown out because people are upset about some other stuff in there.

It’s a really strong packet overall. Still room to improve, but definitely moving in the right direction.

 

[Horwath]

If I had given that ability more praise, they might have filed a restraining order against me. I LOVED the new rogue.

I added that it needed the bleeding attack.
1 damage per remaining d6 sneak attack damage at the start of the turn.
Needs at least that amount of healing to stop it or Action for a Medicine check equal to rogues DC(dex based)