WotC Survey Result: Classes OK, Eberron Needs Work

WotC has posted the latest D&D survey results. The survey covered the character classes not included in the previous survey - the barbarian, bard, monk, paladin, sorcerer, and warlock - and the recent Eberron material. Overall, it reports general satisfaction, with concerns in specific areas. The big ticket issues were sorcerer options, monk Way of the Four Elements opton, and more sweeping issues with the Eberron stuff, icluding the warforged and artificer. Mike Mearls says, but doesn't announce, that "I expect that you’ll see some revisions to the Eberron material before the end of the year."

The survey report is as follows:

Overall, the barbarian, bard, monk, paladin, sorcerer, and warlock all graded very well. The areas of concern were limited to specific areas of the classes.

For instance, we’ve heard consistent feedback that the sorcerer doesn’t offer enough options within the class. Not everyone is excited about the wild mage, thus leaving some players with only the dragon sorcerer as an option. It’s no coincidence that we showed off a favored soul option for the sorcerer in Unearthed Arcana. Plus, we have another sorcerer option on tap for that article series.

We also saw some dissatisfaction with the monk’s Way of the Four Elements option. Feedback indicates that this path focuses too much on adding more ways to spend ki points, rather than giving new options or maneuvers that a monk can use without tapping into that resource. We’re doing some monk design right now that used the Way of the Four Elements as an option, so we’ve shifted that future work in response to that feedback.

Like with the first wave of class feedback, things remain very positive. The issues we’ve seen look like they can be resolved by trending toward what people liked in our future design. Nothing stood out as needing serious changes.

The Eberron material, as you can expect for stuff that is in draft form, needs some more refinement. The changeling will likely have its ability scores and Shapechanger ability tweaked. The shifter scored well, so expect a few shifts there (pardon the pun) but nothing too dramatic.

The warforged had the most interesting feedback. I think we’re going to take a look at presenting a slightly different approach, one that ties back into the original race’s armored body options to make them feel more like innately equipped characters.

The artificer still needs a good amount of work, so that one will go back to the drawing board. I think the class needs a more unique, evocative feature that does a better job of capturing a character who crafts and uses custom items. We played it too conservatively in our initial design.

I expect that you’ll see some revisions to the Eberron material before the end of the year. Unearthed Arcana is proving a useful resource in giving new game content every month while giving us the chance to test drive mechanics.

Thank you all for taking part in these surveys and making our job of producing great RPG content much easier. I’m looking forward to seeing how our work evolves and hope you enjoy the option of weighing in on our work.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Plane Sailing

Astral Admin - Mwahahaha!
You realize that a survey is not equivalent to the truth on any given issue, right? Millions of people voted for Bush, who thinks the world was created 6000 years ago. Do that make it true? Because of votes? Seriously? Don't make me laugh. Popularity doesn't make something true or false, or a game mechanic broken or well designed.

The rest of your post is just snark, not worth responding to.

<snip>

that's a Bill Clinton "it depends on what your definition of is is" type move. Errata in a games rules book includes functional changes to game rules to make them work as intended, not just correcting for editing errors or proofreading mistakes.

It's not hyperbolic to call a false statement a lie, because that's the literal truth. Nothing more, nothing less.

You need to take a chill pill, sir. Remember the rules that you've signed up to - no politics, no insulting other members.

Thanks
Plane Sailing, ENworld admin
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Fralex

Explorer
I think the key thing about the artificer is the freedom it grants the player. I talked about this a bit on Keith Baker's blog:

What, in your view, is the “heart” of the artificer class? Considering 5e handles magic items and crafting so differently from 3e, the UA version feels like it’s trying too hard to incorporate mechanics that aren’t quite compatible with 5e, and the end result is something that does several things the original artificer could do without really capturing what made it fun.

For me I think the biggest thing was the freedom you had, because of the very mix-and-match nature of 3e’s magic item crafting. When I made something, it felt like my own creation. I had decided that this item would be a wand, and then I decided it would have this one particular spell. There was no list of “approved ideas” I was restricted to coming up with, or at least, the list was so huge it didn’t matter.

The UA artificer doesn’t give you that same creative freedom. Scroll-Infusing comes sort of close, because scrolls are the only magic item still open to any spell you want, but you’re still limited to just a portion of the wizard spell list. Maybe if being an artificer let you add any spell to your spellbook, but those spells could only be cast through magic items? Sort of like this person’s idea: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?367999-5e-Homebrew-The-Artificer-(of-Alancia)
And this was his response:

Absolutely. As someone who played an artificer in 3.5, my favorite aspect was Spell Storing Item and the Weapon and Armor augmentations… the ability to come up with exactly the spell or effect that the current situation calls for. Someone needs healing? I’ll use Spell Storing Item to create a healing salve. Horde of undead? Time to slap an “Undead Bane” enchantment on my hammer. Honestly, the creation of long-term magic items was never as important to me as a character feature as that ability to create the perfect tool on the spur of the moment.

I don't think the artificer needs to work the same way as it did in older editions, but it needs to evoke that feeling of being able to create something of your own design. As I said before, the UA version would be a lot better if it simply allowed you to learn other classes' spells in some form.
 

Vael

Legend
I think artificer matches the wizard's fluff the best, and hacking the wizard seems totally doable. Here's a really simple change for wizard chassis: make them spells-known casters instead of preparation casters, with the sorcerer's spells-known progression, and take away Arcane Recovery. Suddenly the artificer is a MUCH more limited spellcaster, and could easily justify better weapon and armor proficiency and d8 hit dice and an extra skill, PLUS some artificer goodies like gadgets, infusions, potions, etc.

... Or just make a new class. That way we won't have to cross-reference, which is a good thing. Rather than, "it's like a wizard, but take away this, add this, change this to that, multiply this by pi, reword this, use this spell list, except when you don't ...." just write a frickin' new class.

Here's the 3 big reasons I think Artificers deserve their own class.

1. Unique spells and spell list. The 3.5 Artificer had a spell list that mashed up the best support spells from both the Cleric and the Wizard, losing a lot of the blasting spells. They also had a lot of unique spells. So if the Artificer were to be a subclass, we now have to edit their parent class's spell list.

2. The Artificer can support its own subclasses. We've talked about different archetypes of the Artificer, and I think that there is space for them to be defined as unique subclasses.

3. Because Artificers rock and I want them to stand alone.

3b. To be honest, I think the best spellcasting mechanic for the Artificer is like the Cleric or Druid. Full access to their entire spell list, but prepare a subset.
 

phantomK9

Explorer
I haven't played or read much about the Eberon artificer class, but from what I read of the UA article and from what everyone has said what the purpose of the artificer should be, it seems like a new class is really what is needed.

Mechanically I think a class that takes something like the Gnomes Tinkering ability, adds some magic and then eventually cranks that up to 11 would really be interesting.
 

lkj

Hero
Of potential interest-- Mearls was asked whether an Eberron update would come as an update to the original article or as a new article (the tweeter probably not wanting a whole month's UA slot filled with Eberron again).

Mearls' reply:

"depends on the scope - I kind of like the idea of artificer as class, which requires more effort"

So-- accepting the character limits of twitter-- the option of making artificer its own class is clearly on the table.

AD
 

I'm A Banana

Potassium-Rich
Fralex said:
I don't think the artificer needs to work the same way as it did in older editions, but it needs to evoke that feeling of being able to create something of your own design. As I said before, the UA version would be a lot better if it simply allowed you to learn other classes' spells in some form.

I mean, that right there looks like ritual casting. And given that UA artificers could already make potions of things that normal wizards couldn't do, I think that'd be a good avenue for grabbing "other class's spells in some form."
 

Fralex

Explorer
I mean, that right there looks like ritual casting. And given that UA artificers could already make potions of things that normal wizards couldn't do, I think that'd be a good avenue for grabbing "other class's spells in some form."

True, but that list was really small! I want feel like the things I make are my own! Remember what I said about being constrained to a list of "approved ideas":

For me I think the biggest thing was the freedom you had, because of the very mix-and-match nature of 3e’s magic item crafting. When I made something, it felt like my own creation. I had decided that this item would be a wand, and then I decided it would have this one particular spell. There was no list of “approved ideas” I was restricted to coming up with, or at least, the list was so huge it didn’t matter.
 

variant

Adventurer
A dedicated Artificer class could allow things like alchemists and other magical crafting archetypes to be put under its umbrella.
 

mearls

Hero
A dedicated Artificer class could allow things like alchemists and other magical crafting archetypes to be put under its umbrella.

Yeah, that's what is swaying it in my mind. You could also imagine a character who works with rune magic falling under that umbrella.
 

pemerton

Legend
You could also imagine a character who works with rune magic falling under that umbrella.
I've always thought that the 4e runepriest should have been brought under the cleric umbrella (Essentials-style).

A rune mage going in the artificer direction would be quite a different thing, I think. More like the old Runemaster and Magus from Rolemaster (companions II and III respectively).
 

Remove ads

Latest threads

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Top