• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D (2024) WotC On One D&D Playtest Survey Results: Nearly Everything Scored 80%+!

In a 40-minute video, WotC's Jeremy Crawford discussed the survey feedback to the 'Character Origins' playtest document. Over 40,000 engaged with the survey, and 39,000 completed it. I've summarised the content of the video below. High Scorers The highest scoring thing with almost 90% was getting a first level feat in your background. This is an example of an experimental thing -- like...

Status
Not open for further replies.
In a 40-minute video, WotC's Jeremy Crawford discussed the survey feedback to the 'Character Origins' playtest document. Over 40,000 engaged with the survey, and 39,000 completed it. I've summarised the content of the video below.

High Scorers
  • The highest scoring thing with almost 90% was getting a first level feat in your background. This is an example of an experimental thing -- like advantage and disadvantage in the original 5E playtests.
  • Almost everything also scored 80%+.
About The Scoring System
  • 70% or higher is their passing grade. In the 70s is a thumbs up but tinkering need. 80% means the community wants exactly that and WotC treads carefully not to change it too much.
  • In the 60s it's salvageable but it really needs reworking. Below 60% means that there's a good chance they'll drop it, and in the 40s or below it's gone. Nothing was in the 50s or below.
Low Scorers

Only 3 things dipped into the 60s --
  • the d20 Test rule in the Rules Glossary (experimental, no surprise)
  • the ardling
  • the dragonborn
The next UA had a different version of the d20 Test rule, and they expect a very different score when those survey resuts come in.

It was surprising that the dragonborn scored lower than the ardling. The next UA will include new versions of both. The main complaints were:
  • the dragonborn's breath weapon, and confusion between the relationship between that dragonborn and the one in Fizban's Treasury of Dragons.
  • the ardling was trying to do too much (aasimar-like and beast-person).
The ardling does not replace the aasimar. The next version will have a clearer identity.

Everything else scored in the 70s or 80s.

Some more scores:
  • new human 83%
  • dwarf, orc, tiefling, elf tied at 80-81%
  • gnome, halfling tied at 78%
Future installments of Unearthed Arcana
  • The next one will have new ardling and dragonborn, a surprise 'guest', and a new cleric. It will be a shorter document than the previous ones, and the one after that is bigger again. Various class groups.
  • Warrior group digs into something teased in a previous UA sidebar -- new weapon options for certain types of characters. Whole new ways to use weapons.
  • New rules on managing your character's home base. A new subsystem. Create bases with NPCs connected with them, implementing downtime rules. They're calling it the "Bastion System".
  • There will be a total of 48 subclasses in the playtest process.
  • New encounter building rules, monster customization options.
  • New versions of things which appear in the playtest after feedback.
Other Notes
  • Playtests are a version of something with the assumption that if something isn't in the playtest, it's still in the game (eg eldritch blast has not been removed from the game). The mage Unearthed Arcana will feature that.
  • Use an object and other actions are still as defined in the current Player's Handbook. The playtest material is stuff that has changed.
  • Thief subclass's cunning action does not interact with use an object; this is intentional. Removed because the original version is a 'Mother may I?" mechanic - something that only works if the DM cooperates with you. In general mechanics which require DM permission are unsatisfying. The use an object action might go away, but that decision will be a made via the playtest process.
  • The ranger's 1st-level features also relied too heavily on DM buy-in, also wild magic will be addressed.
  • If you have a class feature you should be able to use it in the way you expect.
  • If something is removed from the game, they will say so.
  • Great Weapon Fighting and Sharpshooter were changed because the penalty to the attack roll was not big enough to justify the damage bonus, plus they want warrior classes to be able to rely on their class features (including new weapon options) for main damage output. They don't want any feats to feel mandatory to deal satisfying damage. Feats which are 'must haves' violate their design goals.
  • Light Weapon property amped up by removing the bonus action requirement because requiring light weapon users to use their bonus action meant there were a lot of bad combinations with features and spells which require bonus actions. It felt like a tax on light weapon use.
  • Class spell lists are still an open question. Focus on getting used to the three big spell lists. Feedback was that it would be nice to still have a class list to summarize what can be picked from the 'master lists'. For the bard that would be useful, for the cleric and wizard not necessary as they can choose from the whole divine or arcane list.
The playtest process will continue for a year.

 

log in or register to remove this ad

Xamnam

Loves Your Favorite Game
In the video Jeremy Crawford was like “we can tell from the written responses which are based on initial impressions and which are from actual playtest experience.” I’m just like… sure you can, buddy… 🤣
I do think they're just referring to the fact that the survey asks you to mark if you've play tested it or not, not that they can infer that from the quality or content of responses. Here's the direct quote:
If say a person doesn't have time to play test it's still valuable for us to get feedback on the survey, just based on the person's reading of the material, because we can tell when we're reading if feedback is based on real play experience versus first impression on reading. Feedback from both situations is helpful to us, and so I encourage people if you've at least read it, please fill out the survey, even better if you've read it and you've tried some of it out in play because we find all of our perceptions change once we get to the game table and we're rolling dice, but again all of the feedback is helpful this is.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

DEFCON 1

Legend
Supporter
In the video Jeremy Crawford was like “we can tell from the written responses which are based on initial impressions and which are from actual playtest experience.” I’m just like… sure you can, buddy… 🤣
Heh heh... you seem to have a lot more faith in the writing ability of the people who filled out the surveys than I do, thinking they could mask their responses of actual play versus indignant initial impressions. :D
 

Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
As a side note, I hope that the 'mother may I' approach they are talking about doesn't extend to skill checks. I wasn't a fan of the way they codified Search, Influence and other skill related checks in packet 2, but agree that MMI shouldn't come into play in class abilities.
I got bad news for ya.

Skills will likely be a little bit more codified.

Especially for things that come up often.

That's why Use a Object might be changed or disappear. Because the power and utility of a class or race might be drastically changed depending on whether or not the DM is a veteran or a novice or very restrictive or very permissive.

But fret not it'll probably be in the Dungeons Masters Guide and no one reads that thing. :LOL::ROFLMAO:
 
Last edited:

Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
This comes across as the people that don't vote, yet grumble about the government. If you are not willing to put in the effort to try to make something better (in your view), if you later complain about you end just being hypocritical.
I'm complaining about it now. There's no "later" about it. I'm not interested in starting a grass-roots gaming movement, so I know my individual opinion does not matter to WotC, a view confirmed by the massive outpouring of approval they've received. I still have my preferences.
 

overgeeked

B/X Known World
Another bit that stuck out for me is talking about mandatory feats around the 28:46 mark.

In my experience players take a view of "either you're perfect or you suck." So his line about players feeling they must have a feat just to show up and do their job is basically an intrinsic part of a lot of players' mentality surrounding gaming. You see it in every discussion of optimization, builds, and power gaming. Either you're the best or you shouldn't bother.
 

Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
Heh heh... you seem to have a lot more faith in the writing ability of the people who filled out the surveys than I do, thinking they could mask their responses of actual play versus indignant initial impressions. :D
I went to American Public School.

I know that at least the majority of American play testers won't be able to disguise their writing enough to pretend that there's something they're not. .:ROFLMAO::D:confused:...:(
 



Sacrosanct

Legend
In the video Jeremy Crawford was like “we can tell from the written responses which are based on initial impressions and which are from actual playtest experience.” I’m just like… sure you can, buddy… 🤣
When 5e was still pretty new, a LOT of people were doing white room analysis of the various classes, abilities, spells, etc. And what we found was that 5e, more than any other edition, did not play out in real actual play games like the white room analysis predicted.

So yeah, I can totally see why he said that, and agree.
 

OB1

Jedi Master
I got bad news for ya.

Skills will likely be a little bit more codified.

Especially for things that come up often.

That's why Use a Object might be changed or disappear. Because the power and utility of a class or race might be drastically changed depending on whether or not the DM is a veteran or a novice or very restrictive or very permissive.

But fret not it'll probably be in the dungeons Masters Guide and no one reads that thing. :LOL::ROFLMAO:
As long as they don't change the assumption that 'The DM narrates the results, asking for a check if there is uncertainty of the outcome', I'm okay with it. I just don't want the assumption to be that I can Influence a Red Dragon in it's lair to take a hike while I raid it's treasure hoard because I Nat 20'd an Influence (Persuasion) check :)
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Remove ads

Top