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

niklinna

satisfied?
The whole warlord shouting arms back on thing would make more sense if you could chop an arm off to begin with. Back when I played a warlord, I just treated it as yelling "Pull yourself together, man!" I actually yelled that, at the table. Back when we played at tables.

Anyhow! ObTopic, it's mildly interesting that so much scored so well. Lots of upcoming changes could be inferred from that. Either they've got the pulse of the fanbase, or only those who like the playtest are responding. Or I suppose they could be lying! Plus it's all 100% compatible, win-win all around.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
I would love the wizard to have more ivocative subclasses
I'm with you here. I was the subclasses to be big changes in how they are played. Bladesingers, Oracles, Learned Skill-Sages, Runemasters, what have you. Not just "what school of magic do you slightly favor"? Heck, if we want to keep school (as a sacred cow or through enjoyment), make it an additional pick much like warlocks get two choices.
 


Zaukrie

New Publisher
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.
I've played for forty plus years. Only one player has worried about perfection. I'm just not convinced it's true. Most players don't look at optimization stuff online.
 

Kurotowa

Legend
It could be solved with a little update on what HP is, really. I dont mind Warlord healing as Temp HP.
The tension between "HP are meat points that let you walk off direct hits" and "HP are luck points that act as plot armor" has been around longer than I've been playing. And I came in on the ground floor of AD&D 2e. I doubt any official pronouncement would do much to shift the lines at this point.
 


niklinna

satisfied?
The tension between "HP are meat points that let you walk off direct hits" and "HP are luck points that act as plot armor" has been around longer than I've been playing. And I came in on the ground floor of AD&D 2e. I doubt any official pronouncement would do much to shift the lines at this point.
Clearly they are both, and splitting them is impossible*. It's like the wave/particle duality. Maybe we can shoot PCs through a wall with two slots and see how it affects their hit points. (It could get messy.)

* 100% compatibility being A Goal, after all.
 

Oofta

Legend
The tension between "HP are meat points that let you walk off direct hits" and "HP are luck points that act as plot armor" has been around longer than I've been playing. And I came in on the ground floor of AD&D 2e. I doubt any official pronouncement would do much to shift the lines at this point.
The problem is that HP represent whatever you want. It's just a game mechanic to streamline something that is far too complex for an RPG.
 

I'm with you here. I was the subclasses to be big changes in how they are played. Bladesingers, Oracles, Learned Skill-Sages, Runemasters, what have you. Not just "what school of magic do you slightly favor"? Heck, if we want to keep school (as a sacred cow or through enjoyment), make it an additional pick much like warlocks get two choices.
every class getting the 2 subclass thing of the warlock is like a dream to me...

imagine a warmage that can be an enchanter, or evocor, or necromancer...
 

Scribe

Legend
The tension between "HP are meat points that let you walk off direct hits" and "HP are luck points that act as plot armor" has been around longer than I've been playing. And I came in on the ground floor of AD&D 2e. I doubt any official pronouncement would do much to shift the lines at this point.

I just go with "It is an abstraction of your physical and mental health, as well as your willingness to continue to fight" essentially. In that way a shout of encouragement could be temp HP as 'motivation'. :)
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Remove ads

Top