D&D (2024) Developer Video on Druid/Paladin/Expert Feedback

​

WotC has posted a video discussing initial feedback on the One D&D Druid/Paladin playtest, along with survey results from the Expert playtest. Some highlights for discussion:

Druid: The developers recognize that the template version of wild shape is contentious. If they retain this approach, they would plan to add flexibility to those templates. If they revert to monster stat blocks, they might allow Druids to choose a limited number of options, with a default selection provided.

Paladin: The new version of smite is still intended to work with critical hits. If ranged smite persists, its damage may be adjusted through the internal balance/playtesting process.

Ranger: The updated Ranger scored very well in the playtest. Some players did miss the choice of options in the Hunter subclass.

Bard: All of the Lore Bard's features scored welll, but the overall subclass rating was mediocre. They attribute this to the loss of Additional Magical Secrets, which many saw as the key attraction of this subclass.

Rogue: The change to limit sneak attack to the Rogue's own turn scored poorly. The developers generally like moving actions to a player's own turn to keep the game moving quickly, but in this case, the change doesn't seem to be worth the loss of tactical flexibility.

Feats: With the exception of epic boons, all the feats in the Expert packet scored well. The developers are still loking at written feedback for fine tuning.

Conspicuously not mentioned were the Arcane/Divine/Primal spell lists, which were the focus of a lot of discussion during the Bard playtest.

 

[Ashrym]

When D&D Beyond displayed the class and subclass percentages back in 2017, druid was last.

Here's updated info from 2020.

DnD Beyond 2020​	​	​	​	​	​
Class​	Percentage​	First​	Second​	Third​	2017​
Fighter​	13%​	Champion​	Battle Master​	Eldritch Knight​	14%​
Rogue​	11%​	Thief​	Assassin​	Arcane Trickster​	11%​
Warlock​	9%​	Fiend​	Hexblade​	Great Old One​	9%​
Barbarian​	8%​	Berzerker​	Totem​	Zealot​	9%​
Cleric​	8%​	Life​	Tempest​	War​	9%​
Wizard​	8%​	Evocation​	Necromancy​	Divination​	10%​
Bard​	7%​	Lore​	Glamour​	Whispers​	8%​
Monk​	7%​	Open Hand​	Shadow​	Drunken Master​	8%​
Paladin​	7%​	Devotion​	Vengeance​	Ancients​	9%​
Ranger​	7%​	Hunter​	Beast Master​	Gloom Stalker​	9%​
Sorcerer​	7%​	Draconic​	Wild Mage​	Divine Soul​	8%​
Druid​	6%​	Moon​	Land (forest)​	Shepherd​	6%​
Artificer​	1%​	Artillerist​	Alchemist​	Battle Smith​	n/a​

Fighter and rogue continued to be the most popular classes significantly and the druid became closer to the pack but still last place. Warlocks pulled ahead of wizards. Artificers are in last place now but largely as a supplemental class instead of a PHB class.

Paladin and Bards are generally considered the most powerful classes in the game.

Fighter is probably third, though champion is generally weaker.
Warlock is above average.
And rogue is probably about average.

According to whom? We should know better than making an appeal to the masses by now. ;-)

Bards continue to be the bottom of the full spellcasters because of a lack of abilities to further empower those spells. Paladins are good for bursts of damage but that only goes so far.

 

[mamba]

I think its an equally strange take for WotC and it's current supporters to claim that the most important part of game design for the last few years and moving forward is how many "yes" votes any given widget gets on their over-long questionnaires only a small portion of the gaming public (and certainly not the part they want that isn't even playing yet) will ever complete.

If you have a better idea of how to measure whether something is popular, let me know.

If you have a better idea of how to measure whether some changed design is a success, let me know.

 

[Justice and Rule]

This is the second half of what I'm saying.

Flavorwise, the Druid is kida niche because Wildshape sucks up some much of its imagery. The D&D movie trailers push the druid as a shapeshifter and barely as a caster if a all. So in theory you are supposed to be able to run a Shaman, Fey-Priest, Tribal Healer, or Witch Doctor with the Druid... if your PC isn't built around Wildshape you are better off with a cleric, warlock, wizard, or something.

Especially if Wildshape is to much for you.

Definitely not wrong. Combined with the overall power of the Circle of the Moon, wildshape is just hard to get away from when it comes to the druid. It's not that surprising.

The Fighter and Rogue combined represent most nonmagical character concepts in fantasy and mythological fiction.

It's opposite ends of the spectrum.
The Fighter and Rogue were designed to cover a couple dozen of PC concepts and is mechanically sparse to not unwanted mechanics that would not match any concept .

The 5e Druid was designed to fill 3-6 concepts and has the mechanics and features of all 3-6 as core.

I think, given the popular subclasses, it's also likely that fighters and rogues are the easiest characters to build in a pinch... like, for example, if you just had a character die, it's really easy to quickly build a Champion fighter compared to a spellcaster, especially when it comes to mid-to-higher levels.

 

[Clint_L]

Wildshape is the defining trait of the D&D druid. Wherever the class goes (and it's not a new edition, so it's not going to go far, really), wildshape will continue to be its defining trait. I don't that is up for debate. What is being debated is how to best implement wildshape because it does raise balance and complexity issues.

And if you think it's the defining trait now, wait until the movie comes out next week. Apparently it triples down on wildshape. Also, we should discuss how owlbear form will be implemented, because it is 100% going to happen.

 

[Emberashh]

If you have a better idea of how to measure whether something is popular, let me know.

I think the idea itself is faulty. Popularity shouldn't matter at all.

What should matter is if the class actually works well for the people playing it, and an arbitrary popularity contest doesn't deliver you that information.

 

[Micah Sweet]

If you have a better idea of how to measure whether something is popular, let me know.

If you have a better idea of how to measure whether some changed design is a success, let me know.

Use your own judgement as a group of creatives with a lot of RPG experience, make your own design decisions listening to but unfettered by the kangaroo court of social media, and then publish.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I think its an equally strange take for WotC and it's current supporters to claim that the most important part of game design for the last few years and moving forward is how many "yes" votes any given widget gets on their over-long questionnaires only a small portion of the gaming public (and certainly not the part they want that isn't even playing yet) will ever complete.

Again, I get where you are coming from when it comes to statistics based on D&D Beyond play-numbers and results from online polls: They tell us very little about what people would actually enjoy best. For one, we can't rate an option we have never seen, can we? And most of the "most played" DDB statistics come down to "whatever is free".

Still, I think most of the people involved in this somewhat swirling discussion don't assume that the statistics should be followed without question. I know WotC doesn't think so, because they've essentially gone through their process at this point, which is to use the data as "something to think about" and not as "design by committee". You'll see people argue that they don't listen to the feedback at all. Here, you are kind of suggesting that they listen to it too much. It can't be both. (Though it CAN, I suppose be too much in some areas and not enough in others, which is probably true!)

Its more to do with the decided illogic of saying that something being the least played means theres a design flaw.

I'm not sure anyone is drawing a direct line there. I can see how it might look that way, but what's being said is more like: "Druids are the least played class. They also have a lot of the games fiddly subsystems that are hard to master as part of their design. We suspect there is a correlation."

Whether there IS a correlation or not would have to be tested, and the only way to test it is to create a druid that runs more smoothly. Now, that Druid could wind up popular (or not!) ANYWAY, based on the specifics of the design or the timing (IE not because it's simple, but because it's fun; because it's powerful; because Druids are made popular because of the movie; or some other unrelated reason) or it could wind up NOT popular for the same reasons (in reverse), but that's another story.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I think the idea itself is faulty. Popularity shouldn't matter at all.

What should matter is if the class actually works well for the people playing it, and an arbitrary popularity contest doesn't deliver you that information.

Your first sentence doesn't really work on its own. If it "works well for people playing it", it will wind up popular. I think I get your chicken-or-the-egg argument, but ultimately popularity does matter.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Use your own judgement as a group of creatives with a lot of RPG experience, make your own design decisions listening to but unfettered by the kangaroo court of social media, and then publish.

I'm pretty sure that they DO all of that. Successfully or not. The "listen to your audience" part is only a small part of the picture (which is why they get accused of not doing it at all).

 

[Emberashh]

Use your own judgement as a group of creatives with a lot of RPG experience, make your own design decisions listening to but unfettered by the kangaroo court of social media, and then publish.

This. Player input does matter and should be accounted for, but that has to be counterbalanced by the intentions of the designers.

I'm not sure anyone is drawing a direct line there.

Mini said it pretty explicitly.

"Druids are the least played class. They also have a lot of the games fiddly subsystems that are hard to master as part of their design. We suspect there is a correlation."

But again, this is starting off with the assumption that "least played" is a problem.

This is why I pointed out that all of these "problems" being asserted about Druid only came about in the last month. These problems didn't exist prior, and now that its been suggested people are going out of their way to confirm the bias.

None of that is to say that Druid was perfect and couldn't be improved, but this premise that its least played and it thus has a huge problem that indicates a dire detrimental flaw is just wack.

And even then. Even if we assume that "least played" is a problem to solve, the relative popularity of it next to the next most popular doesn't necessitate what was effectively a ground-up rewrite.

Like, its not a coincidence the UA changes were not recieved well and were tremendously controversial. Not only was their attempt bad, but its a severe overcorrection meant to address a problem thats entirely contrived.