D&D (2024) New Survey Results | Druid & Paladin | Unearthed Arcana | D&D

WotC has shared a new video going over the survey results following the drud and paladin playtests for One D&D.

​

For those who don't have time to watch the video, here are some general notes.

Paladin

• Did extremely well in terms of satisfaction
• All class and subclass features scored 70% or higher - lowest was Divine Smite at 72%
• Got some pushback in written feedback on being able to smite on ranged attacks - class identity concerns, Paladin viewed as melee-centric class, ranged smites might eat into Cleric/Ranger identity too much
• Positive feedback on redesigned smite spells - may become paladin exclusive spells down the road

Druid

• Wild Shape feedback seems to be split - slight majority saying "never want this Wild Shape in print", slight minority saying "this is their favorite version of Wild Shape they've ever seen"
• People love the texture and differences in beast options in '14 Wild Shape, but are open to feature being easier to use (i.e. don't want players to have to weigh the merits of 100+ stat blocks every time they want to use Wild Shape)
• Will have another take on Wild Shape next time Druid appears in Playtest UA
• General concept of Channel Nature seems to have gone over well, but want to see more done with it
• Expected feedback for restoring elemental forms for Moon Druids, but instead found people wanted to lean more into Lunar themes
• Want Moon Druid forms to be more resilient, but still want to reign in power at high levels (frequent/unlimited uses of Wild Shape constantly refreshing HP total)

 

[Mistwell]

I wonder if they COULD give what the differing groups want at the same time.

Couldn't they just make the initial wildshape power have an option you must choose? Something like:

"You must choose one of the following two wildshape paths:

1) Path of the spiritual beast: choose your wildshape form from the list of templates appropriate to your level;
2) Path of the summoned beast: choose your wildshape form from the list of beasts appropriate to your level."

That would allow those who want to keep it simple to templates and those who want it more complex to choose a specific beast. As long as each option is roughly balanced, it shouldn't make a big deal in power levels.

Then allow someone to switch their choice at certain levels.

 

[Mistwell]

Apparently some people think the Monster Manual stat block should be a sacrosanct representation of that monster/animal in the world, therefore only that stat block should be used to represent that creature, even as part of PC abilities. But stat blocks are blocks of mechanics, name notwithstanding. Monster Manual stat blocks are designed and balanced as Monster threats, not PC options.

Some people get really married to mechanics. I never understood that. It should be what your PC can do in the game, not the mechanics behind the scenes, which is the focus. This is the same debate with the Warlock and the mechanics of spell recovery rather than the reality of how often they cast spells. I suspect the people who are married to be mechanics tend to be the people who engage with the rules outside of playing time the most, like a secondary hobby.

The stat blocks shouldn't need to match what's in the MM. You're not even supposed to know the stat blocks in the MM because your character doesn't know them. MM stat blocks are what's behind the Wizard of Oz's curtain. Focus on your PC, and not what's in the DMs material. What's in your PC should be in the PHB or on your character sheet.

 

[mellored]

I wonder if they COULD give what the differing groups want at the same time.

Problem is, we kind of don't know how big each group is.

How many people just didn't like this template, and assumed all templates where going to be equal bad.

We are going to need another pass with a good template to actually see what the results are.

 

[Mistwell]

Problem is, we kind of don't know how big each group is.

How many people just didn't like this template, and assumed all templates where going to be equal bad.

We are going to need another pass with a good template to actually see what the results are.

I suspect they have data on people saying that in their comment?

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

There's still time to iterate on the druid. Worst case scenario, they can just republish the 2014 druid instead.

 

[mellored]

I suspect they have data on people saying that in their comment?

Sure, but that data is going to be heavily skewed. (I am a data analyst).

If you want to turn into a giant frog and swallow people, this template doesn't even come close to allowing that. So many will reject templates as a whole.

Framing the question can get you very different answers. Asking why they like something is different than asking why they dislike something.

Or if you hear a new story about someone from country X committing murder, people will then be more against everyone else from country X.

How big of an issue this is I can't say. But that's why you need to take multiple measurements from different angles.

 

[mamba]

I wonder if they COULD give what the differing groups want at the same time.

they can, scaling stats in 1DD, regular statblocks from the 5e classes, which remain compatible

Or more seriously, scaling stats in 1DD and anyone who does not like that can houserule animals just like it was in 5e. Much easier to houserule that than coming up with scaling ones as a houserule.

 

[mamba]

There's still time to iterate on the druid. Worst case scenario, they can just republish the 2014 druid instead.

That is indeed a worst case.

 

[Incenjucar]

I wonder if they COULD give what the differing groups want at the same time.

Couldn't they just make the initial wildshape power have an option you must choose? Something like:

"You must choose one of the following two wildshape paths:

1) Path of the spiritual beast: choose your wildshape form from the list of templates appropriate to your level;
2) Path of the summoned beast: choose your wildshape form from the list of beasts appropriate to your level."

That would allow those who want to keep it simple to templates and those who want it more complex to choose a specific beast. As long as each option is roughly balanced, it shouldn't make a big deal in power levels.

Then allow someone to switch their choice at certain levels.

DM optional rule seems like a way to go.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

Maybe instead of "Hunter's Mark" for the Ranger, they should have "Nature's Smite" which would be a ranged version of Divine Smite with appropriate damage type for Rangers.

They should probably also port over Eldritch Smite as an invocation from Tasha's for the Warlock if they decide to keep them a half caster as well.

Foebane: add Xd6 damage of the same type as your weapon per spell slot spent, ignore resistance. Add 2d6 against your Favored Enemies.