D&D (2024) One D&D Survey Feedback: Weapon Mastery Spectacular; Warlock and Wizard Mixed Reactions

Jeremy Crawford discusses the results of the Packet 5 Survey:

• Weapon Mastery at 80% approval, and all options except for Flex scored similarly. Crawford says that Flex is mathematically one of the most powerful properties, but will need some attention because people didn't feel like it was. This feature is in the 2024 PHB for 6 Classes, guaranteed at this point.
• Barbarian scored well, particularly the individual features, average satisfaction of 80% for each feature. Beserker got 84% satisfaction, while the 2014 Beserker in the 2020 Big Class Survey got 29% satisfaction.
• Fighter received well, overall 75% satisfaction. Champion scored 54% in the Big Class Survey, but this new one got 74%.
• Sorcerer in the Big Class Survey got 60%, this UA Sorcerer got 72%. Lots of enthusiasm for the Metamagic revisions. Careful Spell got 92% satisfaction. Twin Spell was the exception, at 60%. Draconic Sorcerer got 73%, new Dragon Wings feature was not well received but will be fixed back to being on all the time by the return to 2014 Aubclass progression.
• Class specific Spell lists are back in UA 7 coming soon, the unified Spell lists are out.
• Warlock feedback reflected mixed feelings in the player base. Pact magic is coming back in next iteration. Next Warlock will be more like 2014, Mystic Arcanum will be a core feature, but will still see some adjustments based on feedback to allow for more frequent use of Spells. Eldritch Invocations were well received. Crawford felt it was a good test, because they learned what players felt. They found the idiosyncracy of the Warlock is exactly what people like about it, so theybare keeping it distinct. Next version will get even more Eldritch Invocation options.
• Wizard got a mixed reception. Biggest problem people had was wanting a Wizard specific Spell list, not a shared Arcane list that made the Wizard less distinct. Evoker well received.

 

[Charlaquin]

At some point the "Anti-Wizard" crowd is going to just have to accept the fact they are a minority. Most people just don't have the hard-on for wizard-hate (or the hard-on for Drizzt-hate) that a select group of other players always seem to have.

It’s called a hate-on

 

[Scribe]

I'm continually surprised that they haven't added a "Power Strike" option where you can straight up add 1d8 to your damage one or more times per encounter to the fighter; it was a late 4e thing that was pretty cool. You could have it recharge when you roll for initiative, and then it would be always available in every encounter.

I mean it goes back further. 5e stripped out too much, not from 4e, but from 3e, 2e.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Picture this: Individual spell lists: Bard can pick from any of them plus 'class' cantrips like owning a book.

 

[DEFCON 1]

This is one of the problems with the wizard. At least the sorcerer/warlock/ranger/paladin/cleric have a different spell set for each subclass.

No, it's the problem of the player. The player is choosing to prioritize overpowering game mechanics to try and dominate the game, rather than creating an interesting character to play.

Needing the game to wall off all kinds of abilities into discreet little buckets in order to FORCE players to play for theme rather than just to be OP is pointless. The player either wants to play to theme or doesn't. And if (general) you are playing with players who play to OP and you're sick of it... then (general) you should find new players, not expect WotC to change up the rules so that those players can't play their way anymore. It's not WotC's job to solve (general) your boredom issues for you.

 

[DEFCON 1]

It’s called a hate-on

I stand corrected.

 

[Shardstone]

I might agree with you if it wasn't for the fact that despite the extensive spell list... it seems like everyone and their mother keeps saying the Wizard has only like 3 good spells at each level and which get taken time and time and time again such that everyone keeps complaining about them.

As soon as I see 25 different load-outs of Wizards getting talked about rather than the same Fire Bolt/Shield/Tiny Hut/Fireball/Polymorph/Simulacrum Wizard all the time (because that's the overpowered spell list that all these players can't help but glom onto because game mechanics trump personality or originality for most players)... maybe I'll feel differently.

I don't think we should use forum optimizing speak for that. I've seen and played many wizards with crazy loadouts.

 

[Gradine]

Do the designers just not know how math works? I don’t understand how they could possibly think +1 damage is “mathematically one of the most powerful (weapon mastery) abilities.”

He might also be adding the +2 AC from being able to use a shield, without realizing that we holding a shield already.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

There was also a reason people liked it that way. I’m glad they’re keeping the class intact for the people who like it, instead of changing it to appease people who don’t.

That’d be acceptable to me.

Regarding your first point, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think 1-hour "short rests" was the reason why people liked it. It wasn't about the rest, so much as having higher level spell slots that recharged more than once in the day (something the last playtest version removed). And it was the 1-hour limitation, specifically, that frustrated people like me. But I do like 1-hour short rests for many other less important abilities. Therefore it sounds reasonable that a potential solution is to somehow have that recharge of higher level spell slots, but not tie it to short rests, specifically. But if you and I can agree on a limited ritual, that sounds promising. We'll see what they come up with in a couple weeks!

 

[Vael]

Well, this is vaguely disappointing. Unified spell lists had issues, but I still thought that it was better for the future of DnD to push through with it. Same for the Warlock ... Half-caster wasn't the solution, but I am not a fan of Pact Magic and what how it plays (though BG3 actually made it work, lol), so this feels like a retreat and loss of innovation.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I don't think we should use forum optimizing speak for that. I've seen and played many wizards with crazy loadouts.

Well, if you have been lucky enough to see that, then I don't see why condensing the Wizard spell list down to 2/3rds would then make their issue better? Unless you are saying you think Wizard characters are too diverse and instead need to look more similar? If that's your claim, then I only wish I had your problem!