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.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Magic items aren't balanced, really. The balance is thwt theybare pure bonus controlled by the DM.

No, I know that. I just mean simply that if +1 (or so) damage is considered powerful, then +7 (or so) damage should ought to be considered horribly broken (and not just a "nice perk"). It just seems to me that something in-between would work better than either of those extremes. (Obviously there's nothing really wrong with a Flame Tongue at higher levels, I'm not singling it out - just using it to illustrate a point).

I think Flex would work nicely as +2 to damage (allowing versatile weapons to still be versatile) but then it steps on the toes of the "Dueling" Fighting Style.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

Notice how 1d10 + 2 AC is either 1 damage die higher than 1d8 +2 AC, or 2 AC higher than 1d10 + 0 AC. It can’t be both at the same time.

Also, this speaks to one of the big problems with Flex as a mastery, is it makes versatile weapons less interesting, because there’s no longer multiple modes to choose from.

Multiple modes are an illusion. No one designs a character to use a longsword two-handed on purpose. It is an emergency tactic that never happens. Flex makes the benefit happen 100% of the time, which is great.

Without Flex, a Champion Fighter is dealing:
1d8+Str at level 1, up to 4d8+4xStr at L20.
With Action Surge, it is 2d8+2xStr at level 2, up to 8d8+8xStr at level 20

With Flex, a Champion Fighter is dealing:
1d10+Str at level 1, up to 4d10+4xStr at L20.
With Action Surge, it is 2d10+2xStr at level 2, up to 8d10+8xStr at level 20

With both, the Champion gets critical hits on a 18-20, doubling the dice. Doubling d10s are better than doubling d8s.

That is GREAT when all those attacks are used against a single enemy. Especially with there being so many ways to get advantage in the game.

This is fine compared to the Battle Axe's ability to Topple, which can knock them prone once. If that Champion Axe Fighter has Weapon Adept at level 13 (able to have 2 masteries at once for his battle axe), and Topple is useless for every successive attack because the enemy is already prone and they have advantage for the rest of those attacks, is a Battle Axe Champion going to choose Graze over Flex in this situation? I would choose Flex every time.

Flex is FINE.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I believe those are actually produced by Gale Force 9, not WotC, so I doubt this ever factored into their reasoning.

Yeah, I put "GF9" right there in my description - but there's no reason to believe that WotC could 1) Listen to feedback on what things might make licensees products better; and/or 2) Move the Spell Card product back in-house for 2024.

Besides, I wasn't really suggesting that they were making that change for that product, just that the change is good for that product.

 

[Shardstone]

I don't get the Wizard hate. I am starting to believe it is a holdover grudge from back in the day because they used to be broken. They aren't today. Not compared to the other full caster classes like the Sorcerer who not only get full spellcasting, but relevant class abilities that are impactful in combat.

The thing is that Wizards don't really get Class abilities. If they are boring it is because they really only get spells. Compared to a Sorcerer's Metamagic, what do they get? The Savant ability? There aren't enough spells in each school to matter, and some schools don't even exist at certain spell levels. Arcane Recovery? That compares to Font of Magic. Other than those, Wizard abilities are all delegated to the Subclass and so many of those Subclass abililites are little more than ribbons/flavor. The vast majority of level 2 Wizard subclass abilities are BORING. People choose Evocation and Divination because they actually have abilities that work decently in combat for levels 2 through 5. And the Sorcerer gets the Evocation school's primary ability as a metamagic option. Most other Wizard subclasses bring nothing to the table. Illusion, Transmutation, and Conjuration? Worthless in a fight. Abjuration, Enchantment, and Necromancy? Barely better. Compare any of those to the Sorcerer's Draconic Resilience? Not a contest.

Wizards' power is about their broad customizability with arcane magic. They are the only ones that really care about Spell Schools, and they need diverse options in those spell schools. Because that is almost ALL they have.

Wizards deserve to have the largest spell list because it is inherently necessary for their School focus to matter, and they get little else. They deserve to be the Arcane Toolbox class because they are the scientists and scholars of magic.

My man I started this conversation off a few posts back saying I'm a big wizard fan.

It's so difficult to discuss things online these days. It really feels like people just jump to assumptions about someone else's views and doesn't really take the time to understand what the other person is saying. It's always "hate" or "overreaction" or "vitriol" over the must mundane things. I'm just so, so, so tired.

Why can't I just want the wizard to take up less space so that other classes can shine without hating the wizard? Why can't I ever discuss D&D without people constantly saying that I have some emotional agenda I'm trying to get at?

Is there no way to discuss changes to a game these days in a semi-objective manner? Does it always have to come from an anecdotal and emotional place?

 

[Remathilis]

Multiple modes are an illusion. No one designs a character to use a longsword two-handed on purpose.

I agree with everything but this. Versatile is for small PCs to get two-hander options. It's for halfling fighters who can't use a greatsword to get a bit of a boost from using a longsword in both hands.

Other than that, you're spot on.

 

[Minigiant]

I don't get the Wizard hate. I am starting to believe it is a holdover grudge from back in the day because they used to be broken. They aren't today. Not compared to the other full caster classes like the Sorcerer who not only get full spellcasting, but relevant class abilities that are impactful in combat.

Then just make 4th list.

Wizardry
Contains all the formulaic scholarly magic.

Wizard could scribe any Arcane or Wizardy spell to their spell books.

No other classes gets access to Wizardry. Simple.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Flex is FINE.

It's "Fine" - it's just a little uninspiring. One of it's flaws is that it takes away while it gives - if you're using "Flex", there's no reason to ever drop your shield and 2-hand your versatile weapon. I doubt that that option is used very often, but it's part of the negativity toward Flex - it doesn't give you much and it takes away something (that's also not much). Which makes it just kinda meh. Again, this is more "feeling" than "fact", but that's what WotC's surveys are supposed to deal with, right?

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Why can't I just want the wizard to take up less space so that other classes can shine without hating the wizard?

For the record, I've played a wizard probably longer than 99% of the people on this forum and I think making them step on fewer toes is absolutely the right thing to do, from both a moral (be nice to your friends who play other classes) and a game design perspective.

Why can't I ever discuss D&D without people constantly saying that I have some emotional agenda I'm trying to get at?

Is there no way to discuss changes to a game these days in a semi-objective manner? Does it always have to come from an anecdotal and emotional place?

If you are continually butting heads with the same two or three people, I strongly recommend the ignore button. Being here is supposed to be a positive experience for everyone involved.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I don't get the Wizard hate.

It's because they're used as a cudgel to keep other classes from being better.

One can only hear 'but the wizard...' before something gets taken away from the sorcerer or the fighter or now the bard before you're tired of the wizard.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

My man I started this conversation off a few posts back saying I'm a big wizard fan.

It's so difficult to discuss things online these days. It really feels like people just jump to assumptions about someone else's views and doesn't really take the time to understand what the other person is saying. It's always "hate" or "overreaction" or "vitriol" over the must mundane things. I'm just so, so, so tired.

Why can't I just want the wizard to take up less space so that other classes can shine without hating the wizard? Why can't I ever discuss D&D without people constantly saying that I have some emotional agenda I'm trying to get at?

Is there no way to discuss changes to a game these days in a semi-objective manner? Does it always have to come from an anecdotal and emotional place?

Apologies. I was incorrect in my first statement which looked like I suggested you specifically hate wizards. I replied to you only because at the time you had the most recent post saying that wizards had too much. My reply was intended to be a general response for how other people are bagging on the wizard's identity, which to me, currently, is having the biggest arcane toolbox because they need it to represent their schools, and they don't have anything else.

I'm sorry for making it seem like I was accusing you of hating wizards.

I too love wizards as a concept, but I don't play my favorite Abjurer concept because the abilities are nigh worthless. A Diviner makes a better Abjurer, changing dice rolls to nerf enemy crits, which is way better than the Abjurer's ability.