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.

 

[tetrasodium]

I think people are missing something on the use of versatile. I thought a lot of melee-types who had access to some spells were the ones using it a lot. You needed a hand free to cast a spell, but for those rounds you were not casting a spell or casting a spell which didn't require a hand, then you used two hands.

No you do not need such a thing. It's bneeded only under the most tortured reading of the rules. In 2e & 3.x it might have even been a bit of an extreme case of rules lawyering to claim that. Here are the relevant rules. It starts out with some talk about action costs & similar but nothing relevant to focus items so I'll skip ahead to where it begins to near focus items.

Spoiler: Components

A spell's components are the physical requirements you must meet in order to cast it. Each spell's description indicates whether it requires verbal (V), somatic (S), or material (M) components. If you can't provide one or more of a spell's components, you are unable to cast the spell.

Thank you Mario but the princess is in another castle! This says almost nothing mechanically so far.

Spoiler: Verbal

Most spells require the chanting of mystic words. The words themselves aren't the source of the spell's power; rather, the particular combination of sounds, with specific pitch and resonance, sets the threads of magic in motion. Thus, a character who is gagged or in an area of silence, such as one created by the silence spell, can't cast a spell with a verbal component.

You can't be silenced or gagged if the spell has a verbal component. This leaves out the important bit that past editions made sure to be clear on though & says nothing about loudly strong voice or so on & as a result practically begs for a battle between player & GM if the player really really wants free silent spell by simply declaring they want to whisper the verbal component if the GM disagrees. Still nothing about focus items or free hands.

Spoiler: Somatic

Spellcasting gestures might include a forceful gesticulation or an intricate set of gestures. If a spell requires a somatic component, the caster must have free use of at least one hand to perform these gestures.

Again nothing about focus items. You are left a free hand while wielding the vast majority of weapons, so far almost the entire "casting a spell" section has been useless words for the sake of words & even the sections covered tend to create as many problems as they solve. Worse is that you can even wield a 2h weapon & then take one hand off it next round as part of your free object interaction in order to cast a spell instead of attack

Spoiler: I *wish* I were making that up

Spoiler: Material

Casting some spells requires particular objects, specified in parentheses in the component entry. A character can use a component pouch or a spellcasting focus (found in “Equipment”) in place of the components specified for a spell. But if a cost is indicated for a component, a character must have that specific component before he or she can cast the spell.

If a spell states that a material component is consumed by the spell, the caster must provide this component for each casting of the spell. A spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components -- or to hold a spellcasting focus -- but it can be the same hand that he or she uses to perform somatic components.

Player:"well I have a component pouch on my belt & my rapier/longsword/held greatsword leaves me with a free hand so I'm good right?" -> facepalming GM:..

Spoiler: well no.. but..

Component Pouch. A component pouch is a small, watertight leather belt pouch that has compartments to hold all the material components and other special items you need to cast your spells, except for those components that have a specific cost (as indicated in a spell's description).

Equipment

D&D Beyond - Dungeons & Dragons Fifth Edition Tools, Rules, Races, Classes, Items, Spells, Monsters, and More

www.dndbeyond.com

GM: Holy mother of god... why are there so many useless words

No. You do not need a focus or versatile weapon to cast spells & even spells with a somatic or a material component you only need to have SAY you have a free hand & a component pouch in your pack/belt. Without once present elements like ASF & ACP that connected to some of those three VSM components it's almost guaranteed that nobody is tracking what gish friendly spells use what parts of VSM & nongish builds aren't considering how they would be impacted to not just equip their PC under the time saving assumption that all spells use all parts of VSM so it probably doesn't even matter what a spell uses as long as the caster is proficient with their armor choice.

The one exception* is sword & board because the sword is in one hand & board (shield) the other keeping both occupied unless you drop one as part of casting the spell and I kid you not pick it back up as part of your attack next time you have an action

* I think but would not be at all skeptical if told I had a critical rule very wrong on S&B

 

[Mistwell]

I mean. The monk is right there in packet 6, recovering its Ki on a short rest. It’s still possible that won’t be how pact magic works in packet 7 (though I doubt that will be the case), but either way I think it’s plain to see that recovery of primary resources on a short rest is 100% on the table still.

Betting Monk short rest mechanic is changing as well.

 

[Parmandur]

Looks at the present thread. Raises eyebrow.

How could you say that?!?!?!?!?!?

 

[Mistwell]

No you do not need such a thing.

Disagree

It's bneeded only under the most tortured reading of the rules.

So you disagree as well. You put an unjustified adjective on it, but you agree some people read it that way too. "A spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components -- or to hold a spellcasting focus -- but it can be the same hand that he or she uses to perform somatic components." I think a lot of people read that rule and conclude they need a hand free because it uses the phrase "hand free."

War Caster then says, "You can perform the somatic components of spells even when you have weapons or a shield in one or both hands." Obviously it's doing something, right?

I don't think there is anything tortured about it.

 

[tetrasodium]

Disagree

So you disagree as well. You put an unjustified adjective on it, but you agree some people read it that way too. "A spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components -- or to hold a spellcasting focus -- but it can be the same hand that he or she uses to perform somatic components." I think a lot of people read that rule and conclude they need a hand free because it uses the phrase "hand free."

War Caster then says, "You can perform the somatic components of spells even when you have weapons or a shield in one or both hands." Obviously it's doing something, right?

I don't think there is anything tortured about it.

Oh I completely agree that it's ludicrously hostile to any gm that dates say "uh no wtf man,, at least try pretending to follow the rules" but we are talking about a system that bends over backwards to ensure that any gm saying such a thing and following along runs hard isn't a brick wall of "yea man he's right we are playing 5e not whatever you are thinking of"


too much of 5e is deliberately structured to slap the GM if they dare protest any excess and it's implausible that it's not intentional.

/AskMeHowIKnow... It's not without reason that 5e is known for abusing GM's.

 

[Mistwell]

Oh I completely agree that it's ludicrously hostile to any gm that dates say "uh no wtf man,, at least try pretending to follow the rules" but we are talking about a system that bends over backwards to ensure that any gm saying such a thing and following along runs hard isn't a brick wall of "yea man he's right we are playing 5e not whatever you are thinking of"


too much of 5e is deliberately structured to slap the GM if they dare protest any excess and it's implausible that it's not intentional.

/AskMeHowIKnow... It's not without reason that 5e is known for abusing GM's.

I don't think anything you just said is a response to what you claimed to be responding to?

 

[Charlaquin]

Betting Monk short rest mechanic is changing as well.

Well the monk wasn’t out for playtesting yet at the time that we had that conversation, and it is out now, and it does recover its primary resource on a short rest. Obviously that could change between now and release, if the packet 6 survey results indicate that’s what people demand. But the point is, short rest recovery of primary resources was and is on the table.

 

[DevL]

I think people are missing something on the use of versatile. I thought a lot of melee-types who had access to some spells were the ones using it a lot. You needed a hand free to cast a spell, but for those rounds you were not casting a spell or casting a spell which didn't require a hand, then you used two hands.

Except the errata for two-handed weapons state the following.

Two-Handed (p. 147). This sentence has been changed to “This weapon requires two hands when you attack with it.”

Thus wielding a two-handed weapon doesn’t stop you from casting spells with somatic components as it’s assumed that you let go of the hilt or haft with one hand.

 

[DevL]

If the uselessness of the two-handedness of versatile weapon when applying flex is a concern, a simple step in the right direction would be to let flex increase the damage dice one step.

Versatile D6/D8 becomes D8/D10 with flex and versatile D8/D10 becomes D10/D12.

 

[Clint_L]

You get to have your cake and eat it, too. And frankly, it is doesn't seem any better or worse than the other weapon Mastery abilities, which can be situational. Theyball seems to be worth about....+1 damage on every hit. On balance.

Well...if your cake is about .7 DPA, and if you're not a monk - shouldn't monks get to have their cake and eat it too?

Like, I want just one person who is defending flex to explain why it shouldn't benefit the one class that almost universally uses versatile weapons. I mean, I know why you're not - you can't defend it and just don't want to admit that you are wrong about flex. Flex basically makes versatile weapons no longer versatile. It actually nerfs monks in comparison to other classes (i.e. if a fighter was using a spear with a shield, and a monk was using a spear with two hands, at least the monk got to do a bit more damage. Not anymore).

As for the other masteries being worth about 1 DPA, that's not close to being true.

Topple is worth much more than 1 DPA - giving your entire party advantage against a foe is extremely valuable, potentially increasing everyone's DPA. Not to mention the tactical advantages offered by your opponent being prone.

Graze is worth about +2-3 extra DPA once you reach +5 strength, and bypasses defences completely - it actually becomes more valuable the higher your opponent's AC.

Vex's advantage on every attack following a hit is going to be worth significantly more than 1DPA in almost any situation. Much more.

Cleave is on average probably worth more than flex, and certainly far, far stronger when fighting multiple foes (though I think cleave is too situational and should also be improved).

Nick is a better DPA increase and frees up your bonus action, and which class is going to be taking nick? Rogues. Which class always has something they can do with their bonus action? Rogues.

Push is hard to convert straight into DPA, but I think most players will happily trade 1 DPA for the kind of battlefield control that push opens up.

Sap will very likely reduce your opponent's damage by much more than 1DPA, though it gets watered down the more attacks your opponent has. Very strong at low levels - consider against a monster like an ogre.

Slow is similar to push - again, I think most players would gladly trade a tiny DPA increase for this much control.

I think it is very, very hard to make a case that flex is anything but the worst mastery - and again, totally unusable by the class that most needs something from versatile weapons.