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]

Thwt would git the name of "Clex," and fit with "Versatile." Maybe allow for +2 AC if used double handed, or a damage die increase if used one handed: that way the Weapon Master could have their cake and eat it too either way, and Quarterstaff would be a very desirable choice for a Monk, which would also fit the fiction.

And then it would actually be both +1 damage and +2AC instead of just one or the other, which in my opinion would be enough of a boost to keep up with the other masteries. It would make two-handing or one-handing-with-shield into a purely cosmetic choice for flex weapon masters, but I guess that’s fine. And it would preserve flex’s niche as the “simple mastery.” Seems like a solid solution.

 

[Mistwell]

No look at the tweet I linked earlier. It's deliberate that a player can simply take one hand off and simply "hold" a 2h weapon with no action economy hit when casting a spell. The rules are useless words there and make Chaucer look positively concise.

You mean the non-sage-advice Mearls tweet, which isn't anything anymore? Mearls was from the era of "this is how I do it in my game" and his rulings have not been part of sage advice for a long time now.

 

[mellored]

I really liked a mastery that made flex having two different properties. One for one handed use (maybe free grab) or two handed use. (maybe increased AC).

Both would be great options for a monk using a staff.

Well monks can't grab very well, as it is a Str based.

But I do like the idea of versatile weapons getting 2 different effects.

 

[Charlaquin]

I don't think it was. Truly, I believe it was put out there with the mechanic there to get feedback on what to do about it. But we shall see.

Ok. Fair warning, I’m going to bring this up again when packet 7 comes out and we see the next draft of the warlock. And probably again when we see the next draft of the monk (presumably packet 8).

 

[Mistwell]

Ok. Fair warning, I’m going to bring this up again when packet 7 comes out and we see the next draft of the warlock. And probably again when we see the next draft of the monk (presumably packet 8).

That's fine. Like I said I am happy to apologize if that's what happens. I am betting against it.

 

[Charlaquin]

You mean the non-sage-advice Mearls tweet, which isn't anything anymore? Mearls was from the era of "this is how I do it in my game" and his rulings have not been part of sage advice for a long time now.

The tweet definitely isn’t meaningful, but the errata that changed the wording of two handed weapons to say “This weapon requires two hands when you attack with it” definitely makes it clear that you can hold a two-handed weapon in one hand and use the other hand to do other things, just as long as you aren’t attacking with the weapon at the time.

 

[Mistwell]

The tweet definitely isn’t meaningful, but the errata that changed the wording of two handed weapons to say “This weapon requires two hands when you attack with it” definitely makes it clear that you can hold a two-handed weapon in one hand and use the other hand to do other things, just as long as you aren’t attacking with the weapon at the time.

Yes, and then what? You cast a spell, so you're not holding the weapon in two hands. It's now no longer your turn and an opportunity attack is triggered. What rule says you can attack with the weapon that was definitely not being held in two hands on your turn? Is it object interaction, and if so how did you draw your focus/material components after letting go of your weapon you were wielding two handed? For that matter, how did you grab your weapon to be two handed again that round to begin with if you cast a spell the round prior to that?

War Caster does something. "You can perform the somatic components of spells even when you have weapons or a shield in one or both hands." It's part of the point of the feat.

 

[Charlaquin]

Yes, and then what? You cast a spell, so you're not holding the weapon in two hands. It's now no longer your turn and an opportunity attack is triggered. What rule says you can attack with the weapon that was definitely not being held in two hands on your turn? Is it object interaction, and if so how did you draw your focus/material components after letting go of your weapon you were wielding two handed? For that matter, how did you grab your weapon to be two handed again that round to begin with if you cast a spell the round prior to that?

Why would you need an object interaction to place your free hand on the pommel of your weapon? If you’re not actively using the hand for anything, it’s a free hand, and you should be able to hold your weapon with it.

War Caster does something.

Yes, it allows you to perform somatic and material components while wielding two weapons or a weapon and a shield.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Well monks can't grab very well, as it is a Str based.

But I do like the idea of versatile weapons getting 2 different effects.

They can grab very well, as they are getting an ability to use dex or wis as grab stat. Fingers crossed.

I always forget that they reverted the just unarmed attack to get into the grapple.

 

[Mistwell]

Why would you need an object interaction to place your free hand on the pommel of your weapon?

Because you're readying your weapon to attack. I don't know of anything calling that out as a free action, do you?

If you’re not actively using the hand for anything,

You did. You actively used it to cast a spell.

it’s a free hand, and you should be able to hold your weapon with it.

Sure, you can hold a weapon with it - which will take some kind of interaction to ready a weapon with it. You can do this for free one time during your move or action...but this is not your move, nor is it your action. You cannot grab your weapon and make a reaction attack when it's not your turn.

Yes, it allows you to perform somatic and material components while wielding two weapons or a weapon and a shield.

Or a weapon in two hands.