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.

 

[Remathilis]

There's nothing about adding in options that suddenly makes the new Warlock lose backwards compatibility. Its not like the concept of their spell DCs changed where a book referencing a warlock casting would suddenly not work.

If martial types can get an entire new weapons subsystem added and its considered "backwards compatible", you can't argue that a warlock casting spells with int breaks compatibility.

There were a lot of ideas they tossed out that got reverted back to 2014 for no other reason I guess than if it wasn't broke, don't fix it.

I liked the change too, but I'm pretty sure unless it was overwhelming enthusiastic approval, WotC would play it safe and stick with the older version.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Probably the head scratcher for me is that they are giving up on int or wisdom based warlocks.

I can respect the change back on spellcasting, but who voted against giving warlocks more options in the survey? did people actually note a dissatisfaction with more options?

Maybe, maybe not. But that just means people who liked the idea of Warlocks using any of the three ability scores should be sure to comment on that again in the next Warlock playtest. Tell them that you liked the option. If enough people tell them that, then perhaps they will reconsider bringing the option back.

But the last thing people should do is see something get rolled back and just whimper and throw up their hands, never speaking of the thing they lost again (other than complaining about it over here). That's not going to show WotC anything. Sure... at the end of the day it might not garner you the result you want after all... but at least you can feel as though you tried. How many people used this past survey to write in and say they still wanted Wildshape templates? If someone didn't because they though it wouldn't do any good... well they sure guaranteed that to now be true by not saying anything.

If some of these changes really matter to people... no one should let them go down without a fight.

 

[mamba]

This puzzled me too -- it was a smart and clever development on the existing class that improved the range of builds possible.

that sounds like your answer right there…

 

[OB1]

I think it's notable that BG3 uses a 15 minute short rest and limits them to twice per long rest (unless you have a bard in the party, which gives you a 3rd). For those that have played BG3, how does that mechanic feel in play? I'm wondering if we might see that become the new 5.24 standard.

 

[Charlaquin]

Probably the head scratcher for me is that they are giving up on int or wisdom based warlocks.

I can respect the change back on spellcasting, but who voted against giving warlocks more options in the survey? did people actually note a dissatisfaction with more options?

Yeah, that surprised me too. My guess would be that people thought it was confusing? Or maybe overpowered. I do recall variable attack stats being a feature of 4e that was very unpopular with some folks, so maybe there’s a large contingent of players out there who feel very strongly about all ability scores needing to have strictly defined, unchangeable effects, and to those people letting warlock choose their spellcasting stat introduces too much malleability into those stats.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

The Warlock is saved! Praise Asmodeus, Baba Yaga and Great Cthulhu!

 

[Clint_L]

Then why change it at all?
If they publish PHB that is 95% same as 2014, who will buy it?

Anyone who needs a PHB. They’re not trying to juice sales like with the old editions. They’re trying to maintain their momentum while allowing the game to slowly evolve. They said this explicitly at the launch of OneD&D and have repeated it ad nauseum since.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Yeah, that surprised me too. My guess would be that people thought it was confusing? Or maybe overpowered. I do recall variable attack stats being a feature of 4e that was very unpopular with some folks, so maybe there’s a large contingent of players out there who feel very strongly about all ability scores needing to have strictly defined, unchangeable effects, and to those people letting warlock choose their spellcasting stat introduces too much malleability into those stats.

I mean, the one greatest advantage of letting Warlocks use INT, WIS or CHA is that maybe we'd finally stop seeing nothing but Sorlocks, Bardlocks, and Pallocks... we'd also vary things up and see Clerlocks, Drulocks, Ranglocks and Wizlocks.

Just for originality sake it would be a godsend.

 

[Charlaquin]

I mean, the one greatest advantage of letting Warlocks use INT, WIS or CHA is that maybe we'd finally stop seeing nothing but Sorlocks, Bardlocks, and Pallocks... we'd also vary things up and see Clerlocks, Drulocks, Ranglocks and Wizlocks.

Just for originality sake it would be a godsend.

I agree, I thought it was a great change. Just trying to understand why it might have been unpopular with enough folks to miss the 60% mark.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Some people think MAD is an active balancing factor rather than an accident of the collision of the 6 abilities and class-based design, so anything that reduces it is viewed as broken rather than the bandaid it actually is.