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.

 

[DEFCON 1]

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.

My guess is that perhaps people think Warlocks themselves should not be that special.

Why don't Divine Soul Sorcerers use Wisdom? Why don't Enchanter Wizards use Charisma? Why aren't Moon Druids powered with their Constitution?

A case can be made that not a single spellcasting class should be beholden to a single ability score across the board. Every single one could be justified in having any one of 4 (perhaps even all 6) scores be the primary casting ability. So to single out the Warlock over every other class is giving them a bonus they just don't particularly deserve.

 

[teitan]

Now fix that “if you don’t want to take a fear take this feat” stupidity and make feats an optional rule again.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I know this thread has been going for a while, and I only wanted to put this in-

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 idiosyncrasy of the Warlock is exactly what people like about it, so they are keeping it distinct. Next version will get even more Eldritch Invocation options.

This is exactly how I feel. As I've mentioned before, two of my favorites classes in 5e are the Warlock and the Monk- not because they are overpowered, or too awesome, but because they feel and play so differently than all the other classes.

In a sea of sameness, they stand out. I'd like to keep it that way.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Never again the 'optional feats' times.

Remove the ASI feat.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Now fix that “if you don’t want to take a fear take this feat” stupidity and make feats an optional rule again.

There's literally no difference, so why does it matter?

(And I'd say this the same way to everyone who might've gotten upset if WotC were to go back and turn the ASI feat back into just an ASI. Neither direction matters.)

 

[Remathilis]

There's literally no difference, so why does it matter?

(And I'd say this the same way to everyone who might've gotten upset if WotC were to go back and turn the ASI feat back into just an ASI. Neither direction matters.)

This is the argument against divine smite as a spell. They want to avoid using the system (paladin spells or feats) not use the system in a way that looks like you aren't.

 

[Mistwell]

Wielding a weapon two handed is not a thing the 5e rules define. The two-handed weapon peppery only says you need two hands to attack with a weapon that has it. If you have two hands and neither of them are otherwise occupied at the time when you want to make the attack, then you meet all of the criteria the rules give for doing so.

I disagree. If you used your hand to cast a spell with a focus/material components, you cannot then return to wielding to weapon with both hands outside of your turn.

The rules don’t say that.

I don’t doubt that players in your games do so, given how you rule on two-handed weapons. But that ruling is not what the books actually say.

The book doesn't say what you claim it says either, which is why we need to use the rules it does have, which are one free interaction on your turn rules.

 

[Charlaquin]

My guess is that perhaps people think Warlocks themselves should not be that special.

Why don't Divine Soul Sorcerers use Wisdom? Why don't Enchanter Wizards use Charisma? Why aren't Moon Druids powered with their Constitution?

A case can be made that not a single spellcasting class should be beholden to a single ability score across the board. Every single one could be justified in having any one of 4 (perhaps even all 6) scores be the primary casting ability. So to single out the Warlock over every other class is giving them a bonus they just don't particularly deserve.

I don’t disagree, but I think the solution is to give everyone the option to choose their spellcasting stat,

 

[Mistwell]

The unbelievably awful RAW is still RAW. The meals tweet is simply confirming that it is also RAI.

Its literally RAW and RAI.

You declaring it so doesn't make it so.

There is nothing directly in the rules either way, and Mike Mearls is NOT rules as intended. He's not even Sage Advice. Heck he wasn't even Sage Advice way back when he made that tweet and tons of his tweets back then contradicted Crawford who then was declared as Sage Advice.

 

[Charlaquin]

I disagree. If you used your hand to cast a spell with a focus/material components, you cannot then return to wielding to weapon with both hands outside of your turn.

Why not?

The book doesn't say what you claim it says either,

It does though. On page 147, it says “This weapon requires two hands when you attack with it.”

which is why we need to use the rules it does have, which are one free interaction on your turn rules.

No rule says you need to use a free interaction to make an attack with a two-handed weapon.