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.

 

[Neonchameleon]

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.

If it's not an actual improvement why change it? That said I liked the variant casting modifiers for the warlock but the half-assed half-caster warlock was such a terrible version of the warlock that I'm unsurprised that it weighed down ideas and changes tied to it. And the "everything interesting must be a spell" design philosophy, another bad idea, also being tied to it probably put the final nails in the coffin.

 

[nevin]

yeah if the old way was better just do that. New is not always better.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

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.

Realistically there's very little effort in taking one hand off a greatsword and switching to more of a "resting" guard, and then placing your hand back on the greatsword and taking up a more active guard. It takes less than a second to do either of those things. It's easily just as much of the action for the round, which in this case is the Magic Action.

It's same as retrieving multiple arrows from a quiver and firing a bow as part of an attack action in the rules.

 

[jerryrice4949]

The Bard picking their spell list was the single coolest thing in the whole playtest, if that is gone, I'm questioning whether the new PHB is worth bothering with.

I agree. At this point I am not sure why I would buy the new PHB. Maybe weapon masteries but nothing else.

 

[Charlaquin]

The Bard picking their spell list was the single coolest thing in the whole playtest, if that is gone, I'm questioning whether the new PHB is worth bothering with.

I could easily see the bard getting access to their choice of the cleric, druid, or wizard (or maybe sorcerer) spell list in addition to a bard list that’s much smaller than the 2014 one.

 

[nevin]

Realistically there's very little effort in taking one hand off a greatsword and switching to more of a "resting" guard, and then placing your hand back on the greatsword and taking up a more active guard. It takes less than a second to do either of those things. It's easily just as much of the action for the round, which in this case is the Magic Action.

It's same as retrieving multiple arrows from a quiver and firing a bow as part of an attack action in the rules.

I hate breaking down combat rounds to little actions like that. It adds unneeded complexity and never ever comes close to reality. I wish more games would just jettison the little things that add nothing to the game. It's like the whole raise your shield mechanic in PF2e . things like that make the game more like Quilting. Lets do it one stitch at a time......

 

[tetrasodium]

Realistically there's very little effort in taking one hand off a greatsword and switching to more of a "resting" guard, and then placing your hand back on the greatsword and taking up a more active guard. It takes less than a second to do either of those things. It's easily just as much of the action for the round, which in this case is the Magic Action.

It's same as retrieving multiple arrows from a quiver and firing a bow as part of an attack action in the rules.

The game doesn't operate on "realistically". It operates on mechanics and there is one being discussed that nullifies itself while presenting a trap for well meaning traders giving the rules a good faith effort rather than looking for a GM convoluted hole to twist .

 

[DEFCON 1]

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

I'd have no problems with that. I've done it before in my Eberron campaign as a matter of fact. But I also wouldn't expect WotC to actually do it though, as they tend to constrain options more often than not (either for ease-of-use, or to focus on theme.)

In this particular Warlock case... if it were up to me to come up with it I'd probably assign Fey Patrons to CHA (the magic one), GOO Patrons to INT (the psionic one), and Fiends to WIS (the worshipable one).

 

[nevin]

The game doesn't operate on "realistically". It operates on mechanics and there is one being discussed that nullifies itself while presenting a trap for well meaning traders giving the rules a good faith effort rather than looking for a GM convoluted hole to twist .

im not disagreeing with your assessment. I completely agree going from one hand on the greatsword to one hand off is a minor action. I hate the digging into those details to limit any kind of basic actions spellcasting or melee. The components are gone when you cast the spell. reaching down and pulling out a dagger takes what two to three seconds. going into the details that far is always unfun.....

 

[Mistwell]

Reaction lets them make an attack. An attack with a two-hander requires you to have two hands available for it. They have two hands available. There is no conflict.

No the attack action allows that. A reaction attack is not the attack action. Again, you similarly can drop an item in that hand using the attack action to attack, but you cannot drop an item in that hand using your reaction to make an attack.