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.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Wotc making them core is pandering.

Making them optional was pandering.

Putting them back would be embracing one of their good contributions to D&D that they fled from in their desperation to get people who hated on and abandoned them to tell them they're pretty again.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Are there any makes of 12-sided d4s whose numbering looks the same as the other D&D dice?

Bad idea - you don't want to pick up a d4 when you intend to roll a d12 (I've seen this with d20s marked 0-9 twice used in place of d20s

My 12 sided d4s have Roman numerals.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

My impression is, the discussions on the ENWorld forums matches the statistics of DnDBeyond character sheets.

In this sense, ENWorld is reasonably representative of the D&D community at large, at least a significant sector of it.

It is not my impression. I would be winning to accept that the poll data was similar. I have not made a comparison but the discussions tend to be dominated initially by people with strong feelings on the matter (usually negative) and meander onto one of usual strange attractor that all conversation here spirals around.

 

[mamba]

Noooo? Ya don’t say? See my original comment was meant more as a tongue in cheek comment but everyone has chosen to be all serious and defensive about it and tell me why I’m wrong or “live with it”. And you all wonder why I got defensive.

maybe the tongue in cheek part did not translate well …

 

[Mistwell]

I get wanting the Basic rules supported and a no-feats game. However, I don't know if we can tell yet if there will be new basic rules which support a feat-like thing at first level and only at first level?

 

[Kobold Stew]

I get wanting the Basic rules supported and a no-feats game. However, I don't know if we can tell yet if there will be new basic rules which support a feat-like thing at first level and only at first level?

I believe they have signalled a couple of times that they will.

At level 1, you choose between Skilled and Tough, and ASIs at all higher levels.

It may not be optimal, but it's simple and feat-lite.

 

[Remathilis]

No, theyre an optional rule. It’s not avoiding a system to not use something that’s OPTIONAL. Making them a core rule and then not using them would be avoiding them. What you’re saying is like saying I have to use every rule in the book or I’m avoiding the systems. No, 5e is designed as a toolkit, as stated by the design team from the beginning, for the dm to build their game from. I use what rules modules I like within my game. To tell me that’s avoiding a system is arrogant. Wotc making them core is pandering.

You're acting like I'm saying you're wrong. I'm not. If I don't hand out a single magical item, I'm avoiding the magical item system. If I don't allow multi-classing, I'm avoiding the multi-classing system. You're not doing anything wrong by avoiding it. Shine on.

 

[Shardstone]

I know it might seem to be a minor thing, but I am personally less particular about specific mechanics and rules in the game, and more about getting archetypes right. For me, one of the (relatively few, as it happens) criticisms I had of D&D5E was they got the Warlock Class wrong (for me). That is, I couldn’t play a Warlock like a traditional occultist or witch because I couldn’t have the spell casting Ability be Intelligence or Wisdom, respectively. You were forced to pick Charisma, which didn’t make sense to me.

This is where I'm at.

Classes have an identity, but that identity is meant to be several identities. The warlock is as much as a demonologist as it is a witch or an occultist, both of which have wisdom and intelligence slants decidedly.

The original idea of the 2024 Warlock really let me customize the idea of warlock to a very fine degree. By being able to pick my casting stat, I could not only go towards the witch or occulist idea via my primary attribute, but also by deciding if I want more magical invocations or more spellcasting invocations. It felt very good when creating a new warlock character and exploring what it might look like leveling one up.

By going back to just Charisma, I'm back to having to play something like a scheming rogue-warlock. Yes, it's a fun flavor, and warlock is still my favorite class, but I'm a little sad that I can't play a wise witch or intelligent occultist.

I guess most classes are locking you into a primary attribute, but it felt nice and, in a funny way, relatable that the warlock was so flexible.

 

[Scribe]

Warlocks should absolutely get to pick their caster stat. Especially since they have been moving that way with Cantrips. Charisma is too loaded as it is.

 

[Parmandur]

There is? They've outright stated what approval was of the 2014 things?

In the video, Crawford reveals what some of the 2014 options got in the big 2021 Class Duvey that WotC did. The ones that git improvements thus go around, at least.