D&D (2024) Class spell lists and pact magic are back!

[Charlaquin]

thank you, not sure why doing so for 10 years would be a good reason to not fix it though

It’s not a good reason not to fix it, I’m just enough of a realist to accept that it isn’t going to be fixed.

 

[mamba]

For me, if I could live with it, it got satisfied, and if I really liked it, it got greatly satisfied.

and what did you assign when you like the idea but not the execution (e.g. wildshape templates, not saying you liked them in any form....)? Sounds like 'dislike', which was my point.

And, you know, if you said dissatisfied, and enough people said satisfied... you may hit that 60% mark and get it iterated on. Remember, the 70% mark is KEEPING IT AS IS, BUT TWEAKS. 60% is NEEDS WORK.

Certainly, my problem is more that 'needs improvement' is basically either the 'it's ok as it is' (satisfied) or the 'throw it away' (dissatisfied) rating. I cannot really say what I want to say, and chances are people underrated it because of the terms (needs improvement = dissatisfied to me).

On a related note, do we know what % is assigned to each option, is it 25, 50, 75, 100? 0, 33, 67, 100? In either case 'dissatisfied' does not make the cut, possibly drastically.

 

[tetrasodium]

Easier if you just ban counterspell.

I mean, if it's this bad for paladins, I can't imagine playing a wizard if your games.

You are prrobably overlooking some fraction of the not so hidden simplicity. I doubt that it's entirely coincidental that he effectively described the (Su) tag rather than the (Sp) one that would allow those things or the (Ex) one that would even work in antimagic and such. d&d used to have a simple 4 character element that explicitly clarified a lot of those questions but somehow 2014 wotc decided it would be easier if everything was literally a unique edge case in areas once trivially expressed.

 

[Remathilis]

Right, so… Don’t do that. I agree with you that it’s a dumb methodology, but it is how WotC has been doing it for 10 years, and I don’t see them changing it, especially with how successful 5e ended up being. The most practical thing to do is accept that this is how they’re going to conduct their playtesting, like it or not, and engage with the surveys on those terms. Is it going to feel weird voting “satisfied” for a thing you think needs revision? Probably. But it’s also the most effective action you as an individual can take to try to influence the playtest towards your interests. Along with, of course, using your allotted written comments to express what about the thing you think should change and why.

There are God knows how many people filling out those surveys. Most will fill it out according to how they think they should answer. Its a lost cause. Its either Love It or Lose It, but very little room in-between.

FWIW: I plan to "very dissatisfy" the packet 7 warlock for no other reason than pact magic returning. Let them figure out what that means.

 

[Charlaquin]

There are God knows how many people filling out those surveys. Most will fill it out according to how they think they should answer. Its a lost cause. Its either Love It or Lose It, but very little room in-between.

I can’t control how they answer. Just how I answer.

FWIW: I plan to "very dissatisfy" the packet 7 warlock for no other reason than pact magic returning. Let them figure out what that means.

I mean, ok, I guess. It would probably be more likely to result in changes you want if you gave your reasoning, but since I’m pro-pact magic, I’m glad to hear that you’ll be acting in a way that is less disruptive to my interests than you could do, as some sort of ineffectual gesture of protestation.

 

[Remathilis]

I mean, ok, I guess. It would probably be more likely to result in changes you want if you gave your reasoning, but since I’m pro-pact magic, I’m glad to hear that you’ll be acting in a way that is less disruptive to my interests than you could do, as some sort of ineffectual gesture of protestation.

I figure any chance of having it removed is gone now, so I will register my protest vote going forward.

 

[Charlaquin]

I figure any chance of having it removed is gone now, so I will register my protest vote going forward.

Well yeah, if you’d rather protest in a way that WotC has no possible way of even perceiving as a protest than express your actual earnest desires, then any chance of your desires being realized is certainly gone. I wonder how many others who agree with you have made the same choice. Not that I’m complaining though, the results of your actions are benefiting me, so by all means, make that protest! I’m sure it will be cathartic for you.

 

[see]

I dunno. It just seems odd that the D&D community had no stomach for change...

What's odd about that?

The community being polled on these decisions is composed pretty much of two parts. The smaller part is what's left of the community whose reactions in the D&D Next playtests ten years ago shaped 5th edition in the first place. The larger part is all the people who were introduced to D&D with 5th edition and who liked 5th edition enough to become part of the community. Where would a constituency for change come from?

 

[Remathilis]

What's odd about that?

The community being polled on these decisions is composed pretty much of two parts. The smaller part is what's left of the community whose reactions in the D&D Next playtests ten years ago shaped 5th edition in the first place. The larger part is all the people who were introduced to D&D with 5th edition and who liked 5th edition enough to become part of the community. Where would a constituency for change come from?

Jeremy has eluded to a survey that was done a few years back on the PHB. He has mentioned it several times when comparing satisfaction changing on elements of the playtest. Much of the experimentation that was in the previous packets was a direct response to that earlier survey. So I do find it odd that the survey found pain points in the game, but somehow all those pain points are okay when the playtest comes out. Was the survey wrong? Did a bunch of people just say "this sucks and don't you dare change it?" Or did WotC realize that the changes needed would be a long, drawn out series of back and forths they don't have time for and have said 'you know what, 2014 was good enough."?

 

[Charlaquin]

Jeremy has eluded to a survey that was done a few years back on the PHB. He has mentioned it several times when comparing satisfaction changing on elements of the playtest. Much of the experimentation that was in the previous packets was a direct response to that earlier survey. So I do find it odd that the survey found pain points in the game, but somehow all those pain points are okay when the playtest comes out. Was the survey wrong? Did a bunch of people just say "this sucks and don't you dare change it?" Or did WotC realize that the changes needed would be a long, drawn out series of back and forths they don't have time for and have said 'you know what, 2014 was good enough."?

None of the above. They used the experimentation and polling to find out what changes were actually needed to address the pain points, and are making those changes, and not making others.