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

[tetrasodium]

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."?

I don't think we've seen packets targeting a lot of those pain points yet. To a degree we probably could have seen them crammed in the rules glossaries like the crit changes but I suspect they might have impacted some of the class changes in ways that dominate the surveys. The first six packets don't give me reason for much optimism though

 

[Mistwell]

not really. My main concern is that 1) I cannot properly express what I want to happen, esp. iterate or throw out, and 2) that I have to do so in a way that contradicts plain English.

As was said, if I want an iteration because I think the proposal needs improvements, I need to vote ‘satisfied’, as that is what in the poll should result in an iteration… now I do not know about you, but when I think something needs improvement, I am not satisfied with it, that is pretty much the definition of that word. Dissatisfied’ on the other hand should never be used, it is a trap, not a meaningful choice, in terms of how the poll result will treat it.

That for the poll to work as intended I have to select ‘satisfied’ rather than ‘dissatisfied’ in this case shows how idiotic the design is. It literally violates the rules of the language it is conducted in, bravo

The rest of what you wrote does not in any way reflect what I said. I agree, it is nonsense, as you wrote

Are the comments sections of your survey not working?

 

[mamba]

I don't think we've seen packets targeting a lot of those pain points yet.

I assume the first 5 did, not sure why they would wait with that

 

[mamba]

Are the comments sections of your survey not working?

mine are, does that mean everyone fills them / they make any meaningful difference to the survey result? If I believe that the answers are poorly reflecting the intent and most people do not fill them, then what?

 

[Mistwell]

mine are, does that mean everyone fills them / they make any meaningful difference to the survey result? If I believe that the answers are poorly reflecting the intent and most people do not fill them, then what?

You said "I cannot properly express what I want to happen." That's what the comment section is for.

 

[tetrasodium]

I assume the first 5 did, not sure why they would wait with that

I haven't seen a lot of reason to be optimistic they want to hit them but can at least accept that there could be reasonable reasons to not include them alongside class changes after the crit change rule dominated discussion for so long

 

[mamba]

You said "I cannot properly express what I want to happen." That's what the comment section is for.

fair enough, not sure how many do though or hope / assume the rating itself reflects what they intended. Needs improvement = dissatisfied seems pretty straightforward, but it isn't since you have no idea whether there will be one, as you find out after the fact

To me it would be better if I could with just clicking some option, and leave the textbox proposals / more detailed feedback than the most basic 'I want an iteration on this'

 

[Dausuul]

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.

The problem with that distinction is that it's applying tags across the entire game -- every single creature and class ability -- in service of a tiny handful of spells and effects (mainly dispel magic and anti-magic field) which care about distinguishing "active magic" from "background magic."

This kind of tail-wagging-the-dog thing showed up a lot in 3E. In each individual case, you could argue it wasn't a huge burden. It's just a two-letter tag on each ability and a few paragraphs in the PHB to describe what they mean, right? But when you piled them all together, you got an incredibly ponderous system.

5E has tried hard to avoid this. When only a couple of spells care about a distinction, it is now their job to define that distinction, and corner cases are left to the DM.

 

[Neonchameleon]

The problem with that distinction is that it's applying tags across the entire game -- every single creature and class ability -- in service of a tiny handful of spells and effects (mainly dispel magic and anti-magic field) which care about distinguishing "active magic" from "background magic."

This kind of tail-wagging-the-dog thing showed up a lot in 3E. In each individual case, you could argue it wasn't a huge burden. It's just a two-letter tag on each ability and a few paragraphs in the PHB to describe what they mean, right? But when you piled them all together, you got an incredibly ponderous system.

5E has tried hard to avoid this. When only a couple of spells care about a distinction, it is now their job to define that distinction, and corner cases are left to the DM.

This. The (Sp) (Su) (Ex) was almost entirely cruft that made literally every ability in the game very slightly fiddlier. Although the individual cost was low it was a small piece of grit on every single other ability in the game which added up. And as you mention, especially in 3.5 it really was only those two abilities that cared with even Spell Resistance caring surprisingly little.

And tying this back to either earlier in this thread or possibly the wizards thread, another good example of this nonsense that almost no one actually uses but make each piece worse are spell components. Almost everyone uses spellcasting foci and even those that don't in my experience don't actually check their component pouches, or make things up as they go along. Material components other than diamond and for quasi-magic items are vestigial.

 

[Undrave]

Wild shape templates: gone.

These were a good idea; they just chose the stupidest way to implement them. Instead of template by Land/Sea/Air, they should have made template based on what people actually want to use their Wild Shape for: Protector, Predator, Infiltrator, Traveler. With the subclasses getting unique templates or upgrades! But no, they had to go by animal locomotion type!

This reverting back only helps the Wizard class.

The only class that matters it seems…