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]

I miss the hybrid multiclassing of AD&D.

I still say 5e multiclassing should be "multiclass subclasses"

 

[Azzy]

I still say 5e multiclassing should be "multiclass subclasses"

That would be interesting.

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

OTOH, they could just design the game with multi-classing in mind from the start, but that would require an entirely different design paradigm

I don't think so. You could still work with the current class designs as they are. Like, you could just mark certain abilities with an asterisk (for 'main class only'), and they are only active if that class is your highest one.

You could go even more front-loaded (which surely sounds like it aligns with the current design paradigm) and hand all of the class-defining abilities out at lv1 if you felt like it, because the other classes couldn't just dip in and get all of them.

 

[Gorck]

Or they could go back to the old method where, once you take a second class, you had to keep levelling the second class until you had the same number of levels in each class. And, thereafter, neither class could be more than one level higher than the other. That would certainly fix the dipping problem.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Make popular dip abilities feats so people aren't sad you're taking a level in a class to get that ability.

 

[Maxperson]

He kinda hits the mark though. 5e pretty much removed the opportunity cost for SAD dex and SAD cha by devaluing int & tos degree even wis. A lot of that can be traced to how int was devalued in skills and the amount of punch a PC had for their skills.

My God, Int may be the most used stat in my games. It controls knowledge. Players use it to try and recognize monsters and what abilities they possess, recognize symbols of gods, history of places and items, geography and much, much more. I wouldn't say Int is devalued. And wis saves are as common as spit.

 

[Maxperson]

Multi-classing cheese for that issue can be resolved by requiring a minimum for all stats they can choose from to multiclass into or out of that class.

I think the point being made was that if you can pick the casting stat, then you can match that up with the primary/secondary stat(s) of the class you want to multiclass into.

 

[Mistwell]

I think the point being made was that if you can pick the casting stat, then you can match that up with the primary/secondary stat(s) of the class you want to multiclass into.

I know. And I am saying to solve for that problem (where it would be nearly meaningless then to multiclass otherwise because you can match your caster stat to whatever primary stat the other class uses) is to require a minimum stat for ALL the stats you could have chosen from. In other words, if you can choose from Charisma, Wisdom or Intelligence for that class, then you must have a minimum 13 in all three of those stats to multiclass with that class.

 

[OB1]

I've actually always wanted to see Warlocks as Con based casters. You are channeling power via a powerful entity, and your constitution allows you to handle more of that power coursing thru you. And now you're opened up to pick any other stats to fit your concept of the character.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I've actually always wanted to see Warlocks as Con based casters. You are channeling power via a powerful entity, and your constitution allows you to handle more of that power coursing thru you. And now you're opened up to pick any other stats to fit your concept of the character.

They were Cha or Con in 4e