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.

 

[Remathilis]

Which are unnecessary if you are coming up with good ideas. The mechanics do not replace a player's good ideas... they just answer the question for the DM whether or not the good idea works to get what they want. And if the ideas are good enough, the DM often doesn't even require the player to use the mechanics... they just say the idea works.

There's a reason for instance why players don't have to role Persuasion checks after every single point they make in a discussion-- the DM in conversation will usually just give out information if the right questions are asked or points are made. No mechanics necessary. A Fighter player can just make good points same as every other player and get what they might want.

I kinda feel the "come up with good ideas" line to be a bit of a cop out. Not every player is good at coming up with Macguyver/Loony Tunes style plans. Not all DMs are good about supplying the info needed to make one or willing to allow the "yeah, that will work" method of play to work. You need a very comfortable relationship with your DM to make that happen and it's not something everyone has access to. Even if you do, not everyone is on their A Game all the time, people make mistakes and miscalculations, DMs don't interpret what was said right, etc.

Still, I don't know how you fix that without handing out plot tokens that basically say "no DM, it's really like this." Im not sure if you merged the combat skill of the fighter with the skills of the rogue you'd compete with a full caster in terms of options, but I hate metagame currency mechanics even more than that...

 

[DEFCON 1]

I kinda feel the "come up with good ideas" line to be a bit of a cop out. Not every player is good at coming up with Macguyver/Loony Tunes style plans. Not all DMs are good about supplying the info needed to make one or willing to allow the "yeah, that will work" method of play to work.

"Good ideas" are merely players thinking of things to do. What do they want to accomplish? If players are not thinking of things to do... then they are doing nothing but stating "I want to make an Athletics check" or "I want to make a History check". But then most likely the DM is going to ask "Why?"

Why are (general) you wanting to make an Athletics check? The player will of course then have to state their idea, which is "I want to get over that wall". Or why do they want to make a History check? And the reason is they had the idea of "I want to know how old this wall is."

We're not talking about Looney Toons plans... we're talking about simple roleplaying. You as a player decide what it is you wish to do. That's it. What do you want to do? That's the idea you come up with... deciding what you wish to accomplish. And having additional proficient skills or features on your character sheet is not required for that at all. You as a player can still think of whatever it is you want to do for as long as you want, regardless of the amount of game mechanics your character sheet has. The only reason why a particular class would need more skills or class features for "out of combat" actions is to be slightly better at then having to roll the dice after you've come up with what it is you wish to do.

Yes, some players don't have any desire or want to roleplay or think of what their character wishes to do. And that's fine. But if that's the case... giving their PC's class additional skills or class features won't suddenly change that for them-- they still won't care to come up with ideas of things to do. Mechanics are there to facilitate your ideas, not to generate them. So how much stuff a player does "out of combat" is entirely based on what it is they decide they want their PC to do.

 

[Eubani]

Dozens of the Fighter's "good ideas" will still mean a journey of 100's of miles will still take weeks, whilst the Wizard's Teleport spell will take moments, no "good idea" required. But it is all the same now isn't it? No difference in agency at all.

 

[Remathilis]

Dozens of the Fighter's "good ideas" will still mean a journey of 100's of miles will still take weeks, whilst the Wizard's Teleport spell will take moments, no "good idea" required. But it is all the same now isn't it? No difference in agency at all.

Well the answer to that always comes down to "nerf magic to barely be better than mundane methods" or "give the fighter his own magic". Either get rid of teleportation magic with a range farther than Misty Step or give the fighter the ability to magically manifest wings.

 

[Mistwell]

Dozens of the Fighter's "good ideas" will still mean a journey of 100's of miles will still take weeks, whilst the Wizard's Teleport spell will take moments, no "good idea" required. But it is all the same now isn't it? No difference in agency at all.

The wizard isn't teleporting 100s of miles alone though. The wizards teleport is most often viewed as a party resource, rather than that player's resource. Like many wizard spells are viewed. The ideas that involve "hey wizard can you cast a spell that will..." are party resources that the wizard is being asked to activate.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Dozens of the Fighter's "good ideas" will still mean a journey of 100's of miles will still take weeks, whilst the Wizard's Teleport spell will take moments, no "good idea" required. But it is all the same now isn't it? No difference in agency at all.

What do you mean "No good idea required"? Last I checked... someone had to come up with the idea of where the group needed to go in the first place. They needed to come up with the idea of the most efficient way to do that. They had to come up with the idea of make sure the travel and arrival was safe for the entire party. They had to come up with the idea of checking all of their equipment and such to guarantee they had what they were going to need wherever they were planning on going. They had to come up with the ideas of what they were going to do after they arrived.

These are all things the "lowly Fighter" player can do and come up with. All the roleplaying that has to happen prior to taking the trip. Yes, the Wizard player will eventually be the one who gets to state "I cast teleport"... but that is like the LAST thing in a whole list of ideas and plans that need to be generated first, for which the Fighter player is no different than any other player at the table, game mechanics be damned.

 

[Remathilis]

The wizard isn't teleporting 100s of miles alone though. The wizards teleport is most often viewed as a party resource, rather than that player's resource. Like many wizard spells are viewed. The ideas that involve "hey wizard can you cast a spell that will..." are party resources that the wizard is being asked to activate.

That reminds me of a 2e specialty priest who purposely did not take the healing sphere because he was tired of using all his slots to heal people.

 

[DEFCON 1]

The wizard isn't teleporting 100s of miles alone though. The wizards teleport is most often viewed as a party resource, rather than that player's resource. Like many wizard spells are viewed. The ideas that involve "hey wizard can you cast a spell that will..." are party resources that the wizard is being asked to activate.

Exactly! You hit the nail on the head.

I mean what's the other way this would work? Whoever comes up with the idea is the one who gets to accomplish it? What kind of stupidity is that? Every class would have to have every mechanic available to them in order to "let the person who came up with the idea be the one to do it". And that's just ridiculous.

Any player who comes up with an idea of what the party can do but then has to rely on a different character in the party to make the mechanical function is not "losing out" on anything, they are playing the game of party-based adventuring as intended. And and in fact is actually roleplaying better. The Fighter player can be the one who comes up with the idea "Hey! We might want to look for traps in this hallway!"... but the even smarter Fighter player recognizes which character in the party has the best Perception and they tell that player "Why don't you search?"

That's not the Fighter player losing out because they don't have enough "out of combat" mechanics... that's the Fighter player being a good and intelligent roleplayer.

 

[Mistwell]

That reminds me of a 2e specialty priest who purposely did not take the healing sphere because he was tired of using all his slots to heal people.

I am playing a Cleric in a game right now that has some divination spells like Speak with Dead. Every adventuring day he casts a variety of these spells to gather information about the dungeon we're in. But he's not coming up with the questions to ask - the party is as a group. All my PC is doing is checking off a spell slot once the party decides what to ask with the divination spell. If instead it were a party magic item to cast Speak with Undead, it would be no different...except my PC wouldn't be losing a precious spell slot to do it. I get no sense of enhanced player agency by it being my PC checking off the spell slot to trigger this out of combat information gathering scheme where the questions were generated by any of the party members or all of them collectively.

 

[bert1001 fka bert1000]

I am playing a Cleric in a game right now that has some divination spells like Speak with Dead. Every adventuring day he casts a variety of these spells to gather information about the dungeon we're in. But he's not coming up with the questions to ask - the party is as a group. All my PC is doing is checking off a spell slot once the party decides what to ask with the divination spell. If instead it were a party magic item to cast Speak with Undead, it would be no different...except my PC wouldn't be losing a precious spell slot to do it. I get no sense of enhanced player agency by it being my PC checking off the spell slot to trigger this out of combat information gathering scheme where the questions were generated by any of the party members or all of them collectively.

Another 4e innovation not brought forward! 4e Rituals put all these big non-combat utility spells into Rituals that were clearly party resources on a separate resource track. Also for a low cost, any character could be a ritual caster. It didn't really solve the "magic is the best utility" but you could have any Character fill the part which I found to be useful in easily creating certain character types that shouldn't be D&D type casters.

Also, skill challenges could be used for more mundane or "creative" solutions without DM decides as the adjudication method.

I wish they had improved on the Ritual system for 5e.