D&D (2024) Developer Video on Druid/Paladin/Expert Feedback

​

WotC has posted a video discussing initial feedback on the One D&D Druid/Paladin playtest, along with survey results from the Expert playtest. Some highlights for discussion:

Druid: The developers recognize that the template version of wild shape is contentious. If they retain this approach, they would plan to add flexibility to those templates. If they revert to monster stat blocks, they might allow Druids to choose a limited number of options, with a default selection provided.

Paladin: The new version of smite is still intended to work with critical hits. If ranged smite persists, its damage may be adjusted through the internal balance/playtesting process.

Ranger: The updated Ranger scored very well in the playtest. Some players did miss the choice of options in the Hunter subclass.

Bard: All of the Lore Bard's features scored welll, but the overall subclass rating was mediocre. They attribute this to the loss of Additional Magical Secrets, which many saw as the key attraction of this subclass.

Rogue: The change to limit sneak attack to the Rogue's own turn scored poorly. The developers generally like moving actions to a player's own turn to keep the game moving quickly, but in this case, the change doesn't seem to be worth the loss of tactical flexibility.

Feats: With the exception of epic boons, all the feats in the Expert packet scored well. The developers are still loking at written feedback for fine tuning.

Conspicuously not mentioned were the Arcane/Divine/Primal spell lists, which were the focus of a lot of discussion during the Bard playtest.

 

[Kobold Stew]

Please elaborate on the logic you followed that lead you from what I said to accusing me of the bold.

What led me to this was reading your words, which you then doubled down on, in this same post:

What I actually said is that some people clearly cannot handle what 5e is, and that regardless of what the circumstances are for these people it would be better for all involved that they play something else with their friends.

You are not failing to communicate your beliefs; I just disagree with them.

 

[Emberashh]

Unfortunately, there's really no way to say that without sounding gatekeepy.

Its not gatekeeping to suggest people would be better off playing other games, because that advice applies regardless of what the issue is.

TTRPGs aren't just DND, and we shouldn't be doublespeaking our way into forcing DND to be this everything to everyone game that it fundamentally can't be while lamenting that so few are even willing to play anything else.

What led me to this was reading your words, which you then doubled down on, in this same post:

Do you go to people that suggest that Mausritter or Hero Kids is better to start kids on than 5E and accuse them of being intolerant gatekeepers, or do you recognize that some people have games better suited for who they are and that it isn't intolerant to encourage them to play those games instead of frustrating themselves with a game that fundamentally can't cater to their needs without alienating its own fans?

Theres a reason I pointed to DCS World specifically. That isn't a game one can just pick up and play, and you can't change that without fundamentally altering what the game even is.

And meanwhile, if we look beyond DND in the TTRPG space, theres Pathfinder thats distinctly more complex to engage with as a player.

Is it gatekeeping to tell people who want something simpler than that to play a game thats already suited to their tastes, or is that just normal ass advice we tell people trying to squeeze blood from a stone?

Id sure hope its the latter, cause otherwise you're calling out that entire community for "intolerant gatekeeping" because they don't want to encourage people putting so much effort into warping the game into something else, when people already have options for something else available to them.

 

[Undrave]

The main hint was Barbaric Yawp. Yell very loudly and shatter man and magic.

But incidentally, the rest of that excerpt also touches on the Barbarians actual core ability, Outlander, which builds up some similar party buffs to what we see in Rangers, but also escalates from being able to regularly convince enemy Barbarians to fight for you to calling on up to 5000 of them at will to be your personal horde.

Ah... so it's a Shirtless Warlord.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Except you can still play the 2014 druid in 2024 WotC 5e, according to some folks, so nerfing the new version is irrelevant.

This is a logical fallacy...

 

[Emberashh]

Ah... so it's a Shirtless Warlord.

Pretty sure Warlords never could shout so loudly at a Fireball that it sputtered out to an ember

Also key to remember the Barbarian originally shipped with a horde it could call on, well before we ever got anything like the Warlord concept.

 

[Micah Sweet]

This is a logical fallacy...

How so? Nerfing the new version of a class while not invalidating the old version (which I have heard many folks claim is the case) makes the nerf pretty meaningless in my view.

 

[mamba]

Well, that's another $50 to WotC if they have to buy it. I don't see the problem from their point of view.

you might not, but they apparently do or they would not do something that loses them those $50

 

[mamba]

I will defend 2e to my dying breath.

you can argue that it had the best lore or whatever (and I’d probably agree), but you cannot argue that they lost money on a lot of stuff they were publishing (bad management, but still…)

 

[UngeheuerLich]

How so? Nerfing the new version of a class while not invalidating the old version (which I have heard many folks claim is the case) makes the nerf pretty meaningless in my view.

The key is "my view"...

So introducing a much more powerful option is no problem?

You even claim that introducing new history is making old history worthless.

So I am reappy not sure if you mean that seriously or of I am falling for a joke, as I honestly believe you know very well that your statement is just wrong.

 

[Remathilis]

Ah... so it's a Shirtless Warlord.

Pretty sure Warlords never could shout so loudly at a Fireball that it sputtered out to an ember

Also key to remember the Barbarian originally shipped with a horde it could call on, well before we ever got anything like the Warlord concept.

Maybe we could have the barbarian and warlord get into a shouting match where one harms and the other heals you.