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.

 

[DEFCON 1]

In DND, those limitations don't exist. You don't have to play a Rogue Scout and pretend to be a Ranger.

You can just  be a Ranger.

After a point if Im just ignoring what the game presents to me mechanically then I may as well skip the game and write a book.

Okay, well let's put the "just write a book" argument to the side as that is always such a ridiculously extreme jump in an argument that it serves no purpose to the conversation.

That being said... so for you it's merely the name of the class? If the game has something named a certain way then you want to use that thing... even if the way it's used does not match up to what you want it to do? Okay, fair enough. Again, I can intellectually understand that way of thinking and can't argue with it, I just personally don't tend to subscribe to it because it seems to me to be needlessly prohibitive. For me, refluffing exists and I find it very useful to get a better match between what I want both mechanically and narratively. But to each their own.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Maybe it's this

Heh... if this dude is ranking ALL the rogue subclasses as C, D & E... the issue for them looks to be the Rogue itself, and not the subclasses. So then it comes down to someone just asking "Hey, do I think the Rogue as a class just sucks compared to the Ranger that I wouldn't want to play it?" And based on how many people tend to say the Ranger is one of the weakest classes... those folks are probably fewer and farther between. But I guess it can take all types, LOL.

 

[Maxperson]

And said reason can still be described as entirely arbitrary. Theres no mutual exclusion here.

You are wrong. Reason and arbitrary are polar opposites. It's irrelevant how you choose to describe it, if there is a reason for it then it is 100% not arbitrary.

Exploration is more than that. A lot more.

I know. It's pretty clear that what I typed was not an exhaustive list. The point though, which you seem to have missed, is that there is no pillar that can cease to exist without the DM being so bad that even bad DMs avoid playing in that game. There is no pillar which can disappear.

 

[Maxperson]

If the whole point is BE Aragorn, I recommand play a fighter dip with rouge and choose outlander for background.
Edit: Because that is probably every charater are beside Valar, Maiar and half-Maiar (Lúthien ) in the middle earth.
Edit2 : And Nazgûls, they are warlock

Aragorn had powers, though. The Dunedain blood gave them abilities. What you suggest fails to be Aragorn.

 

[Maxperson]

So for you it's not just having a spell-less ranger... it sounds like you'd also want a more fully re-done Ranger class altogether (if you want different versions of FE and FT too). That would make sense why the Scout wouldn't do it for you.

I'm just saying that if I were to go with a spell-less ranger, I'd want those two abilities to be there. Personally I'm happy with the magical ranger(as an idea), but don't really like the 5e version.

 

[Nadan]

Aragorn had powers, though. The Dunedain blood gave them abilities. What you suggest fails to be Aragorn.

Isn't "The Dunedain blood" what we call racial trait in DND?
Edit: Or lineage like those three in VRGtR, because Dunedain are human but extra spicy.

 

[Incenjucar]

To me, this sounds like a list of activities that Rangers (and in some cases adventurers more generally) already have the tools to be good at.

Natural explorer lets rangers travel in favored terrain without the risk of becoming lost and with significant bonuses to foraging.
Horses of various types are listed in the PHB with capabilities and purchase prices.
Tending to wounds is one of the explanations given for short rest healing.
Getting in ridiculous fights is one of the main focal points of the game.
As for hunting larger game and using hunting dogs, these are areas where the game doesn't have focused rules, but rangers have access to all the proficiencies one would expect to be involved.

The gap here is that these real life adventurers don't have magic. The 5E/0E ranger is a spellcaster. Davey Crocket doesn't really need to be a wizard.

 

[Pauln6]

I'm just saying that if I were to go with a spell-less ranger, I'd want those two abilities to be there. Personally I'm happy with the magical ranger(as an idea), but don't really like the 5e version.

Every version of the DnD ranger has been so different that it may not be possible to square the circle. The 1e version was a weird mish mash that even had wizard spells. The 4e version certainly had more in common with the 5e scout than any previous versions.

I think it would be interesting to see the designers listing various ways to build a 'ranger' and people can decide which one gets closest to their ideal.

 

[Maxperson]

Isn't "The Dunedain blood" what we call racial trait in DND?
Edit: Or lineage like those three in VRGtR, because Dunedain are human but extra spicy.

Show me a human in 5e with several magical racial traits?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

The gap here is that these real life adventurers don't have magic. The 5E/0E ranger is a spellcaster. Davey Crocket doesn't really need to be a wizard.

But he would not say no to it, if magic were a thing in real life?