D&D (2024) My current assessment…

[Cyber-Dave]

The disparity between martial and magical classes is growing. The best of the martial builds got kneecapped, but there is no evidence of that lost damage potential being regained elsewhere. Given that magical classes still have something of an edge as is, that’s not a good change. Invisibility got buffed to the point that it’s virtually stealth without a skill check. That steps on the toes of the rogue. There is no sign that the rogue was buffed to make up for the loss. In fact, relatively speaking, the rogue seems to have gained power compared to other materials, but only because their most powerful builds were kneecapped, while being nerfed compared to those who could truly steal their spotlight: utility casters. Stealth has been nerfed significantly due to relative context. Also, with more classes gaining expertise, the rogue has even less of a place to shine mechanically.

One has a lot of potential, but as of right now, the devil is in the details… and these details will sink the edition. As of right now, One isn’t so badly balanced as to be a repeat of 3e, but it’s badly balanced enough for me to avoid updating if the final product doesn’t change significantly during playtesting. It undoes too much of what 5e did to achieve parity between martial and magical classes under its hood.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

One has a lot of potential, but as of right now, the devil is in the details… and these details will sink the edition. As of right now, One isn’t so badly balanced as to be a repeat of 3e, but it’s badly balanced enough for me to avoid updating if the final product doesn’t change significantly during playtesting. It undoes too much of what 5e did to achieve parity between martial and magical classes under its hood.

Uh..... what do we actually know about One?

They are just beginning the process of playtesting. We haven't even seen ideas for the Fighter/Monk/Barbarian (core martial classes). Let alone refinements.

Maybe a little early on this?

 

[Horwath]

The disparity between martial and magical classes is growing. The best of the martial builds got kneecapped, but there is no evidence of that lost damage potential being regained elsewhere. Given that magical classes still have something of an edge as is, that’s not a good change. Invisibility got buffed to the point that it’s virtually stealth without a skill check. That steps on the toes of the rogue. There is no sign that the rogue was buffed to make up for the loss. In fact, relatively speaking, the rogue seems to have gained power compared to other materials, but only because their most powerful builds were kneecapped, while being nerfed compared to those who could truly steal their spotlight: utility casters. Stealth has been nerfed significantly due to relative context. Also, with more classes gaining expertise, the rogue has even less of a place to shine mechanically.

One has a lot of potential, but as of right now, the devil is in the details… and these details will sink the edition. As of right now, One isn’t so badly balanced as to be a repeat of 3e, but it’s badly balanced enough for me to avoid updating if the final product doesn’t change significantly during playtesting. It undoes too much of what 5e did to achieve parity between martial and magical classes under its hood.

I don't know that GWM mastery got that heavy kneecap.

seems more balanced out with damage.

if we take 5th level fighter with GWM and 17 STR + current GMW vs 5th level fighter with 18 STR and PT GWM we get:

base hit chance 60%, cleave chance 25% per round(very generous in finding low HP targets to trigger Bonus action attack and not overkilling too much); using greatsword.

current DPR: 10*0,60*2 + 10*0,60*0,25 + 7*0,05*2,25(crit bonus damage) = 12+1,5+0,79 = 14,29

current DPR using -5/+10: 20*0,35*2 + 20*0,35*0,25 + 7*0,05*2,25 = 14+1,75+0,79 = 16,54

PT DPR: 11*0,65*2 + 11*0,65*0,25 + 7*0,05*2,25 + 3*0,878(prof bonus to damage once per turn) = 14,3+1,79+0,79+2,63 = 19,51

with GWM being a half feat, it's overall better. and no chance of huge overkills and losing damage.

 

[Cyber-Dave]

I don't know that GWM mastery got that heavy kneecap.

seems more balanced out with damage.

if we take 5th level fighter with GWM and 17 STR + current GMW vs 5th level fighter with 18 STR and PT GWM we get:

base hit chance 60%, cleave chance 25% per round(very generous in finding low HP targets to trigger Bonus action attack and not overkilling too much); using greatsword.

current DPR: 10*0,60*2 + 10*0,60*0,25 + 7*0,05*2,25(crit bonus damage) = 12+1,5+0,79 = 14,29

current DPR using -5/+10: 20*0,35*2 + 20*0,35*0,25 + 7*0,05*2,25 = 14+1,75+0,79 = 16,54

PT DPR: 11*0,65*2 + 11*0,65*0,25 + 7*0,05*2,25 + 3*0,878(prof bonus to damage once per turn) = 14,3+1,79+0,79+2,63 = 19,51

with GWM being a half feat, it's overall better. and no chance of huge overkills and losing damage.

GWM and SS builds showed their strength when buffed with bless and/or synergistic abilities that could grant them advantage on their attacks. Using a 60% hit rate artificially hides the DPR that they could achieve with party teamwork (and often did). In that specific scenario, the class hasn’t been kneecapped. Its peak performance, however, has.

That being said, I didn’t love that two feats became a requirement for most martial builds, but unless all the classes are buffed akin to the ranger, this will be a net nerf to martial performance (and ruin incentives for spellcasters to spend their magic buffing martials instead of looking for ways to steal the spotlight). I have little hope that they are keeping an eye out for such details, however, for in relative context, the rogue—a class I consider to be a general underperformer these days—has been nerfed pretty heavily with their changes to expertise, invisibility, and hiding.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Maybe they did not write PLAYTEST big enough.
Also, only the most "optimized" builds are harmed. And if you take all the goodies into account, it does not look bad at all for martial classes. My rogue (and I play a rogue now for many levels) won´d be negatively effected by the change at all. Actually, with the change to twf, he would receive a substantial upgrade if he uses two short swords instead of a rapier.

 

[Cyber-Dave]

Maybe they did not write PLAYTEST big enough.
Also, only the most "optimized" builds are harmed. And if you take all the goodies into account, it does not look bad at all for martial classes. My rogue (and I play a rogue now for many levels) won´d be negatively effected by the change at all. Actually, with the change to twf, he would receive a substantial upgrade if he uses two short swords instead of a rapier.

I’m aware it’s a playtest. That’s why I’m busy voicing issues. Problems found now can be addressed and fixed. If I help make people aware of the problems so they voice them in their feedback, such issues will hopefully not make it to release. If this wasn’t a playtest, I wouldn’t bother voicing a complaint. I would just not purchase One.

If you think your rogue has been buffed, you haven’t paid enough attention to the changes to hide and invisibility, the loss of the ability to take expertise in thieves’ tools, or clued into what this will mean to long term to evolving play. Two weapon fighting has received a minor, healthy, buff, though… that is true.

 

[Horwath]

GWM and SS builds showed their strength when buffed with bless and/or synergistic abilities that could grant them advantage on their attacks. Using a 60% hit rate artificially hides the DPR that they could achieve with party teamwork (and often did). In that specific scenario, the class hasn’t been kneecapped. Its peak performance, however, has.

That being said, I didn’t love that two feats became a requirement for most martial builds, but unless all the classes are buffed akin to the ranger, this will be a net nerf to martial performance (and ruin incentives for spellcasters to spend their magic buffing martials instead of looking for ways to steal the spotlight). I have little hope that they are keeping an eye out for such details, however, for in relative context, the rogue—a class I consider to be a general underperformer these days—has been nerfed pretty heavily with their changes to expertise, invisibility, and hiding.

OK lets do it with 5th level barbarian in rage with +2 attack bonus from bless.

Barbarian 1: STR 17, damage 2d6+5, 70% hit rate, 91% hit chance with advantage.
Barbarian 1*: with -5/+10, 2d6+15, 45% hit rate, 69,8% with advantage

Barbarian 2: STR 18, damage 2d6+6, 75% hit rate, 94% hit chance with advantage.

both 9,5% chance of crit, will increase bonus action attack chance to 30% per round.

1: 12*0,91*2 + 12*0,91*0,3 + 7*0,095*2,3 = 21,84 + 3,28 + 1,52 = 26,64

1*: 22*0,698*2 + 22*0,698*0,3 + 7*0,095*2,3 = 30,71 + 4,61 + 1,52 = 36,84

2: 13*0,94*2 + 13*0,94*0,3 + 7*0,095*2,3 + 3*1 = 24,44 + 3,67 + 1,52 + 3 = 32,63


Ok, so if you are a Barbarian in rage being Blessed non-stop, you can do better with old vs new GWM feat.
But, if you add how much there is overkill with +10 damage per attack sometimes, I'm not sure how much old GWM is better.

And if you lose your Cleric for bless you are worst of with old.
Or if you cannot have advantage on demand.

 

[Cyber-Dave]

OK lets do it with 5th level barbarian in rage with +2 attack bonus from bless.

Barbarian 1: STR 17, damage 2d6+5, 70% hit rate, 91% hit chance with advantage.
Barbarian 1*: with -5/+10, 2d6+15, 45% hit rate, 69,8% with advantage

Barbarian 2: STR 18, damage 2d6+6, 75% hit rate, 94% hit chance with advantage.

both 9,5% chance of crit, will increase bonus action attack chance to 30% per round.

1: 12*0,91*2 + 12*0,91*0,3 + 7*0,095*2,3 = 21,84 + 3,28 + 1,52 = 26,64

1*: 22*0,698*2 + 22*0,698*0,3 + 7*0,095*2,3 = 30,71 + 4,61 + 1,52 = 36,84

2: 13*0,94*2 + 13*0,94*0,3 + 7*0,095*2,3 + 3*1 = 24,44 + 3,67 + 1,52 + 3 = 32,63


Ok, so if you are a Barbarian in rage being Blessed non-stop, you can do better with old vs new GWM feat.
But, if you add how much there is overkill with +10 damage per attack sometimes, I'm not sure how much old GWM is better.

And if you lose your Cleric for bless you are worst of with old.
Or if you cannot have advantage on demand.

It’s not as simple as “losing your cleric.” That’s rhetoric. It’s a question of your foe’s AC and who can buff you in your party. You had to consider when to use it more carefully, but peak performance was drastically higher than it is now. The “overkill” is also a bit of an empty argument. If you are fighting large numbers of weaker foes, overkill could be a problem… but you could always just choose not to use that feature. Furthermore, in such situations, a caster would take the spotlight and shine anyway. Martials would shine when it came to single target damage against VIPs, for the most part, and overkill ceases to exist in such situations. Don’t get me wrong—I’m not unhappy to see SS and GWM toned down. They will have to boost most martial classes with internal features in the face of that loss, though, and they didn’t pay attention to such details (albeit regarding a different set of specific topics) insofar as the rogue is concerned. Quite the opposite.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I’m aware it’s a playtest. That’s why I’m busy voicing issues. Problems found now can be addressed and fixed. If I help make people aware of the problems so they voice them in their feedback, such issues will hopefully not make it to release. If this wasn’t a playtest, I wouldn’t bother voicing a complaint. I would just not purchase One.

If you think your rogue has been buffed, you haven’t paid enough attention to the changes to hide and invisibility, the loss of the ability to take expertise in thieves’ tools, or clued into what this will mean to long term to evolving play. Two weapon fighting has received a minor, healthy, buff, though… that is true.

I think, you should read up on the thieves tools issue yourself. And you should not assume i have not read it correctly. I think your assessment is totally off base. Yes, some things have been nerfed, but not in a vaccuum. Also, you don´t know about my character. It is optimized enough, but does not use rules loopholes... except for booming blade + sneak attack. Which he would gladly change to be able to use twf and still have his bonus actions available.
I don´t resort to cheap tactics like hiding during combat and emerge to get advantage or readying an action to get a second sneak attack. Not needed at all.

 

[MoonSong]

Uh..... what do we actually know about One?

They are just beginning the process of playtesting. We haven't even seen ideas for the Fighter/Monk/Barbarian (core martial classes). Let alone refinements.

Maybe a little early on this?

It's never too early, but it quickly becomes too late. If something doesn't pass the sniff test early on, it is never too early to worry and maybe complain. I let my concerns be brushed away too easily the last time around. I'm not making that mistake again.