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.

 

[Ondath]

It’s literally a new version of the books though.

For the first time, the word edition is actually being used correctly!

 

[Parmandur]

Anyone who needs a PHB. They’re not trying to juice sales like with the old editions. They’re trying to maintain their momentum while allowing the game to slowly evolve. They said this explicitly at the launch of OneD&D and have repeated it ad nauseum since.

Exactly. The primary audience is teens and twenty aomethinfs: having am attractive, fresh presentation for new customers is the priority. Fixing up pain points is a nice bonus, but needs to be balanced by maintaining backwards compatibility for an Evergreen game.

 

[Parmandur]

I think the biggest issue with the playertest at this time is really lack of time. It is clear the process should have started sooner to allow more tweaks and resurveying. I think some of the new things being cast aside might be well received with minor tweaks but time is now too tight to allow some of the titration needed.

Not really: if they figure out their audience doeanwanr something...drop it for what they want. It's not a struggle session to browbeat people into liking something that they don't like. And frankly I don't think more time would have changed the methodology: as it is, they seem to be finalizing everything well in advance of publication.

 

[Parmandur]

For it to be 6th edition, something would have to change.

For it to be 6th edition, it would have to come after 5 other "editions," but it doesn't. I could het behind 9th Edition (typical edition for the PHB, MM, & DMG) or 17th Esition. 6th Edition would be ridiculous.

 

[Parmandur]

These UA results where things don't hit the mark and then get backtracked are inspiring anti-hype in me. Why do I want new books if the are going to be mostly the same as old books, save for like a few pages?

I'm getting it for the new Background & Origin system and art.

 

[mamba]

they seem to be finalizing everything well in advance of publication

if you drop most of the changes, that is easy

 

[Parmandur]

if you drop most of the changes, that is easy

Yes, the key was they figured out what changes to keep.

 

[mamba]

Yes, the key was they figured out what changes to keep.

yeah, something like that

 

[Shardstone]

Here's the thing blowing my mind.

First off, Crawford said last video that they did NOT have time to give anything more then one pass anymore, if that, which means if something isn't perfect out the gate, they default to the original way because it already works.

Second off, Crawford says this video many things are getting around 60% feedback from the previous packet. However, we already know that since they won't be revising things, that means that things at 60% get rolled backed to the original version, or something close to it.

So when everyone in this thread keeps talking about the MAJORITY, keep in mind THE MAJORITY has NOTHING to do with the rollbacks. It is not the MAJORITY that is saying they want 2014 pact slots, just 40% (adjust for different rule). So for many things, THE MAJORITY is showing interest in the new direction, but doesn't want to use it without new tweaks. Therefore, there things get rolled back.

It is making me sick having to read so many people pretending like every single reversion is because the majority was far more satisfied that way. We're talking margins of 10-20% for the most part, some of which still involve the majority, just not WotC's necessary super majority.

 

[Parmandur]

yeah, something like that

There are a bunch if changes making their way through, and the structure of the b9oks us changing even if the rules mostly aren't (the Rues Glossary replacing the unholy PHB index is probably worth the price alone).