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]

Remember when people were insisting it was clearly not backwards compatible, and WotC was just, like, lying when they said it wasn’t going to be a new edition?

Yeah, turns out they weren’t lying.

I still thought the game would be backwards compatible WITH many of the experimental BS they were tossing in those UAs. This doesn't even move the needle anymore. It's as much a new edition as Tasha's is.

 

[mamba]

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).

I guess I will see, but it is still 10% better when it could have been 50%, nothing to write home about

If after a year of playtesting the best thing you can say is that it has new art and a better index, something went wrong...

 

[Mistwell]

So, you’re saying you can’t attack with a versatile weapon two-handed after casting a spell, but you can attack with a two-handed weapon after casting a spell…?

I am saying I am talking about the topic of versatile and vex, and you want to change the topic to what, try and win some linguistics fight I have no interest in? If you don't want to talk about the topic, fine. Find someone else to talk about some other topic with, OK?

It’s true that you explicitly can’t speak when it’s not your turn. I think that’s dumb as hell, but it is what the rules say. The rules do not say any such thing about dropping something you’re holding.

They don't say you can do ANYTHING when it's not your turn. What the heck does "not your turn" mean to you, if you can do anything you want that isn't explicitly barred?

 

[Parmandur]

I guess I will see, but it is still 10% better when it could have been 50%, nothing to write home about

If after a year of playtesting the best thing you can say is that it has new art and a better index, something went wrong...

Realistically, the more times they iterate the game, the more conservative it will probably become.

 

[Mistwell]

the loophole is failure to properly lock down the difference between wielding a weapon with 2h & merely holding it or dropping a 1h weapon in phb pg190 interacting with objects -AND- building other mechanics like the somatic component/focus item requirement in spellcasting as if it was locked down.

5e wants to have it both ways in areas like this and it sets the stage to slap the GM if they ever dare tell a player "no that's not gonna work". You keep defending the looseness for fun reasons and kicking the problem linked to it off to the side as if the two had nothing to do with each other when one is only a problem because it expects the other to be locked down & presents a trap as if it should.

All I am doing is discussing what the rules are, not how I change them for my games when I am the DM. I do tend to run it a lot looser. But we're discussing Vex and how it is, and how compares to other Weapon Masteries and impacts a class like Monks. And it really does stink. It's just not nearly as good as the other Weapon Masteries, and is nearly useless for the Monk despite it being their main weapons. But the designers are claiming it's powerful. NOBODY has come up with why it's "powerful" in any way. The best anyone could come up with is if you have a ton of attacks and it increases the die it adds more damage. Which...is still very weak.

 

[Parmandur]

I still thought the game would be backwards compatible WITH many of the experimental BS they were tossing in those UAs. This doesn't even move the needle anymore. It's as much a new edition as Tasha's is.

They were careful to only propose changes which could have worked, it is true. But I think a lot of people were seeing the early tests as the tip of yhe iceberg rather than a maximalist, pie in the sky experiment...but Crawford was always honest on how this would go down. Not his first rodeo.

 

[mamba]

Realistically, the more times they iterate the game, the more conservative it will probably become.

yeah, clearly the trajectory we are on. I liked it best before they listened to anyone. Now it is not even really worth getting any more, and we still have three more tests to dial things back to 0

If they had not thrown out anything and instead iterated on it, it would imo be a great version, as it stand it is ... 5e all over again

 

[Parmandur]

yeah, clearly the trajectory we are on. I liked it best before they listened to anyone. Now it is not even really worth getting any more, and we still have three more tests to dial things back to 0

If they had not thrown out anything and instead iterated on it, it would imo be a great version, as it stand it is ... 5e all over again

That's Evergreen. I think they have manages to pull it off.

 

[Remathilis]

yeah, clearly the trajectory we are on. I liked it best before they listened to anyone. Now it is not even really worth getting any more, and we still have three more tests to dial things back to 0

Cynical as I am, I'm pretty sure we're not getting zero. Weapon mastery alone proves that. But I'm going to assume that going forward, we're not going to see anything more radical than what Tasha included or what a strong dose of errata would offer. I also think there are a few "no way are we reprinting this" changes that feedback won't move the dial on. It's just at this point it's hard to actually assume any given change, even ones that had appeared settled upon, will happen. I love cunning strike, but I won't assume that the concept is even a lock until that phb is in my hands. It could appear in the next playtest packet and then go poof. Whose to say.

At this point, the only thing I would say with certainly is that racial ASI is out and level 1 feats are in. Everything else is still a coin toss.

 

[mamba]

That's Evergreen. I think they have manages to pull it off.

maybe, but I am much less happy about that than you are. To me this round of improvements would have benefitted an evergreen version immensely. Instead we stick with the kludges we had for the last 10 years already.