D&D (2024) Revisiting Classes from OneD&D


log in or register to remove this ad

DEFCON 1

Legend
Supporter
Do we actually know that it had outright majority opposition?
From what I remember in Jeremy's video about it I think he said that the templates they gave us scored low. But all of us who saw the playtest could tell right away that they were basic templates and had no real oomph to them, no bells and whistles, nor were they reflective of the stuff that 5E14 wildshape would give us. So I don't think it would have been a surprise to them to see what they gave us as ranked low. Whether the concept of templated wildshape on the whole scored low-- that I don't think we know... only that these specific templates for wildshape did.

But if they knew that going in and all they were checking was whether templates as a concept could/would be accepted (even when they showed up in the crappy form they gave us)... then they could evolve the ideas further. As I said when the packets were first released to us... they probably didn't see the point of creating a full-fledged template system that incorporated and balanced two dozen special abilities that came from all the standard animals in the back of the PHB... only to then discover that no one wanted templates regardless. That would have been a massive waste of time and energy. So instead they gave us the basic templates they did and waited to see how people felt and responded to the templates as a concept first... and then they could begin to iterate on them if it seemed like templates were not dismissed out of hand.

In truth we really won't know the full results until we get the next UA packet that has the next iteration of druids in them. At that point we'll discover whether templates as a concept were completely thrown out and we are indeed going back to using 5E14 animal statblocks... or if they just iterate on the template concept to make them more acceptable to more people.
 

Vael

Legend
Do we actually know that it had outright majority opposition?

I went back to the video, and to paraphrase ... it's a slight majority of those that hated the idea of templates over those that really liked the templates. He also said that the main goal is to make Druids easier to play, and that the next playtest Druid will likely have a brand new way of doing wildshape.
 

At first I hated the new wild shape but thought on it and found it to be a good idea. As many have said, it could use some more hammering out. I like the idea of easily using the stat block. My daughter is a druid and she's learning the game. I just used the creature cards and picked out some beast and added it to her character binder. That way she doesn't get overwhelmed with the choices and spend time digging in the other books. I feel like there's a happy medium between the two mechanics but I'm no designer.
 

Dausuul

Legend
I very much like the idea of druids choosing one wild shape, or a few of them, rather than having the entire universe of shapes available at all times. Then put a list of beast statblocks in the PHB, all of them with stats that scale by level.

Perhaps the default druid chooses a single wild shape, swappable on level-up. Then moon druids could have three shapes instead of one, and swap them out after a long rest.

These statblocks could also be used for polymorph, and for druidic summon spells.
 

Conquest is I'm the top 3 Paladin Subclasses, so I think that rounds out the '14 PHB three options.
Wow, I'd be shocked if Devotion - the classic paladin! - doesn't make the cut.
I very much like the idea of druids choosing one wild shape, or a few of them, rather than having the entire universe of shapes available at all times. Then put a list of beast statblocks in the PHB, all of them with stats that scale by level.

Perhaps the default druid chooses a single wild shape, swappable on level-up. Then moon druids could have three shapes instead of one, and swap them out after a long rest.

These statblocks could also be used for polymorph, and for druidic summon spells.
I like this idea a lot! Though I think the generic druid should get more than one. Two sounds about right, with moon druid getting four.
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
Wow, I'd be shocked if Devotion - the classic paladin! - doesn't make the cut.

I like this idea a lot! Though I think the generic druid should get more than one. Two sounds about right, with moon druid getting four.
Oh, we already know Devotion is in, they texted it. I reckon the other 3 Paladin Subclasses are probably Vengence Ancients, and Conquest.
 

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
I went back to the video, and to paraphrase ... it's a slight majority of those that hated the idea of templates over those that really liked the templates. He also said that the main goal is to make Druids easier to play, and that the next playtest Druid will likely have a brand new way of doing wildshape.
I’m pretty sure they’re going to do beast stat blocks, but instead of being able to pick any of them within CR and movement type limits, you’ll have a small curated list of specialized forms, and a sidebar or something will say that the player can change descriptive details of the forms if they want to.
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
I’m pretty sure they’re going to do beast stat blocks, but instead of being able to pick any of them within CR and movement type limits, you’ll have a small curated list of specialized forms, and a sidebar or something will say that the player can change descriptive details of the forms if they want to.
My guess, keep the option to choose any Beast within certain parameters, but provide a few templates in the Druid section for ease of use.
 


Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top