D&D (2024) WotC On One D&D Playtest Survey Results: Nearly Everything Scored 80%+!

In a 40-minute video, WotC's Jeremy Crawford discussed the survey feedback to the 'Character Origins' playtest document. Over 40,000 engaged with the survey, and 39,000 completed it. I've summarised the content of the video below.

High Scorers

• The highest scoring thing with almost 90% was getting a first level feat in your background. This is an example of an experimental thing -- like advantage and disadvantage in the original 5E playtests.
• Almost everything also scored 80%+.

About The Scoring System

• 70% or higher is their passing grade. In the 70s is a thumbs up but tinkering need. 80% means the community wants exactly that and WotC treads carefully not to change it too much.
• In the 60s it's salvageable but it really needs reworking. Below 60% means that there's a good chance they'll drop it, and in the 40s or below it's gone. Nothing was in the 50s or below.

Low Scorers

Only 3 things dipped into the 60s --

• the d20 Test rule in the Rules Glossary (experimental, no surprise)
• the ardling
• the dragonborn

The next UA had a different version of the d20 Test rule, and they expect a very different score when those survey resuts come in.

It was surprising that the dragonborn scored lower than the ardling. The next UA will include new versions of both. The main complaints were:

• the dragonborn's breath weapon, and confusion between the relationship between that dragonborn and the one in Fizban's Treasury of Dragons.
• the ardling was trying to do too much (aasimar-like and beast-person).

The ardling does not replace the aasimar. The next version will have a clearer identity.

Everything else scored in the 70s or 80s.

Some more scores:

• new human 83%
• dwarf, orc, tiefling, elf tied at 80-81%
• gnome, halfling tied at 78%

Future installments of Unearthed Arcana

• The next one will have new ardling and dragonborn, a surprise 'guest', and a new cleric. It will be a shorter document than the previous ones, and the one after that is bigger again. Various class groups.
• Warrior group digs into something teased in a previous UA sidebar -- new weapon options for certain types of characters. Whole new ways to use weapons.
• New rules on managing your character's home base. A new subsystem. Create bases with NPCs connected with them, implementing downtime rules. They're calling it the "Bastion System".
• There will be a total of 48 subclasses in the playtest process.
• New encounter building rules, monster customization options.
• New versions of things which appear in the playtest after feedback.

Other Notes

• Playtests are a version of something with the assumption that if something isn't in the playtest, it's still in the game (eg eldritch blast has not been removed from the game). The mage Unearthed Arcana will feature that.
• Use an object and other actions are still as defined in the current Player's Handbook. The playtest material is stuff that has changed.
• Thief subclass's cunning action does not interact with use an object; this is intentional. Removed because the original version is a 'Mother may I?" mechanic - something that only works if the DM cooperates with you. In general mechanics which require DM permission are unsatisfying. The use an object action might go away, but that decision will be a made via the playtest process.
• The ranger's 1st-level features also relied too heavily on DM buy-in, also wild magic will be addressed.
• If you have a class feature you should be able to use it in the way you expect.
• If something is removed from the game, they will say so.
• Great Weapon Fighting and Sharpshooter were changed because the penalty to the attack roll was not big enough to justify the damage bonus, plus they want warrior classes to be able to rely on their class features (including new weapon options) for main damage output. They don't want any feats to feel mandatory to deal satisfying damage. Feats which are 'must haves' violate their design goals.
• Light Weapon property amped up by removing the bonus action requirement because requiring light weapon users to use their bonus action meant there were a lot of bad combinations with features and spells which require bonus actions. It felt like a tax on light weapon use.
• Class spell lists are still an open question. Focus on getting used to the three big spell lists. Feedback was that it would be nice to still have a class list to summarize what can be picked from the 'master lists'. For the bard that would be useful, for the cleric and wizard not necessary as they can choose from the whole divine or arcane list.

The playtest process will continue for a year.

 

[JEB]

Auras, the reach of weapons is effectively higher, oversized weapons doing an extra dice of damage, trouble fitting into dungeons/other Medium-designed spaces in a setting, and the ability to grapple Huge and smaller monsters while you can't be grappled by Small and smaller monsters.

There's a lot of minor benefits from being Large that add up to make them overpowered as a character option. Min-Maxers would pretty much always choose to be Large if they want to be a frontliner. And 5e tries to keep the race options relatively balanced.

They could balance any perceived advantages of Large races with drawbacks (and the opposite for Tiny races), but 5E design has thoroughly abandoned drawbacks for PCs at this point.

 

[Mecheon]

I've always thought Gnome/Halfling should just be different names for the same thing.

Never saw the need to have two similar small races that could just be made into one.

Gnomes and Halfings thing isn't just "Being small". Gnomes are small fey-ish folk with the talking to animals, alongside the tinkerer, and are honestly closer to elves than they are halflings, wheras Halflings are their hobbits with the serial numbers filed off selves

 

[FrogReaver]

As a reference point I wonder what the lowest percent things have gotten on playtests is. I'm betting even the worst things produced end up like 40-50% liked.

 

[Weiley31]

Interestingly, the ONLY Large sized PC race that "exists* in 5E currently is the Rhydan Horse from the Blue Rose Adventurer's Guide. But I don't believe there is mention or even a note about how such a thing would "normally" affect Auras and what not when playing as one.

Rhydan – 5th Edition SRD

I also can't remember EXACTLY where I saw it, but I did come upon a large sized 3PP race that DID state/make a note that despite it being Large in size, it was "treated as being Medium sized" in regard to effects such as Auras and what not. Which I think is a nice compromise.

All I know is that at this rate, if I want to play as an "Orc" that is "huge Statured" and can wield two handed weapons in one hand, then I'll just use the Ogrun from Iron Kingdoms: Requiem.

 

[tetrasodium]

Honestly: Large sized races have their own stuff to deal with so there's a balance factor in that. Trying to fit through spaces, dealing with smaller races, how much food they have to eat. All that stuff. In regard to Oversized Weapons, WoTC should just do it like how Pathfinder does it. An oversized Greatsword goes from 2D6 to 2D8. Etc, etc, etc.

No they don't really have much to deal with anymore

Spoiler: this was removed

Table: Creature Size and Scale​

Tall	Long
Size Category	Attack and AC Modifier	Special Attacks Modifier1	Hide Modifier	Height or Length2	Weight3	Space4	Natural Reach4
Fine	+8	-16	+16	6 in. or less	1/8 lb. or less	1/2 ft.	0 ft.	0 ft.
Diminutive	+4	-12	+12	6 in.–1 ft.	1/8 lb.–1 lb.	1 ft.	0 ft.	0 ft
Tiny	+2	-8	+8	1 ft.–2 ft.	1 lb.–8 lb.	2-1/2 ft.	0 ft.	0 ft.
Small	+1	-4	+4	2 ft.–4 ft.	8 lb.–60 lb.	5 ft.	5 ft.	5 ft.
Medium	+0	+0	-0	4 ft.–8 ft.	60 lb.–500 lb.	5 ft.	5 ft.	5 ft.
Large	−1	+4	-4	8 ft.–16 ft.	500 lb.–2 tons	10 ft.	10 ft.	5 ft.
Huge	−2	+8	-8	16 ft.–32 ft.	2 tons–16 tons	15 ft.	15 ft.	10 ft.
Gargantuan	−4	+12	-12	32 ft.–64 ft.	16 tons–125 tons	20 ft.	20 ft.	15 ft.
Colossal and Colossal+	−8	+16	-16	64 ft. or more	125 tons or more	30 ft.	30 ft.	20 ft.
This modifier applies to the bull rush, grapple, overrun, and trip special attacks. Biped's height, quadruped's body length (nose to base of tail) Assumes that the creature is roughly as dense as a regular animal. A creature made of stone will weigh considerably more. A gaseous creature will weigh much less. These values are typical for creatures of the indicated size. Some exceptions exist.

as was this revision of that.

 

[JEB]

I also can't remember EXACTLY where I saw it, but I did come upon a large sized 3PP race that DID state/make a note that despite it being Large in size, it was "treated as being Medium sized" in regard to effects such as Auras and what not. Which I think is a nice compromise.

Yeah, it's interesting the 5E design team defaulted to "aura would have to scale up" instead of "aura doesn't scale up, sorry".

Kobold Press's take on centaurs also has them Large size, but with a Medium-size torso for armor/weapon purposes. MCDM also provided somewhat more complicated rules for Tiny and Large PCs in an issue of Arcadia.

 

[Charlaquin]

Interestingly, the ONLY Large sized PC race that "exists* in 5E currently is the Rhydan Horse from the Blue Rose Adventurer's Guide. But I don't believe there is mention or even a note about how such a thing would "normally" affect Auras and what not when playing as one.

Rhydan – 5th Edition SRD

That’s 3rd party. And it’s definitely not the only Large PC race in 3rd party materials.

 

[Juomari Veren]

I'm not surprised most things score this high.

People who object to the changes aren't likely to playtest it or bother with filling out any surveys about it. People who like the changes will playtest it and then take the survey expressing how much they like it.

Sort of a self-fulfilling prophecy.

I was pretty critical of a lot of little things (not normally with UA but especially with OD&D so far) and I fill out every survey, but I also love filling out surveys so I acknowledge I am probably just an outlier.

 

[Charlaquin]

Yeah, it's interesting the 5E design team defaulted to "aura would have to scale up" instead of "aura doesn't scale up, sorry".

Kobold Press's take on centaurs also has them Large size, but with a Medium-size torso for armor/weapon purposes. MCDM also provided somewhat more complicated rules for Tiny and Large PCs in an issue of Arcadia.

I like KP’s centaurs a lot, though I must admit I really like the idea of centaurs needing to buy barding instead of regular armor. Gold is such a non-issue in 5e that I’m happy to pay 4x as much for armor just for flavor reasons

 

[Scribe]

No, it's a "D&D has a good thing going on right now, and in no way are they going to be stupid enough to purposefully ruin it". They're obviously allowing for some changes, but not enough to stop the game from being popular and making money.

Indeed. The MTG team did enough to damage that product, we certainly dont need the D&D team trying to rock any boats.