WotC Survey Result: Classes OK, Eberron Needs Work

WotC has posted the latest D&D survey results. The survey covered the character classes not included in the previous survey - the barbarian, bard, monk, paladin, sorcerer, and warlock - and the recent Eberron material. Overall, it reports general satisfaction, with concerns in specific areas. The big ticket issues were sorcerer options, monk Way of the Four Elements opton, and more sweeping issues with the Eberron stuff, icluding the warforged and artificer. Mike Mearls says, but doesn't announce, that "I expect that you’ll see some revisions to the Eberron material before the end of the year."

The survey report is as follows:

Overall, the barbarian, bard, monk, paladin, sorcerer, and warlock all graded very well. The areas of concern were limited to specific areas of the classes.

For instance, we’ve heard consistent feedback that the sorcerer doesn’t offer enough options within the class. Not everyone is excited about the wild mage, thus leaving some players with only the dragon sorcerer as an option. It’s no coincidence that we showed off a favored soul option for the sorcerer in Unearthed Arcana. Plus, we have another sorcerer option on tap for that article series.

We also saw some dissatisfaction with the monk’s Way of the Four Elements option. Feedback indicates that this path focuses too much on adding more ways to spend ki points, rather than giving new options or maneuvers that a monk can use without tapping into that resource. We’re doing some monk design right now that used the Way of the Four Elements as an option, so we’ve shifted that future work in response to that feedback.

Like with the first wave of class feedback, things remain very positive. The issues we’ve seen look like they can be resolved by trending toward what people liked in our future design. Nothing stood out as needing serious changes.

The Eberron material, as you can expect for stuff that is in draft form, needs some more refinement. The changeling will likely have its ability scores and Shapechanger ability tweaked. The shifter scored well, so expect a few shifts there (pardon the pun) but nothing too dramatic.

The warforged had the most interesting feedback. I think we’re going to take a look at presenting a slightly different approach, one that ties back into the original race’s armored body options to make them feel more like innately equipped characters.

The artificer still needs a good amount of work, so that one will go back to the drawing board. I think the class needs a more unique, evocative feature that does a better job of capturing a character who crafts and uses custom items. We played it too conservatively in our initial design.

I expect that you’ll see some revisions to the Eberron material before the end of the year. Unearthed Arcana is proving a useful resource in giving new game content every month while giving us the chance to test drive mechanics.

Thank you all for taking part in these surveys and making our job of producing great RPG content much easier. I’m looking forward to seeing how our work evolves and hope you enjoy the option of weighing in on our work.

 

[Mr Fixit]

Well, to be honest, isn't there a somewhat loud contingent of people that has pretty much that same objection to bard: that he's too spell dependent and that his songs aren't differentiated and/or unique enough? There is some truth to that, though I'm personally very fond of 5E bards.

 

[TwoSix]

Well, to be honest, isn't there a somewhat loud contingent of people that has pretty much that same objection to bard: that he's too spell dependent and that his songs aren't differentiated and/or unique enough? There is some truth to that, though I'm personally very fond of 5E bards.

It may have been discussed in the past.

 

[Wrathamon]

Am I the only one who thinks the artificer should be a subclass of the bard, not the wizard?

Heavy skill focus. Better armor and weapons. A focus on using magic to affect others.

Okay, the use of Cha rather than Int doesn't fit, nor does much of the flavor. But as a mechanical skeleton, I think it's a better starting point.

I am in the Bard Camp and mentioned it in the survey. The Collage of Artifice.

 

[Staffan]

I am in the Bard Camp and mentioned it in the survey. The Collage of Artifice.

The bard is a mechanically sound option, but fails the flavor test - mainly because subclasses are additive and not subtractive. That is, the College of Artifice would make you a bard who does artifice, but you're still a bard. It might have worked if bard colleges were a 1st level thing (like the cleric's domains), but not when adding them at 3rd level. You have proficiency in a bunch of music instruments, and you inspire people through song. That's why I made my artificer into its own class, but borrowing heavily from the bard and reskinning as appropriate (e.g. minor healing concoctions instead of Song of Rest).

 

[I'm A Banana]

Hell, by that logic, a BARD should be a refluffed wizard since its song magic is just "spells". I could see it as a wizard subclass; focus on enchantment/divination with a few bonus abilities (jack of all trades, song of healing, counter song) and proficiencies tacked on via subclass. Just like your artificer, no?

Anything could be folded into anything. You could just have one Ur-Class, call it Adventurer, and call it a day. Anything could be separated from anything. You could have one unique class for every skill/weapon/armor/spell role style out there. What becomes a class and what does not is largley arbitrary.

What matters in 5e is that if you decide something is a class, it needs to be big enough to be an independent class.

A bard in 5e earns its place as distinct from a wizard/sorcerer/warlock/etc. by having class features that are not spellcasting. Inspiration, Jack of All Trades, and Expertise all serve to define the Bard in their own roles, in ways that separate it from the other classes.

How well that works is probably open to some discussion, and one could argue that these abilities "don't matter" (I'd beg to differ, but it's pretty clearly a judgement call). The important thing is to realize that the goal of those abilities is to separate the bard and make it distinct from other spellcasters (even if it fails in that goal).

An artificer needs that, too. It needs its Bardic Inspiration, its Divine Domain, its Wild Shape, its Arcane Recovery (just to pick from among the full-casting classes). It is not enough to say "it makes items" - every spellcaster can do that. It is not enough to say "it makes items on the fly" or "it infuses magic into items" (ritual casting does the former, normal spellcasting does the latter). What does it do that no one else can? And I mean literally - that no one else can. The artificer's central narrative schtick in 3e and 4e - putting magic into items - is not sufficiently special or unique, so what is?

This is hardly an intractable problem. One idea might be to have floating "infusion dice" that you can trade off for some pseudo-magical effects (not unlike a battle master's expertise dice or a bard's inspiration dice). Something like, I dunno...

[sblock]
Infusion Dice
You know how to produce magical effects from raw materials, allowing the latent energy in wood, stone, crystal, and bone to bubble to the surface. Beginning at 1st level, you have a pool of infusion dice, which are d6's, equal to your Intelligence modifier plus your class level. When you infuse an object with arcane energy (a process taking 10 minutes, that lasts for 1 hour), you can imbue one or more of these dice into it as well, providing a specific kind of enhancement. At 1st level, you know two infusions, and you learn more infusions as you gain levels. The vocation you practice may also add infusions to your list...
LEVEL 1 INFUSIONS
Recovery: Someone using the infused object can take their action to heal HP equal to the infusion dice placed in the object. They must use all infusion dice at once.

Destruction: Someone who hits with an attack using the infused object can deal extra piercing, slashing, bludgeoning, fire, cold, acid, thunder, or lightning damage. Choose the damage type when you infuse the object. The user can only use one infusion die at a time.

Resistance: Someone holding the infused object in a hand can use two infusion dice to gain resistance to piercing, slashing, bludgeoning, fire, cold, acid, thunder, or lightning damage. Choose the damage type when you infuse the object. An object with less than two infusion die cannot be activated to achieve this effect.

Enhancement: Someone holding the infused object in a hand can use three infusion die to gain advantage on a single ability check, attack roll, or saving throw. Choose the type of roll when you infuse the object. An object with less than three infusion die cannot be activated to achieve this effect.
MYTHAL-WEAVER INFUSIONS
(area invisibility, enchantment, illusion, etc.)
RUNE-CARVER INFUSIONS
(+x to attack/damage or AC, improved crits, etc.)
ALCHEMIST INFUSIONS
(poison, fire, paralysis, domination, healing, etc.)
WARFORGER INFUSIONS
(give allies temp hp, heal wounds, enhance morale, etc.)

Personal Energy
At 2nd level, as long as an item you have infused doesn't leave your possession, its duration doesn't end. You don't get back any infusion dice you infused into the item for as long as the item is infused. The moment you lose posession of the item, the infusion lasts for 1 hour longer, even if you later pick the item back up.

Quick Fix
At X level, if you have the remains of a destroyed object, you can spend 1 infusion die to repair it entirely. It is a mundane item when repaired like this, and any magic or infusions it had are still lost.

Gather Energy
At X level, you can spend your action to gain X infusion dice that last for 1 minute. These dice can be infused into items you possess, but lose their infusions if you cease to possess them.

...etc.
[/sblock]

...but whatever it WOULD do, what would grind my gears is if the thing appeared as an independent class with little more than a thinly veiled warlock-infusion list or a bardic inspiration mimic or whatever. That's not a new class, it's a fresh coat of paint and some MS Word jargon replacement.

 

[Zaran]

The bard is a mechanically sound option, but fails the flavor test - mainly because subclasses are additive and not subtractive. That is, the College of Artifice would make you a bard who does artifice, but you're still a bard. It might have worked if bard colleges were a 1st level thing (like the cleric's domains), but not when adding them at 3rd level. You have proficiency in a bunch of music instruments, and you inspire people through song. That's why I made my artificer into its own class, but borrowing heavily from the bard and reskinning as appropriate (e.g. minor healing concoctions instead of Song of Rest).

Same goes for a wizard. I really think WotC just needs to make a new class.

 

[Minigiant]

Let's talk about the monk info.

So apparently the design team knew people wanted to be fire and earth benders but they didn't know that they wanted to shoot fire every turn.

Could this mean a martial arts variant?

 

[Remathilis]

An artificer needs that, too. It needs its Bardic Inspiration, its Divine Domain, its Wild Shape, its Arcane Recovery (just to pick from among the full-casting classes). It is not enough to say "it makes items" - every spellcaster can do that. It is not enough to say "it makes items on the fly" or "it infuses magic into items" (ritual casting does the former, normal spellcasting does the latter). What does it do that no one else can? And I mean literally - that no one else can. The artificer's central narrative schtick in 3e and 4e - putting magic into items - is not sufficiently special or unique, so what is?

NOW we're getting somewhere!

Your infusion dice idea is a good start. Mine was to give them "proto-magic items" that only function when the artificer is near (a recharge mechanic of some kind to justify it). He could hand them out to the party or others, but they stop functioning within 24 hours if the artificer isn't there to recharge them during a long rest. (Might help explain why magic items in Eberron would be harder to buy in 5e; people don't trust any but reputable dealers!) Every level, they can take a new gadget to use (limited by level, with minimum levels for certain gadgets). The gadgets can replicate certain magical items (like cloaks of elvenkind or eyes of the eagle) or some "new" ones could be invented (such as goggles of arcane discovery, which mimics identify). Not all items can be made using the gadget system; the list is limited to those which won't break the game.

So an artificer effectively has a pool of magic items accounted for in class abilities; ones he can loan out to others (as long as he remains close to recharge) or use himself. This replicates crafting without the openness and potential abuse of the DMG system. (Or indeed, even using the DMG crafting system; permanent item creation could be a lost art if the DM wants and artificers still exist to make temp items). Add on some form of potion or scroll ability (for temp spells; I could see the UA versions retweaked as working).

IN THEORY: Its akin to the Invocations system; powerful always-on abilities. IN PRACTICE: its a way to create items without the headaches of flooding the group with items, breaking the Magic Item Economy, or the myriad of other problems at-will crafting creates.

Note that my theoretical artificer here isn't purely a warlock reskin; he lacks high arcana (no 6th-9th level spells), no pact boons, and his spell list is different (partially due to the lack of pact spells). He makes up for that with eventually gaining permanent (no recharge) items or such. Additionally, homonculus (working like a fixed beastmaster) alchemists (bombs baby!) and such could act as subclasses.

 

[I'm A Banana]

he could hand them out to the party or others, but they stop functioning within 24 hours if the artificer isn't there to recharge them during a long rest.

Part of what I looked at with my infusion dice idea was the problem of the party only needing the artificer as an NPC - they can go into town, get their magic items, and leave town, leaving the artificer behind because they basically have all the features the class provides walking around with them. At the end of the day, they come back to town and get topped up. That's not a great class design because it doesn't encourage active use or decision-making, it's just "make the thing, then sit in the back and twiddle your thumbs." It's just off-the-cuff, but stuff like personal energy and gather energy and the 1 hour duration are there to make the player have to be present and have to make active decisions about how to use their turns. I'm not especially pleased with it (still seems anemic to me), but the class needs something to do that is "artificer-y" every time it gets a turn, and also when exploring a dungeon, and also when chatting with the nobles at the banquet (these can be different mechanics). Being able to gather some juice that must be used instantly is part of that solution.

The gadgets can replicate certain magical items (like cloaks of elvenkind or eyes of the eagle) or some "new" ones could be invented (such as goggles of arcane discovery, which mimics identify).

The mimicing is not the right path to go down I think. 5e magic items don't have the "designed for everyday use" feature (and even if they COULD be used like that, they probably SHOULDN'T be, because that makes them much less special), and just looting from spell lists is only going to obscure the narrative and playstyle distinction - the more mimicing you do, the less able to stand on your own two legs you are. If you find some cloaks in an elven ruin, let the wizard tell you what they are. They're the experts in magical whatisits from bygone kajiggers. Artificers make new things as the situation demands, and they're not especially concerned about permanence. They make permanent magic items like anyone else - pay some gold, discover a formula, spend some time. Maybe they do it faster, and they don't need to know the spell (since they don't know spells, they infuse dice), but that's a "ribbon," to use WotC terminology, not a core feature.

Come up with a new mechanic and work with it to discover where IT leads. Let it be authentic to itself. If you are mimicing class abilities or spells or existing game elements too closely, you are just showing how empty your concept of the class is to begin with. It shouldn't NEED much in the way of other class's mechanics. It should be self-contained and complete and original.

The risk there is that your end product doesn't look a lot like the 3e or 4e artificer except in narrative and concept. You get a "playtest sorcerer" situation where what you make is interesting, but it's not really true to the play experience of the older versions of the character type. But if the narrative and concept is more important than the 3e or 4e mechanics, that'll do it.

 

[Celtavian]

Same goes for a wizard. I really think WotC just needs to make a new class.

New class best. Release them with Eberron material. I don't want Artificers in the standard game myself.