D&D Playtest Survey Results | Player's Handbook | Unearthed Arcana
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 29 янв 2024
- Visit dndbeyond.link/yt_playtest8su... and help shape the future of Dungeons & Dragons.
We realize there was an erroneous release date published with regards to the 2024 players handbook. that was definitely incorrect. The Player's Handbook is NOT releasing in May. (but it will be coming this year) Stay tuned for an official announcement soon...
This playtest document is part of a series of Unearthed Arcana articles that present material designed for the 2024 version of the Player’s Handbook. The material here uses the rules in the 2014 Player’s Handbook, except where noted. After we conclude the public playtest for the Player’s Handbook, Unearthed Arcana will explore material for the Dungeon Master’s Guide and Monster Manual.
#dnd #dungeonsanddragons #unearthedarcana 
Развлечения
Good information here. Looks like everything in PT 8 scored well, they will not be releasing another playtest for the PHB. The new books will not be coming out in May "We will still be working on the books in May."
Hoping we still get a stealth DMG or MM playtest despite him not mentioning it. Kinda like how the Bastions and Cantrips one appeared out of nowhere.
This is why I’m one of your patrons. Thank you, very thoughtful
@@InsightCheck it's mentioned in the description that the DMG and MM will get UA.
@@mrmuffins951 HERO
Your comment here is what I was looking for. You are my go-to authority in DnD playtest analysis!
This sounds promising, but I desperately need a graph of total responses per survey vs. average % score per survey. The scores should increase with each one, but I have to imagine the only people still taking them are generally positive about the update.
Is that information even accessible
You are correct. I stopped doing the surveys because I did not like the direction that they were taking. Not much has changed in the material. I’m keeping to 5e
If you don't like the direction, it's even more important for you to get in the survey.
@@O4OUR yeah imagine not play testing to improve a game as much as possible and then complaining about it.
@@iParaShane why are you even watching this video if you are sticking to 5e?
Forget the playtest, getting 90%+ of people to agree on _anything_ is nearly impossible. Hell, in a 2022 survey 10% of those asked said the earth is flat.
90% got it wrong? Have you people ever seen a map?
That would be why they want 70%
Please be joking @@jeroen92
Probably a fair amount of contrarianism/trolling there, which isn't really a healthy way to approach things either, but still.
@@jeroen92 I guess you are one of those dreaded 10% then.
there are two major roleplaying things I still believe DnD 5e desperately needs: campaign setting guides and a masterwork compendium for all of the gods, patrons, and other extra-planar characters. We haven't had a divine compendium since 3.5e. It's time for an update. And a proper setting guide is important. Obviously, one for the Sword Coast is a good idea, but other settings too. The Feywild, Sigil, The Elemental Planes, The Shadowfell. There's not really any maps or guides whatsoever to running a campaign in the Feywild, which makes it hard to use as a DM. We have some setting guides. Eberron. Avernus. Barovia. But what we really need are tools to help us build campaigns in more settings. We need the building blocks and the materials to build on the foundations that WoTC provides.
A monster encyclopedia with all the creatures from previous edition, and immediately you have unlocked dozens of past adventures to play.
@@giovannistreva1266isn't that just the Monster Manual?
@@fandomonium3789 the monster manual has maybe 1/10 of the creatures appeared in the previous editions.
The only Planescape setting had 3 books for monster. Two more for ravenloft, and so on.
Nah
Thanks for all your hard work and transparency. Playtest 8 was *awesome* and I can’t wait for the new books :).
Hi dad
@@actuallyjoseph 👋🏻
Art within D&D manuals is what drew me into D&D. I am thrilled to hear they are expanding the amount and quality of the art within the new books!
After having fired all their art directors and continuing to use AI in promotional material after supposedly swearing it off? I'm not holding my breath..
@@billbo141they never used it in the first place, artist that were hired used it.
@@billbo141 Lol, my comment was in regards to Jeremy Crawford stating the book was packed with art. I was making an objective statement.
If you're concerned about AI taking jobs become politically active. AI will continue to take jobs until the government steps in. Why pay a worker when you can buy an AI to do their job? It doesn't require benefits, you don't need to give it a raise, and it will only get improve over time. That's not even taking into consideration AI gives employers more bargaining power. They don't need those workers so they can offer lower wages (simple supply and demand economics).
Same, I used to spend hours looking at the art in the D&D 3.5 monster manual and player's handbook as a kid. It was so much fun!
VERY glad to hear the new PHB isn’t coming out in May 2024.
I can have it done right or I can have it done fast … I’ll choose “right” all day long baby!
With good glue in the binding hopefully
Actually I'd rather it comes out May so we can all get started. No matter when it comes out, there will be bugs. Anything created on the internet for the internet will have bugs that need ironed out.
My party and I agreed to wrap up the current campaign by the time the new version comes out, so we can start a new one with the new material. I'm almost a bit relieved that it's not coming out in May, that would have been quite stressful for me as the DM. 😅
Same 😂
We're doing a mini playtest campaign, revising as new PSFs come out. Monk kicked butt lol
We are doing the exact same
Really why? It's all workable no matter if you using 2014 stuff or 2024. He literally said in another video that two characters of the same class would be able to fight together from 2014 and the other from 2024. There's stress no unless you are easily stressed anyway.
@@tlemgr Our campaign is going for 4,5 years now and we thought, it is a good opportunity to start fresh, even though, we don't have to do it and could easily continue or simply update our characters.
I really wonder if they'd be able to do the translated version of these books for a big world wide release. It would be a pretty amazing feat on itself to promote these new rules.
I got my mind set on getting these in Spanish and I'd rather not be forced to wait or search online for the resources these new rulebooks offer
How can they not do another UA when we have something like the Bard, whose most recent playtest relied so heavily on the now removed spell list system? There should be another UA for the remaining spellcasters
There have been 8 playtests already. It has to stop at some point. They will look at it again in 2034.
If they are still "working on the books in May" it means that they will be published for the Holiday Season (mid November). They will need around. 6 months for production and distribution of the books.
As someone who has loved the monk since the beginning of 5E, the revised monk was incredible. I want to play it now. I thought it was close to perfect.
They defintely improved it.
Glad the UA isn't the end all. Heading in the right direction, doesn't mean it is ready. No matter how high they scored.
I still hope they implement the new exhaustion rules, they are so much better to use. They serve as a core mechanic for my Homebrew Dying condition changes as well.
For anyone who cares these are the condition changes i use give them a try:
Stunned [Condition]
While you are subjected to the Stunned Condition, you experience the following effects:
Saving Throw Disadvantage: You have Disadvantage on Strength and Dexterity saving throws.
Limited Activity: You can only use one of either an Action, a Bonus Action or Move on your turn. You also can’t take any Reactions. Additionally, you can't concentrate on spells while in this state and if you use any of these actions to attack, you can only make one attack regardless of other features and if you cast a spell, you first need to succeed on a DC 10 Constitution saving throw to do so.
Exhausted [Condition]
While you are subjected to the Exhausted Condition, you experience the following effects:
Levels of Exhaustion: This Condition is cumulative. Each time you receive it, you gain 1 level of exhaustion. You die if your exhaustion level reaches 10.
d20 Rolls Affected: When you make a d20 Roll (Attack Roll, Ability Check or Saving Throw etc), you subtract your exhaustion level from the d20 roll.
Spell and Ability Save DCs Affected: Subtract your exhaustion level from the Spell save DC of any Spell you cast and any Ability DC you have.
Ending the Condition: Finishing a Long Rest removes 1 of your levels of exhaustion. When your exhaustion level reaches 0, you are no longer exhausted.
Dying [Condition]
You gain this condition when your hit points are equal to 0, and you aren’t immediately dead.
While you are subjected to the Dying Condition, you experience the following effects:
Death Saving Throws: [Standard 5E Death Saving Throw Rules, no changes] happen at the start of your turn before all else.
Crippled: While subject to the Dying Condition, you gain the Stunned and Prone Conditions until you are no longer dying you can not end these conditions in any way.
Active Exhaustion: If you exert yourself or move around while dying, you gain levels of exhaustion as following: If you use an Action, you gain 3 levels of exhaustion. If you use a Bonus Action, you gain 2 levels of exhaustion and if you Move, you gain 1 level of exhaustion.
That was teh one change I was the saddest to see go because I could not understand why. I just cannot imagine that anone couldn't see that the new rules were just objectively better and versatile. And it's how exhaustion works, you don't get suddenly bad at one thing after another instead your performance slowly declines. Currently 2 levels of exhaustion rarely have any impact and after 3 you are barely able to play anymore.
It's a shame that was the last PHB playtest for this project, there were still things I wanted to see another draft of. We got two very different versions of Favored Enemy for the Ranger, I wish we knew where the dev team settled on that feature. I think the Wildheart Barbarian still needs tweaks to the Level 6 options, the ones we got were boring. And I'd love to see another draft of the Circle Of The Sea Druid, since I LOVED the concept but felt the specifics still needed work. I've still got some misgivings about the Warlock, but I may be biased by my utter disdain for the apparently settled change of picking a Pact Boon at Level 1 and a Patron at Level 3, which I think is a terrible idea.
Bard as well, the last time we saw it, the main change had to do with the Arcane, Divine and Primal spell lists, which they got rid of almost immediately afterwards 😅
@@brandonedwright i mean it's pretty safe to assume magical secrets will work pretty much as it did in 5e given that each class has its own spell list again.
Was hoping to get another round of UA for revised spells. Forcecage, Wall of Force, Animate Objects, Shield, these spells need to be dealt with for the 2024 PHB.
I suspect that we'll see some of those spells get "nerfed" in the 2024 books, but probably not in ways that fundamentally alter their nature. (Shield may become a +3, for example). I think that those are the kinds of changes they can do without the need for outside playtesting and feedback.
@@daviddalrymple2284 That's my hope as well, but I'd really like to see some confirmation that they're addressed.
Shield to +3 isn't bad. I'd also like to see Damage dealt to a Wall of Force/Forcecage cause the spellcaster to have to make a Constitution Saving Throw to maintain concentration.
@@marimbaguy715 its perfect for roleplay
Jeremy really came out there in the end with “Do not cite the deep magic to me. I was there when it was written!”
I love that i understand this now! Chronicles of Narnia needs more love...
Yay for updates! Thanks Jeremy & Todd!
I would have really liked additional playtests for the Ranger and "problem" spells. The Ranger especially feels lackluster now in comparison to all the new goodies Rogues, Barbarians, and Monks have received.
Looking forward to 2024 and future announcements!
Since there is no more players play test, but still internal play test, please take another look at Master of Armaments. Fighter needs the choice when they hit with a weapon, on which weapon mastery to use. Choosing which mastery to have each morning is not fun and people will just stick with their favorites. It would be so much better to have a choice to make tatical decision, just like Barbarians now get with Path of the World Tree. Battering Roots lets them choose between 3 options of Push, Topple and the Mastery property of the weapon.
Glad we got some good reception to the changes. I hope the Ranger got some tweaks in the process, cause it was improved, but i think it could still be better.
I really wanted one last playtest with everything consolidated for one last look-over. Now, I have no idea where my favorite classes have landed since the last time feedback was sent out. There's also issues I didn't notice before, like the Light Domain dropping Scorching Ray from the domain spells that I overlooked. I had hoped for one last UA where I could voice that concern.
The last playtest for look over will be the actual product. They will look at it again in 10 years.
We have no real idea what the final Bard is like since the last playtest for them still used the 3 spell lists that they scrapped..
Thank the GODS for the reaction of the community. Finally a Monk worth playing :') I attribute the success of this Unearthed Arcana to Treantmonk!
Facts
Yeah, I agree
Please playtest some modified PHB spells like shield in one of the DMG or MM playtests like you did with cantrips in the Bastions UA. Outlier spells are literally the biggest issue in the entire game
Why is there a constant call for nerfs....shield is fine, but really, leave em alone lol.
Public survey from fans is the last place to get any good feedback on spells. No one will actually PLAYtest it, and just fill it with baseless popular opinions. Its already happened with banishment and spiritual weapon.
@@shadowmancer99 shield is fine... on a wizard with a standing AC of 15. Shield is NOT FINE on a bladesinger with a standing AC of 20+. The wizard should _not_ basically have the highest AC in the party.
@@ilovethelegend its for 1 rnd, does nothing for aoe, or for things that require saves....seriously, no need to blow it out of proportion and every slot used on shield is one LESS slot used on something more impactful to the fight/encounter.
Shield is widely considered THE most widely applicable and impactful first level spell in the game
I look forward to the results of this effort and really hope that the promises for encounter math and spell balancing are delivered on.
Monk finally got what they deserved but I think it kinda need another PT on everything before it completely become permanent
There are a good number of PHB spells that still need work imo
People scored that highly for the monk purely bc it was so bad to start off with. It’s like getting cold water while in a desert. Doesn’t mean water is is the most amazing think you’ve tasted… we’ve just been thirsty for 10 years
Yeah, a "most improved" award hardly means "best", or even "all that good".
Glad Monk and Barbarian changes scored well. I think the ranger scores may be exaggerated as an artifact of being so early in the process.
I like the new conjure spells, but forced movement is going to be really strong with those stacked.
Excited to see what is left to come!
Hoping for some exciting stuff!
So happy that Monk and Barb scored so high. I'm still very worried about moon druid but fingers crossed
I’m not surprised that Monk and Barbarian did well. This was a great UA for them!
I really really think that the direction of giving the Barb and Rogue a form of Combat Maneuver system that is an inherent part of their class and they can use virtually infinitely works really well. My biggest critique of them is that the barbarian one only comes online at level 9 and the rogue one reduces its damage, when rogues already kinda suffer in the damage department.
I think that a really solid direction for the design of martial classes could be to give them some form of this maneuver system at level 5 when they get their second attack. That way it's low enough that they can get it fairly early on in their career, but it's also just high enough to make it hard to multiclass into. So Cunning Strike already applies at level 5, and I think Brutal Strike could be lowered to level 5 as well. Monks do kinda get Stunning Strike at that level which I guess is similar, but I think it'd be nice to maybe expand the options. Maybe re-name the ability Pressure Point attack and have Stunning Strike be just one version of it, with other options to say grapple or disarm people with or without ki could be a solid add. And I know fighters can go for the battlemaster subclass but other kinds of fighters don't get any kind of maneuvers at all. So having something similar baked into the core fighter could be nice too.
I’m really hoping they adopt Larian’s action icon system. I have a 3rd veteran player who didn’t really get 5e, played Baldur’s Gate, and has now started to label every bonus action with a triangle.
I was getting ancy without any updates, glad to see it. Hopefully the next playtest comes soon as well.
antsy
While I definitely agree it's much improved, I'm surprised the Monk scored so high as there's still room for improvement; I think it's a much better foundation than it's ever been, but I still don't like that stunning strike is basically our only special move. I want more control and debuff options. Give us more to do! I feel like there's a risk with these surveys that "positive" is being taken to mean "nothing more needs to be done", the surveys really ought to be geared around letting us rate areas for improvement as I'm not sure it's framed for giving the best results.
Dude if this monk got printed as is we would all be lucky, the ua8 monk is fantastic. Not sure why or where you believe it could be improved without it being taken into OP territory. I do want more tactical options/special moves but I think subclasses can easily account for that now. The base chassis is fixed
The only thing I would add to the base monk is change their Hit Dice to d10 instead of d8, everything else they had done is a dream come true
10 years on and their dev team is still deathly afraid of letting martial characters be strong and useful at all levels of play. they all need fundamental rebalancing and yes I means stronger.
Monks don't need a d10 hit die. They are a skirmisher, not a front liner.
@@Marikk2 it's not even about that, it's about Deflect Attacks more than making up for the difference now that it's usable in melee.
At this point the only change I could ask for Monk would be re-naming Discipline as Focus or Ki.
It's so good now.
Ki is a very weird orientalist term that doesn't really work on most settings. Focus is too close to parhfinder 2e lol discipline works fine. If anything, they should probably change the class name to brawler or pugilist or something other and more generic than monk.
Glad Monk scored well. It deserves it.
I am a bit disappointed last "Survey Results" mentioned "we don't have the results of Bastions and Cantrips yet", and here it seems that survey got skipped entirely. I'd love to know how some of the spell changes there scored.
Don't forget to translate (or at least find good partners to do so) those books to another languages. DnD is for all.
I'm very interested in the improved encounter tools in the DMG.
They used the concept of budget and using that budget to buy parts of the encounter. I hate that concept from the word go.
They simply need to create monsters that are level appropriate, and can hold their on at those levels against a group. I have found that many monsters, especially lower level ones, tend to have only one attack a round. Even if that is an area effect, it makes for monsters that are basically no threat. I have found that choosing creatures that have the most possible attacks and /or special abilities per round for a level not only works, but tends to freak out parties that are used to putting their tank up front while rest of the party whales on the target.
For years (and I am far from the only person who has said this) the Devs have increased the power level of characters, but barely touched on more powerful opponents. Sure, the latest books have had some new monsters, but they are very high level monsters in general. the entire Monster Manual needs revamping to provide characters with what I would consider 'medium' challenges at all levels as a baseline.
I don't want to have to use a chart to create encounters. This is the value for the base party level, plus a bonus because they are strong, plus a bonus based on their magic items... yadayadayada. If you are going to do that make it simple. Put a level number on a monster. Then allow the DM to simply add up those numbers to equal the average level of the party. done. If it's more complicated than that, something is wrong.
A DM should be able to pull out a random encounter from scratch in no more than 15 minutes.
@@johnevans5782 My unpopular opinion is that the guidelines in the 2014 DMG are fine; the problem is in how monsters were designed in 2014, and how their CR was calculated.
"I don't want to have to use a chart to create encounters."
Then don't. 5e works better when decoupled from "encounter balance."
@@Agell That is not my experience as player or DM.
@@johnevans5782 Skill issue.
I really liked this playtest a lot, but I feel strongly there was some stuff not done quite yet. The bard REALLY could've used another pass over, as the last one was popular. But it used an old spell list system no longer in the game. And more importantly there are so many problematic spells that need to be addressed and I hope are. Such as wall of force, forcecage, especially simulacrum, etc.
2:57 surprise surprise, when you give a power boost to a class that’s been needing it for a decade, people are happy. Who would’ve guessed?
Not having a dedicated spell survey might be a mistake.
I completely agree with this. Also we will not have seen anything from the DMG which feeds right into their new monster manual. No feedback on whatever this new encounter builder system is
@@Caiphex The PHB portion of the playtest is complete, not the whole playtest. The DMG and MM playtests are still OTW.
Surveing people on something they definitely wont fairly test or even try is a bad idea.
@@user-ni7ji3fb8m even though we did that for over a dozen spells already
@@user-ni7ji3fb8m It worked fine with counterspell and conjure animals, and honestly not every spell is too dominating either. We've seen plenty of spells sprinkled in so far with glowing reception.
You mean to tell me it's a bad idea to test a new version of witchbolt? Of find traps?
I REALLY hope they include a clear section of how a turn procedure and time tracking works when exploring dungeons this time around.
Nah
We are going to have a much more streamlined encounter building system: Proceeds to describe exactly the 4e rules to the letter.
Yeah I definitely cringed at that. Basically they're saying there's one right way to do encounter design and the majority of DMs will no longer try to think outside the box
@@genlando327plays2 That's not what they're saying at all. Encounter building tools exist to help DMs that are struggling to build balanced encounters, but you don't NEED to follow them at all. One of people's biggest complaints about 5e is that it basically tells a DM to "wing it" which is awful especially with how jank the CR system currently is.
@@genlando327plays2I mean you still Can nothing stopping you that’s just gonna be the new baseline, not like encounter balance is real anyway
I'm glad to see such positive responses and have loved the playtest. I won't lie though not doing a playtest for spells when there are so many 2014 phb "problem spells"' has me a bit worried.
They don’t seem to test anything over level 10 so 1/3 the spell list will probably be unchanged
@@jessemccaughey4231 that seems a bit disingenuous given that the playtest included classes to level 20 and epic boons to take from level 20 onwards. I worry you might be right about spells being unchanged though.
Barbarian capstone ability is STILL +2 to atk/damage after multiple playtests. For a character that’s had a spellcaster making clones and casting wish for 3 levels.
So no, I don’t have faith they really do real work on 15-20.
That’s said, most those problem spells are in the 1-4 spell level range so they should be focusing on the silvery barbs & true strikes
I think the are keeping that internal due to the minefield of public discussion around these spells
I hope the fact that Monk was the 90%s means they are going to keep it that way.
It's pretty much a given at this point. There might some slight changes here and there based on player feedback, wording, slight tweaks to damage, minute buffs/nerfs where needed, etc., but it's pretty much a done deal. You should be able to expect the Monk to essentially be this.
@@zedgathegreat9122 thank goodness for that
Personally I would love if they put out a UA that was basically how they envision the PHB 2024 to look like. Mainly to get a feel for how the classes are shaped up with the latest feedback and the most core systems in their updated versions - like spell lists, actions, weapon mastery.
WotC are touting that OneDND is the one to last (I doubt that's going to happen, but I believe it's going to run for a long while) so I really want the product to turn out stellar.
I had an idea for Weapon Masteries that could apply to Unarmed Strikes, like standard unarmed strikes being Light Finesse Weapons with the Nick Property and heavier ones like a body slam being something with the Push or Topple property.
Monk doesn't need weapon mastery
All unarmed strikes can be used to grapple, push and if I remember correctly, also push prone. No special mastery required.
@@marcweinkauf4727 True, but they deal no damage and only move people 5 feet if they fail the save, whereas my hypothetical Body Slam attack would deal Unarmed Strike Damage (usually 1 + Str modifier) and push people 10 feet, no save (unless the Push Property was supposed to have a save).
@@user-pi8pi3wj7h Monks aren't the only people capable of punching people.
@@rpghorrorstories True, except for the new Warrior of the Hand subclass.
Loving the energy and passion displayed in the video. Very excited to see these changes. Could someone clarify, are these changes for the one dnd thing that's coming out? Or is that a whole seperate project?
You mean to tell me that making the monk an actually playable class made most of the community happy 😮😮
I'm very scared about them not releasing another playtest given some classes haven't been touched since some Universal rules have been changed.
Still bummed they never tried anything interesting w the Ranger. While all other classes attempted interesting, *new mechanics. The Ranger toggled back and forth between Conentration and non-concentration Hunters mark. Then called it a day. SMH
Please keep it so that warlock picks their spell casting modifier! It just makes so much sense with them making deals to get magic (I know originally they were intended to learn the magic from resources given by their patron but most people don’t use that way much). Charisma isn’t necessarily required for that and it makes them even better at multi classes which I think is a good thing.
Regarding the conjuration spells: I don't like them, largely because they completely gut the shepherd druid subclass.
I would have been fine with them reducing the number of creatures to 3. So something like:
1 creature of CR2
2 Creatures of CR1
3 Creatures of CR 1/2 or lower.
That would have driven people more toward choosing one or two creatures, but wouldn't have completely gutted the shepherd druid subclass.
Under the new conjuration spells, many of the shepherd druid abilities have no meaning. The level 14 ability of a shepherd druid has effectively been deleted.
I get that some people don't like the complexity of playing a shepherd druid, and some people REALLY don't like when players don't know how to manage combat with many small creatures (the trick is to not try to micromanage). Unfortunately, those people have a disproportionate voice on the game, and they have to break the toys for the rest of us.
Since they didnt rename the spells, the only good thing is that with the backwards compatibility, I suppose you could just use the 2014 spell versions....hate the conjure X changes. So unnecessary. I still think that the Monk while clearly improved, could have more. No need to take out the weapon masteries....hell I'll just give it them for free. As for Druids, they still need their wild shape upgraded, enough with the nerfing.
I have my doubts that the designers can copy the 4E encounter builder design without nailing down the player math more tightly. It will be easier to build an encounter but will that encounter be genuinely balanced against the average party? Unsure.
I'm glad that Monk and the new conjure spells scored well as I really loved the new monk and while the conjure spells still need tweaking I like them better then the clunky overpowered ones in the phb. But I hope Fighter, Ranger, Wizard, & Bard are going to get some more iteration in internal playtesting.
Fighter could really use their own version of the strike system and the ability to use any weapon mastery they know on any weapon that qualifies for it from the get go.
Rangers really need to be able to mark their prey an unlimited amount of times a day and be able to specialise in knowledge of creatures from the arcane, history, and religion skill not just the nature one.
Wizards are improved but still lack enough thematic features representing their identity as the magic scientist/scholor - and personally I'd prefer if school choice was a class feature akin to pact boon and cleric order, while the subclasses were replaced with something thematically tighter and mechanically broader then the schools.
And the bard could really use more performance and combat features, even if that means decreasing their magic a little bit.
Both my DM and I are very sad that Warlock flex-casting never got revived. That's a home game mechanic were keeping from UA. WotC were complete idiots to axe that.
Then for the Monster Manual I hope they reclassify some of the Monstrosities as Beasts or just add new Beasts cause Moon Druids still need better combat shapes @ higher levels to scale w/ their primary feature which is Wild Shape into BIG MONSTERS.
Don't completely agree. The new druid will have better damage than the previous one and will remain an effective tank. (Of course Less immortal than before).
I'm really looking forward to the new PHB, but it is WILD to me that we're in the release year and we still don't even have an estimated date for release, not even a release Q.
It's hard to get fully hyped when we have no clue when this is coming beyond this year sometime.
yes I COMPLETELY agree
Also, while I'm mostly pleased by the progress on classes in the PHB UA, it's disappointing that this is the last one, as I was really hoping for a UA focused on spells; I know there have been several in previous UAs, but there are a lot of other spells that need rebalancing and it would have been nice to see what you were thinking in these areas, especially whether any of the really OP spells are going to be reigned in to make spellcasters less dominant. If you're not going to release another UA, please at least consider a video discussing the goals of your game balancing. Lastly, I'd also really like to know what plans are for errata in OneD&D; one of 5e's biggest problems was a lack of anything being fixed, many common misconceptions and problems could have easily been addressed by more regular errata and official sage advice.
I can’t wait until September for the updated PHB! However, I am concerned with the Warlock. I really think we need to see another update. The last playtest version is still a bit broken. As thematically it’s my favorite class I want to see the Warlock become a solid choice for a single class build and not just a good option for 1-5 levels in a multiclass build. Here are the main issues I think need to be fixed:
1. Eldritch Blast: In one of your videos, you mentioned a Warlock couldn’t be made a true full caster without nerfing Eldritch Blast. However, in both the current version and the most recent playtest version it’s easily stolen by any class including the 2 Charisma based full casters the bard and the sorcerer and a sorcerer can Quicken EB and cast it twice in a round! Now it only takes one level instead of 2 so it's even worse!
Since clearly, it’s not a problem for them why not make the Warlock a full caster? OK I’m kidding here but EB needs a fix, so it’s not easily stolen by other classes. You did this in the first version by making it scale by Warlock level, but I have another suggestion. Instead scale it the same way you scale Firebolt. Then either in the spell description or as a class feature state that a Warlock of level 5 can spread the damage dice over 2 attacks, at level 11 over 3 and at level 17 over 4. Now starting at level 5 a Warlock using Hex and Agonizing blast does more damage than the other classes could with their 1 level dip!
2. Spell Focused Warlocks: Martial Warlocks have it great with Pact of the Blade but what about spell focused Warlocks? Not so much… Pact of the Tome itself is a good start but there needs to be higher level options that grant a 2nd, 3rd and 4th level spell slots (at levels 5, 7, and 9) that comes back on a long rest. Each of these should grant you some other small feature or allow higher level rituals like the current version offers. I would combine the 4th level spell slot with “gift of the protectors”.
3. Mystic Arcanum: Two issues here. First the spell selection needs to be improved, it’s small and full of duds. But the more important issue is that it is a classic example of your “Potential vs Actual” issue you talk about in many Warlock videos. For example, if I choice Soul Cage for my Infernal Warlock because it fits thematically then on any day, I don’t fight a humanoid I have a spell I can’t use but is just sitting there on my character sheet mocking me! Instead, MA should just give us 6th-9th level spell that come back on a long rest and let us prepare spells like any other caster. Then I can choose multiple spells or upcast spells as needed and not have unused potential resources!
I’ve already submitted similar comments in the survey, but this is just one last “Hail Mary” attempt as I really want the Warlock to be the best version it can be in the next PHB!
Please keep fine tuning weak/strong spells and feats for the new PHB.
Surprised to see no word about what's happening to the bard.... Unless I missed something.
I like the circle of reincarnation and the domain of rebirth if playing a bard college of divinity or cleric. Being able to choose a spell not on the list is great. Like magecraft. Shouldn't that be universal? Also a bard should be able to use more sonic spells. It's kind of their thing. Druids always pictured with druid claws and antlers but no attack stats? Root, living plant, and vine armor for druids. The spear flute for bards.
PLEASE BRING MY PSION BACK!! Look what Badooga did and improve it!! She made it very good but i'm craving for an official one!! PRETTY PLEAASE
Esperando ansioso pela nova edição!
Id love to get a few more details on the indivudual features
Hope we get better definition for price for magic items e ways to build them!
Must be tough after all the layoffs
I really hope weapons and gear actually mean something in this version that's coming. Atm it's kinda just not even worth handing out magic items when characters can go from lvl 1 to 20 and never need an upgrade.
I would hope they take one more look at everything before they send it off.
Could we include Shields in Weapon Mastery? Like using it for a shield bash?
Shield press, Shield jab, Shield roundhouse.
I thought warlock was getting one more UA?
I still have a very hard time believing the new Ranger and Druid have satisfactory scores, let alone the “most improved” like he said for Ranger.
The Ranger still has a lot of the same problems it always had.
And the Druid’s Wild Shape now using your own HP killed any reason you’d tank with it
Druids got some great stuff now.
@@barcster2003 Like the ability to use their own HP instead of the animal's? Thereby making them semi-worthless as tanks since they use a d8 and don't even have a Monk's Patient Defense
@wildrabbit2237 you may argue its not worth but they get some things.
All druids
Wild resurgence let's you trade spell slots and wild shapes a bit. Which means you can focus on one or the other more.
Elemental Fury gives you divine strike or potent spellcasting for druids.
Commune with nature let's you have it on your list. It's not the craziest thing but nice to have.
Nature magician allows you to restore spell slots and wild shape uses, which can be good.
Land druids
You get a free cast of a spell on the circle list.
You can switch the spell lists up to what suits you. Fireball is on the list also.
You can get a resistance and give allies it also.
Moon
You can use your AC, abjuration spells and moonbeam while wild shaped.
Moonlight step let's you teleport around.
Lunar form allows teleporting of allies and moonbeam to be better.
Sea is a totally new subclass that allows for sea storm things.
I am hoping for UA for the DMG and MM even though not sure how to test run those. The responses should be less since there be a lot less people using those new rules.
Will the new PHB include most of the already released subclasses in 5e? I don’t want to lose out on options if my group switches over to the new system just because they haven’t reworked a subclass yet
Definitely not. Old books will still be compatible.
The one thing I never quite got (and missed putting in a survey, not that it guaranteed I’d see it discussed). I’d like to know how they resolve the implied Cosmological Lore of the Path of the World Tree subclass because a lot of it seemed linked to the World Tree Cosmology of 3e, which seems to be a very small amount of material/time to include it, whereas the Great Wheel cosmology is more prevalent in other editions. Just the layout of the planes on those two cosmologies is very different.
Nah
If this was the last UA for the PHB, then it's unfortunate since we won't get a UA just for spells (we really needed that one).
Don’t entirely disagree, but it may be for the best. The remaining changes to spells that the game really needs are primarily nerds to things like Shield or Simulacrum, and nerfs rarely play well in surveys.
@@OverkillDM The thing is there are not only overpowered spells that need a redesign, but underpowered spells as well (Treantmonk made one video for each, titled "WEAK SPELLS (and how to fix them in One D&D): D&D 5e" and "The "Outlier" spells that need fixed in D&D 5e, and how we do it with One D&D" - each list has about 30 spells). Sure, people might be negatively biased towards nerfs, but they're not hostages of survey results. Also, I believe the qualitative feedback (written responses) would still be valuable in that case (since people can use it to pinpoint design issues and unforeseen interactions with other parts of the game). I'm just afraid certain spells might get overnerfed without player input.
I really hope the new 2024 PHB could contain both US and metric measurements, side by side, for everything. Length, weight, distance, range, weapons, spells, etc.
I hope they revise the magic item tables. They are not user-friendly for new DMs
Sounds like we're going to get a "Carefully Polished WOTC errata PDFs" soon after the release of these core books as usual too!
Wildshape still isn't good. Making creatures all give the same AC and health is a huge blow to the shapeshifting FEEL of the class. Just make the wildshape health temporary (so it doesn't stack with other temp hp and can't be healed) and make the druid's Wis add to the creatures AC. That way you can get tanky druids or ones that focus more on speed/damage (although would probably need a slight damage boost). Also not a fan that the moon druid is suddenly all about radiant damage and teleporting. Give moon druids ways to 'taunt' or shield/assist allies to mirror other classes getting stuff to do as a team, or crowd control abilities for animal forms.
Monks are fairly great now I just want to see Stunning Strike usable more than once per turn (and not damage if they fail a save - make it a lesser cc than stun instead).
Also, let martial have access to weapon masteries for all weapons they're proficient with all the time rather than unnecessary bookkeeping juggling two or three per day.
And also, can we change the name of 'd20 test' to 'd20 roll'?
Honestly, that dwarf fighter art is so dope or makes me wanna play a dwarf and i have NEVER played one. I am s fighter main though.
I’m curious if they will add some things from the OSR scene like Shadowdark/Knave/Cairn slot encumbrance or DMG pointcrawl, hexcrawl, and wilderness-as-a-dungeon tools/advice.
Honestly don’t see the positive aspects to the Ranger’s class design. Every other MAD class got huge quality of life improvements, and rogues got even more toys to play with like the rich kids they are.
Could we give Sorcerers and Wizards clubs as proficiencies? Commoners get them and I often pictures rods as arcane focuses that could double as clubs the way staffs double as quarterstaffs.
I was hoping for one more UA for bard and some more of the problem child spells but what will be will be, as long as we get that new monk as is if not better i'm going to be happy.
The tasha/xanathar/... books subclasses are compatible with PHB 2024??
with the new core rules will the old subclasses work with the new rules?
does mark hoppus work for mages of shoreline?
Yey! Been waiting a couple months for the next UA!
Hoping for a revised Transmuter for 9pt
What does the latest iteration on Counterspell look like?
The spells all got high ratings because they got majorly buffed. Personally I think Cure woulds is a bit too buffed. I like the initial increase to 2d8 is solid but I dont think I'd scale with the full 2d8 per level. Personally the additional 1d8 seems fine once you've boosted the base amount.
Is any of the playtest data or other D&D gameplay data available for download? I’d be really curious to explore it from a DM perspective. Like which of the three pillars do players enjoy most, how long do average sessions last, what is the average level of players? This would be fascinating data to understand and use to create better sessions and campaigns!
Glad someone at this company still has their job... not a joke.
What is going to happen to the currently owned books on D&D beyond? Is there any sort of migration path set up? Will the new book support the old subclasses?
What were you thinking with that light?
I sure hope Draconic Sorcerer gets some better changes. There is still a massive divide in power and versatility between Draconic and the Tasha's subclasses. Giving them a slightly better AC, not having to spend SP to get a damage resistance, and their capstone being less terrible (but still useless) does nothing to actually help raise the subclass up to the standards the Tasha subclasses set.
Great feedback! Convince your executives to stop laying off your talent and to stop focusing on their stock buybacks
For the 2024 Player Handbook, (or an "expansion book") I would like to make a request.
Could we get official rules for playing epic (beyond level 20) characters?
Even if it probably won't be the most played options...
Please give us just one more bard so it can actually be playtested for the love of all things D&D
I wonder if the developers were getting opinions from non-fan testers or not. D&D is so prevalent in the West that I am afraid if they forget that there's always new players and to make it friendly for them.