WoTC has decided that the PHB will have 12 classes
It's not totally clear they have decided that. They've said the new PHB will contain 48 subclasses, and have repeatedly said that all 12 classes in the current PHB will be included. They've been a tiny bit dodgy about Artificer.
Which is not to say you're wrong! This can't be a last minute editorial decision for them; publishing is complex; etc. They have way more design pinned down than they are letting on, and much of the playtest material is slow-rolled hype-building and "testing the waters."
My favority (probably wrong) theory about this is they're hiding an "actually there will be 16 classes in the PHB" surprise. With Artificer as the "new" expert, alongside a new warrior, priest, and mage. With the "48 subclasses" being 3x16 instead of 4x12.
Well, don't be upset. WoTC already knows how 6e is going to be, what they are doing is refining the rules. But the new manual has already been structured for a long time, and the philosophy that it will have is already established. In the case at hand, they already know that the PHB is going to have 12 classes, and what subclasses each of them is going to have. They know more or less the extension that it will have. They know how many and what chapters it will have. Etc... Based on that, they already have the different releases of the first waves of 6e ready. It is obvious that the PHB, the DM guide, and a MM will come out. After that, they will publish a first campaign, and probably a campaign setting. And they already know what it will be. It is even likely that the campaign is already written (if not that they already have several written). It will only be necessary to retouch the matches according to the final result of the rules.
But above all you have to know that a publisher, like any company, has to have a roadmap of its products long before they go on sale. They would be irresponsible if they didn't. And you also seem to think that the PHB is now writing it on the fly. It is not like this. The PHB has already been written for a long time. And surely they already have a cover, interior illustrations, etc... What remains is to refine the rules themselves, something that is being done with Playtest. And then it will be edited, layout, and printed.
WoTC has decided that the PHB will have 12 classes
It's not totally clear they have decided that. They've said the new PHB will contain 48 subclasses, and have repeatedly said that all 12 classes in the current PHB will be included. They've been a tiny bit dodgy about Artificer.
Which is not to say you're wrong! This can't be a last minute editorial decision for them; publishing is complex; etc. They have way more design pinned down than they are letting on, and much of the playtest material is slow-rolled hype-building and "testing the waters."
My favority (probably wrong) theory about this is they're hiding an "actually there will be 16 classes in the PHB" surprise. With Artificer as the "new" expert, alongside a new warrior, priest, and mage. With the "48 subclasses" being 3x16 instead of 4x12.
Oh well yeah. They might have a different structure in mind. What I want to say is that they already know what it will be, and although it is not impossible, it is very difficult for it to change because it would lead to a lot of problems. What I do assure you is that they are not going to release 4 classes that have not been tested on Playtest. That sure won't happen. But that they still haven't planned 12 classes, but 16, 13 or whatever, it's perfectly possible. Unlikely, but possible.
What I do assure you is that they are not going to release 4 classes that have not been tested on Playtest. That sure won't happen.
If they were going to do surprise-new-classes, they would show them off closer to ultimate release, to build maximum hype in a carefully timed manner.
Possible, but not necessarily so: they’ve already put potential new species in the play test, so it doesn’t look like they’re consistently holding back surprise additions. Admittedly, if they were wanting to add more, they’d be wise to test and tune up the existing classes first before putting new ones up for consideration. Personally, I don’t think we’ll see classes beyond the current PHB twelve, but I failed Divination school.
Well, don't be upset. WoTC already knows how 6e is going to be, what they are doing is refining the rules. But the new manual has already been structured for a long time, and the philosophy that it will have is already established.
And you know this how? Seriously, what's your source?
The PHB has already been written for a long time. And surely they already have a cover, interior illustrations, etc... What remains is to refine the rules themselves, something that is being done with Playtest. And then it will be edited, layout, and printed.
Assuming your information is accurate, and you're not talking out of your ass. There are so many thoughts here.
Like:
Clearly, the play test process is for nought. If WotC has had the books already written, and the book essentially set in stone (as you said yourself) then clearly they have no intention of making large, structural changes to the 6e ruleset should player feedback highlight severe issues that WotC tries to push on us in the playtest process! So what on earth is the point? So that you can point and say, "look, we listened and made changes based on community feedback" when the changes are superficial at best.
And even that aside, if the entirety of the book was already written, why did they not just drop that in our laps so that we could do a PROPER play test of the ruleset?
Thank you very much, Irrelevant_Guy for confirming that WotC is out here, screwing us over YET AGAIN!
Well, don't be upset. WoTC already knows how 6e is going to be, what they are doing is refining the rules. But the new manual has already been structured for a long time, and the philosophy that it will have is already established.
And you know this how? Seriously, what's your source?
The PHB has already been written for a long time. And surely they already have a cover, interior illustrations, etc... What remains is to refine the rules themselves, something that is being done with Playtest. And then it will be edited, layout, and printed.
Assuming your information is accurate, and you're not talking out of your ass. There are so many thoughts here.
Like:
Clearly, the play test process is for nought. If WotC has had the books already written, and the book essentially set in stone (as you said yourself) then clearly they have no intention of making large, structural changes to the 6e ruleset should player feedback highlight severe issues that WotC tries to push on us in the playtest process! So what on earth is the point? So that you can point and say, "look, we listened and made changes based on community feedback" when the changes are superficial at best.
And even that aside, if the entirety of the book was already written, why did they not just drop that in our laps so that we could do a PROPER play test of the ruleset?
Thank you very much, Irrelevant_Guy for confirming that WotC is out here, screwing us over YET AGAIN!
It’s not that it’s written, it’s that they know how long it will be. They have a page count likely worked out, within a small margin. Then you make the copy fit the space. That’s a common practice in publishing. The books gets fitted into the page count, you don’t set the page count to fit the copy. You don’t have it written, you just know how many words you’re allowed/required to use for each part.
And even that aside, if the entirety of the book was already written, why did they not just drop that in our laps so that we could do a PROPER play test of the ruleset
These playtests are closer to market research than real playtests. (The "real" playtesting may be happening in-house, with people who sign an NDA.)
The way that spell lists seem to be implemented in 1D&D looks particularly awkward for the Artificer. They have explicitly said that it is an Arcane caster, which thematically fits well. However, it has a substantial proportion of spells from the other lists, and considerable omissions from the Arcane list. Having skimmed the current list of Artificer spells, only enchantment spells are unrepresented. Evocation spells are common among the cantrips but the big hitters like Fireball are missing from the main list. Conjuration spells are present but not the teleport spells or many of the summoning spells. There isn’t an obvious way to neatly convert the current list into a 1D&D “choose spells from the Arcane list, but only from the W, X, Y and Z schools”, and there’d have to be a long list of “you also have these spells”, like the Bard’s Songs of Restoration feature.
A lot of work, it would seem, to fit the Artificer into the PHB. The work will have to be done at some point, but they’ve got a lot on their plates with the PHB without adding that.
This is assuming you want Artificers to be the exact same as in 5e, which is a silly assumption.
I'd say give 'em conjuration, transmutation, abjuration, and evocation. Divination, enchantment, necromancy, and illusion aren't very Artificer-y. If they decide that they'll make Artificer the half martial it always deserved to be, then you can give the axe to evocation as well.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
The way that spell lists seem to be implemented in 1D&D looks particularly awkward for the Artificer. They have explicitly said that it is an Arcane caster, which thematically fits well. However, it has a substantial proportion of spells from the other lists, and considerable omissions from the Arcane list. Having skimmed the current list of Artificer spells, only enchantment spells are unrepresented. Evocation spells are common among the cantrips but the big hitters like Fireball are missing from the main list. Conjuration spells are present but not the teleport spells or many of the summoning spells. There isn’t an obvious way to neatly convert the current list into a 1D&D “choose spells from the Arcane list, but only from the W, X, Y and Z schools”, and there’d have to be a long list of “you also have these spells”, like the Bard’s Songs of Restoration feature.
A lot of work, it would seem, to fit the Artificer into the PHB. The work will have to be done at some point, but they’ve got a lot on their plates with the PHB without adding that.
This is assuming you want Artificers to be the exact same as in 5e, which is a silly assumption.
I'd say give 'em conjuration, transmutation, abjuration, and evocation. Divination, enchantment, necromancy, and illusion aren't very Artificer-y. If they decide that they'll make Artificer the half martial it always deserved to be, then you can give the axe to evocation as well.
However artificer gets changed, I'm hoping that they keep the part where the subclass is most of the power budget. I love that about them, as each subclass feels almost like its own class due to playing so differently.
The way that spell lists seem to be implemented in 1D&D looks particularly awkward for the Artificer. They have explicitly said that it is an Arcane caster, which thematically fits well. However, it has a substantial proportion of spells from the other lists, and considerable omissions from the Arcane list. Having skimmed the current list of Artificer spells, only enchantment spells are unrepresented. Evocation spells are common among the cantrips but the big hitters like Fireball are missing from the main list. Conjuration spells are present but not the teleport spells or many of the summoning spells. There isn’t an obvious way to neatly convert the current list into a 1D&D “choose spells from the Arcane list, but only from the W, X, Y and Z schools”, and there’d have to be a long list of “you also have these spells”, like the Bard’s Songs of Restoration feature.
A lot of work, it would seem, to fit the Artificer into the PHB. The work will have to be done at some point, but they’ve got a lot on their plates with the PHB without adding that.
This is assuming you want Artificers to be the exact same as in 5e, which is a silly assumption.
I'd say give 'em conjuration, transmutation, abjuration, and evocation. Divination, enchantment, necromancy, and illusion aren't very Artificer-y. If they decide that they'll make Artificer the half martial it always deserved to be, then you can give the axe to evocation as well.
However artificer gets changed, I'm hoping that they keep the part where the subclass is most of the power budget. I love that about them, as each subclass feels almost like its own class due to playing so differently.
Agreed. The Armourer and Battle Smith are close to the Paladin and Ranger in function, while the Artillerist is more of an arcane blaster, like the basic Warlock, and the Alchemist is a support character. Broadly, I think they’ve done a good job of creating a character that can be taken in a variety of directions.
Well, don't be upset. WoTC already knows how 6e is going to be, what they are doing is refining the rules. But the new manual has already been structured for a long time, and the philosophy that it will have is already established.
And you know this how? Seriously, what's your source?
It's just common sense. Do you really think that WoTC doesn't have a business plan for the next few years? Do you think companies improvise on the fly? It's how any business works.
And as an example I am going to give you my sector, which is technology. We have planned the launches for the next two years, and we are beginning to plan what we will launch in the coming years. The end-of-year release is now fully prepared, and samples for reviews will begin to be submitted in April. Right now what will come out in 2024 is being tested, and the final product is being refined. What is in design and development is for 2025/2026. Obviously there are margins, and the exact date of each release is not set until several months in advance. But the roadmap is established years in advance. A serious company cannot improvise, that would be a disaster.
WoTC has planned what will come out in 2024, have no doubt. And they probably already have a pretty good idea of the 2025/2026 releases. There can always be changes, and a release scheduled for Q3 2025 can be brought forward or delayed due to a number of factors. Even cancel. But of course they have a business plan developed for the next few years. How could they not? It is how any company works.
WoTC has decided that the PHB will have 12 classes
It's not totally clear they have decided that. They've said the new PHB will contain 48 subclasses, and have repeatedly said that all 12 classes in the current PHB will be included. They've been a tiny bit dodgy about Artificer.
Which is not to say you're wrong! This can't be a last minute editorial decision for them; publishing is complex; etc. They have way more design pinned down than they are letting on, and much of the playtest material is slow-rolled hype-building and "testing the waters."
My favority (probably wrong) theory about this is they're hiding an "actually there will be 16 classes in the PHB" surprise. With Artificer as the "new" expert, alongside a new warrior, priest, and mage. With the "48 subclasses" being 3x16 instead of 4x12.
They specifically stated that the 48 is intended to mean 4 per class. See here at 18:18:
That doesn't mean Artificer is dead in the water necessarily (though it's not looking good for them), but it does mean 4 subclasses per class is what they're shooting for currently.
They specifically stated that the 48 is intended to mean 4 per class. See here at 18:18:
Huh. "That will appear in this playtest process." Not necessarily how many will be in the PHB.
(Can't tell if he's being cagey or a little imprecise with his wording.)
This is the PHB playtest though. I think it's eminently reasonable to conclude that they aren't going to hide a bunch of subclasses away for full release without getting playtested.
That would however mean that cleric and wizard are getting downsized (at least, in core.)
It's not totally clear they have decided that. They've said the new PHB will contain 48 subclasses, and have repeatedly said that all 12 classes in the current PHB will be included. They've been a tiny bit dodgy about Artificer.
Which is not to say you're wrong! This can't be a last minute editorial decision for them; publishing is complex; etc. They have way more design pinned down than they are letting on, and much of the playtest material is slow-rolled hype-building and "testing the waters."
Quoting myself from a different thread:
Well, don't be upset. WoTC already knows how 6e is going to be, what they are doing is refining the rules. But the new manual has already been structured for a long time, and the philosophy that it will have is already established. In the case at hand, they already know that the PHB is going to have 12 classes, and what subclasses each of them is going to have. They know more or less the extension that it will have. They know how many and what chapters it will have. Etc... Based on that, they already have the different releases of the first waves of 6e ready. It is obvious that the PHB, the DM guide, and a MM will come out. After that, they will publish a first campaign, and probably a campaign setting. And they already know what it will be. It is even likely that the campaign is already written (if not that they already have several written). It will only be necessary to retouch the matches according to the final result of the rules.
But above all you have to know that a publisher, like any company, has to have a roadmap of its products long before they go on sale. They would be irresponsible if they didn't. And you also seem to think that the PHB is now writing it on the fly. It is not like this. The PHB has already been written for a long time. And surely they already have a cover, interior illustrations, etc... What remains is to refine the rules themselves, something that is being done with Playtest. And then it will be edited, layout, and printed.
Oh well yeah. They might have a different structure in mind. What I want to say is that they already know what it will be, and although it is not impossible, it is very difficult for it to change because it would lead to a lot of problems.
What I do assure you is that they are not going to release 4 classes that have not been tested on Playtest. That sure won't happen. But that they still haven't planned 12 classes, but 16, 13 or whatever, it's perfectly possible. Unlikely, but possible.
If they were going to do surprise-new-classes, they would show them off closer to ultimate release, to build maximum hype in a carefully timed manner.
Possible, but not necessarily so: they’ve already put potential new species in the play test, so it doesn’t look like they’re consistently holding back surprise additions. Admittedly, if they were wanting to add more, they’d be wise to test and tune up the existing classes first before putting new ones up for consideration.
Personally, I don’t think we’ll see classes beyond the current PHB twelve, but I failed Divination school.
And you know this how? Seriously, what's your source?
Assuming your information is accurate, and you're not talking out of your ass. There are so many thoughts here.
Like:
Clearly, the play test process is for nought. If WotC has had the books already written, and the book essentially set in stone (as you said yourself) then clearly they have no intention of making large, structural changes to the 6e ruleset should player feedback highlight severe issues that WotC tries to push on us in the playtest process! So what on earth is the point? So that you can point and say, "look, we listened and made changes based on community feedback" when the changes are superficial at best.
And even that aside, if the entirety of the book was already written, why did they not just drop that in our laps so that we could do a PROPER play test of the ruleset?
Thank you very much, Irrelevant_Guy for confirming that WotC is out here, screwing us over YET AGAIN!
It’s not that it’s written, it’s that they know how long it will be. They have a page count likely worked out, within a small margin. Then you make the copy fit the space. That’s a common practice in publishing. The books gets fitted into the page count, you don’t set the page count to fit the copy. You don’t have it written, you just know how many words you’re allowed/required to use for each part.
These playtests are closer to market research than real playtests. (The "real" playtesting may be happening in-house, with people who sign an NDA.)
This is assuming you want Artificers to be the exact same as in 5e, which is a silly assumption.
I'd say give 'em conjuration, transmutation, abjuration, and evocation. Divination, enchantment, necromancy, and illusion aren't very Artificer-y. If they decide that they'll make Artificer the half martial it always deserved to be, then you can give the axe to evocation as well.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
However artificer gets changed, I'm hoping that they keep the part where the subclass is most of the power budget. I love that about them, as each subclass feels almost like its own class due to playing so differently.
Agreed. The Armourer and Battle Smith are close to the Paladin and Ranger in function, while the Artillerist is more of an arcane blaster, like the basic Warlock, and the Alchemist is a support character. Broadly, I think they’ve done a good job of creating a character that can be taken in a variety of directions.
It's just common sense. Do you really think that WoTC doesn't have a business plan for the next few years? Do you think companies improvise on the fly?
It's how any business works.
And as an example I am going to give you my sector, which is technology. We have planned the launches for the next two years, and we are beginning to plan what we will launch in the coming years. The end-of-year release is now fully prepared, and samples for reviews will begin to be submitted in April. Right now what will come out in 2024 is being tested, and the final product is being refined. What is in design and development is for 2025/2026. Obviously there are margins, and the exact date of each release is not set until several months in advance. But the roadmap is established years in advance. A serious company cannot improvise, that would be a disaster.
WoTC has planned what will come out in 2024, have no doubt. And they probably already have a pretty good idea of the 2025/2026 releases. There can always be changes, and a release scheduled for Q3 2025 can be brought forward or delayed due to a number of factors. Even cancel. But of course they have a business plan developed for the next few years. How could they not? It is how any company works.
They specifically stated that the 48 is intended to mean 4 per class. See here at 18:18:
That doesn't mean Artificer is dead in the water necessarily (though it's not looking good for them), but it does mean 4 subclasses per class is what they're shooting for currently.
Huh. "That will appear in this playtest process." Not necessarily how many will be in the PHB.
(Can't tell if he's being cagey or a little imprecise with his wording.)
This is the PHB playtest though. I think it's eminently reasonable to conclude that they aren't going to hide a bunch of subclasses away for full release without getting playtested.
That would however mean that cleric and wizard are getting downsized (at least, in core.)