OneD&D's big three Structural Elements that would benefit non-PHB classes: Class Groups Standardized Subclass Progression Arcane, Divine, and Primal Spell Lists
All three of these are gone now.
RIP, Artificers, cause it doesn't look like you're getting anything new ever again. Though maybe you might still get a spell every once in a while in a book release so WOTC look like they remember you exist.
How about if they split this UA warlock into its own class. Have Chain and Tome be on the warlock and Blade becomes the new Arcane half-caster.
Oh wait, right, there is no "arcane" they got rid of that list.
Also ready to TANK the fighter scores on the next UA for the same reason people tanked the spell lists (Wizards felt not unique enough because they gave their spells to everyone else) now fighter doesn't feel unique because everyone gets mastery.
I think that the big take away is that they (WotC) aren't seeing that people are unhappy with some classes not because of what they have (in features) but because of what those classes still lack.
OneD&D's big three Structural Elements that would benefit non-PHB classes: Class Groups Standardized Subclass Progression Arcane, Divine, and Primal Spell Lists
All three of these are gone now.
RIP, Artificers, cause it doesn't look like you're getting anything new ever again. Though maybe you might still get a spell every once in a while in a book release so WOTC look like they remember you exist.
This is the biggest problem with the recent UAs for sure.
Also ready to TANK the fighter scores on the next UA for the same reason people tanked the spell lists (Wizards felt not unique enough because they gave their spells to everyone else) now fighter doesn't feel unique because everyone gets mastery.
The solution to that was already covered in the video though - buff Weapon Adept/Expert to make Fighter Mastery more special than Everyone Else's Mastery.
I think that the big take away is that they (WotC) aren't seeing that people are unhappy with some classes not because of what they have (in features) but because of what those classes still lack.
Right? It should be obvious. Barbarian features scored better than Barbarians as a whole because all Barbarians can do is hit things. I wanted them to be able to sunder magic or something unique like that.
Is anyone else noticing that no small amount of people complaining that OneD&D won't be changing enough...are the same people who raged over everything OneD&D was planning to change?
I think it really highlights the flaw of basing the inclusion of changes off of pure poll numbers, in that the people who feel strongly negative about changes (namely, to stuff they abuse and exploit) will be far more likely to participate in the survey (if not outright abuse the survey and encourage other people to parrot their opinions) than people who approve of what they've heard.
What's so shocking about people liking some changes and disliking others, exactly?
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)
Is anyone else noticing that no small amount of people complaining that OneD&D won't be changing enough...are the same people who raged over everything OneD&D was planning to change?
Nonsense. People want the changes they do want and they don't want the changes they don't want. It's entirely self-consistent to be mad that the playtest is making some changes and simultaneously mad that it's not making other changes. Literally no one is talking about the abstract concept of change, except in the wildest of hyperbole. Each change is a concrete thing distinct from each other change.
OneD&D's big three Structural Elements that would benefit non-PHB classes: Class Groups Standardized Subclass Progression Arcane, Divine, and Primal Spell Lists
All three of these are gone now.
RIP, Artificers, cause it doesn't look like you're getting anything new ever again. Though maybe you might still get a spell every once in a while in a book release so WOTC look like they remember you exist.
Artificers were (like Bards) in an awkward spot with the three spell list: Arcane casters with healing spells.
I do very much like the flavour of having the three lists, but it did mean that they had to make some awkward-feeling adjustments to make some classes work with them.
I rather liked the different flavours of Arcane, Divine and Primal Bards, but those are presumably defunct now.
Is anyone else noticing that no small amount of people complaining that OneD&D won't be changing enough...are the same people who raged over everything OneD&D was planning to change?
I think it really highlights the flaw of basing the inclusion of changes off of pure poll numbers, in that the people who feel strongly negative about changes (namely, to stuff they abuse and exploit) will be far more likely to participate in the survey (if not outright abuse the survey and encourage other people to parrot their opinions) than people who approve of what they've heard.
No actually, from what I have noticed most of the same people that are saying not enough is changing were the ones advocating for those changes and have largely complained when things arent pushed far enough or they point out things that need tweaking about the changes.
For example, I adamantly defended the new warlock direction. Loved druid templates, epic boons at 20, class groupings, 3 spell lists (thought maybe a 4th would be good). They all needed tweeks. Epic boons needed buffs, we needed to see magic items interact with class groups, warlock needed some more invocation changes and better high level features, druid templates needed more options and mathmatical buff. Ardling was one of my favorite new race options I had ever seen.
Is anyone else noticing that no small amount of people complaining that OneD&D won't be changing enough...are the same people who raged over everything OneD&D was planning to change?
I was consistently in favor of big swings and experimentation. The execution of some of those things was pretty bad (see Playtest 4 Wild Shape), but not the concepts behind them or the desire to fix the underlying problems the devs were trying to solve.
Is anyone else noticing that no small amount of people complaining that OneD&D won't be changing enough...are the same people who raged over everything OneD&D was planning to change?
I was consistently in favor of big swings and experimentation. The execution of some of those things was pretty bad (see Playtest 4 Wild Shape), but not the concepts behind them or the desire to fix the underlying problems the devs were trying to solve.
Spell lists were an interesting concept, but they didn’t mesh well with Bards and Artificers as diversified casters.
I think it could have worked for Bards if they had unrestricted list access, but restricted schools until level 10 or so.
Artificer I agree had a lot of potential to be a mess.
Possibly on Bard, but barring a class spells by school has always been an iffy proposition. Plus I’m not sure giving them universal access is the best idea either; I did like the concept and execution of a lot of the class spells in the past two UA.
Is anyone else noticing that no small amount of people complaining that OneD&D won't be changing enough...are the same people who raged over everything OneD&D was planning to change?
I was consistently in favor of big swings and experimentation. The execution of some of those things was pretty bad (see Playtest 4 Wild Shape), but not the concepts behind them or the desire to fix the underlying problems the devs were trying to solve.
Spell lists were an interesting concept, but they didn’t mesh well with Bards and Artificers as diversified casters.
I think it could have worked for Bards if they had unrestricted list access, but restricted schools until level 10 or so.
Artificer I agree had a lot of potential to be a mess.
I agree with this to a degree. If I run a game I might still use UA Bard from expert play test with just adding in abjuration and necromancy from the primal list. But still enchantment,illusion,transmutation and divination sure from all lists. It was so much cleaner.
If they felt warlocks and sorcs got too much on wizard toes they could have found some school restrictions as well. Sorc bloodlines could have added or altered schools even.
They're mad WotC aren't changing what they want to be changed.
No shit. People want some things to be changed and don't want other things to be changed. What are you even trying to say here?
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)
We can all go through the threads, if we haven't already, and see the gnashing of teeth over the exact same changes that people are now complaining about being reverted.
You're the one making the claim here, you need to "go through the threads." We're not going to support your assertion for you.
Possibly on Bard, but barring a class spells by school has always been an iffy proposition. Plus I’m not sure giving them universal access is the best idea either; I did like the concept and execution of a lot of the class spells in the past two UA.
For me, doing this was (I thought) the entire point of making healing spells Abjuration. Well, that and Moon Druid I guess.
Is anyone else noticing that no small amount of people complaining that OneD&D won't be changing enough...are the same people who raged over everything OneD&D was planning to change?
If you're talking about me, I fought harder than anyone else on this board in favor of the UA5 warlock. I think - and I said it loudly and repeatedly at the time, as well - that Pact Magic is fundamentallyt flawed and cannot be fixed because of people's unreasonable expectations of what it should be, i.e. full caster progression AND always-maximum spell slots AND short rest recharge, and yet somehow they think there's room to quadruple Pact Magic's spell capacity somehow. We know what full-caster short-rest always-max Pact Magic looks like - there is no fixing it. And I said so, loudly enough to catch significant heat for it.
There are, fundamentally, two camps of people for whom the 1DD playtest is - theoretically - relevant. There's the camp that thinks 5e is more-or-less perfect as is, and only needs the most minor of clean-up passes if even that. Eliminate a few well-known points of ambiguity, correct a few spelling or syntax errors, maaaaaaybe change a term or two - essentially, 'touch up the paint' without making one single substantive change to anything. These are the people that are currently absolutely dominating the entire process and utterly destroying any chance of real change.
The other camp are people who think 5e has a great deal of potential that the 2014 ruleset is most definitively not living up to. 5e is a fixer-upper - it's got a good foundation and it could really be something special, but boy howdy hoo does it need a lot of work to get there. There are areas of 5e that are extremely weak and need substantial redesign, and there are many areas of 5e that could use a lighter touch but are still in need of work. These are the people that wanted a 5.5-esque overhaul, something that really mattered and justified the expense and annoyance of having to buy new books.
The problem is that the first camp - the "5e is perfect!" lot that is currently demonizing and destroying the Fixer-Upper camp - has absolutely no intention of buying the new books. They've openly said so - many of the people on this board who've argued against the changes have stated outright that they will never buy the new books no matter what and there is absolutely nothing Wizards can do to change their mind. Those people do not deserve opinions on the new books. They already have their books, the 2014 edition they think is beautiful and perfect forever. They're actively campaigning to deny the Fixer-Upper people their books, hoping the whole thing gets called off, and the entire time most of them never had any intention of engaging with the process in good faith to begin with. A bunch of angry cranky reactionary grognards are actively blocking the process for everyone else out of sheer spiteful stubborn, and those cranky grognards will not be happy until time and space folds and we all wind up in 1994 again the new books are canceled outright.
It's so far beyond infuriating I had to take over a month off this stupid website just to get a grip on it, and frankly I should probably still be gone. I just got pings from people responding to old posts of mine so I ended up dragged back in. And now the UA5 video confirms that every single thing of worth or value in UA5 has been stripped away. The grognards win.
Is anyone else noticing that no small amount of people complaining that OneD&D won't be changing enough...are the same people who raged over everything OneD&D was planning to change?
If you're talking about me, I fought harder than anyone else on this board in favor of the UA5 warlock. I think - and I said it loudly and repeatedly at the time, as well - that Pact Magic is fundamentallyt flawed and cannot be fixed because of people's unreasonable expectations of what it should be, i.e. full caster progression AND always-maximum spell slots AND short rest recharge, and yet somehow they think there's room to quadruple Pact Magic's spell capacity somehow. We know what full-caster short-rest always-max Pact Magic looks like - there is no fixing it. And I said so, loudly enough to catch significant heat for it.
There are, fundamentally, two camps of people for whom the 1DD playtest is - theoretically - relevant. There's the camp that thinks 5e is more-or-less perfect as is, and only needs the most minor of clean-up passes if even that. Eliminate a few well-known points of ambiguity, correct a few spelling or syntax errors, maaaaaaybe change a term or two - essentially, 'touch up the paint' without making one single substantive change to anything. These are the people that are currently absolutely dominating the entire process and utterly destroying any chance of real change.
The other camp are people who think 5e has a great deal of potential that the 2014 ruleset is most definitively not living up to. 5e is a fixer-upper - it's got a good foundation and it could really be something special, but boy howdy hoo does it need a lot of work to get there. There are areas of 5e that are extremely weak and need substantial redesign, and there are many areas of 5e that could use a lighter touch but are still in need of work. These are the people that wanted a 5.5-esque overhaul, something that really mattered and justified the expense and annoyance of having to buy new books.
The problem is that the first camp - the "5e is perfect!" lot that is currently demonizing and destroying the Fixer-Upper camp - has absolutely no intention of buying the new books. They've openly said so - many of the people on this board who've argued against the changes have stated outright that they will never buy the new books no matter what and there is absolutely nothing Wizards can do to change their mind. Those people do not deserve opinions on the new books. They already have their books, the 2014 edition they think is beautiful and perfect forever. They're actively campaigning to deny the Fixer-Upper people their books, hoping the whole thing gets called off, and the entire time most of them never had any intention of engaging with the process in good faith to begin with. A bunch of angry cranky reactionary grognards are actively blocking the process for everyone else out of sheer spiteful stubborn, and those cranky grognards will not be happy until time and space folds and we all wind up in 1994 again the new books are canceled outright.
It's so far beyond infuriating I had to take over a month off this stupid website just to get a grip on it, and frankly I should probably still be gone. I just got pings from people responding to old posts of mine so I ended up dragged back in. And now the UA5 video confirms that every single thing of worth or value in UA5 has been stripped away. The grognards win.
Again.
What a beautiful lament. I'd like to ask one question, though.
The problem is that the first camp - the "5e is perfect!" lot that is currently demonizing and destroying the Fixer-Upper camp - has absolutely no intention of buying the new books.
Source?
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)
Pick literally any thread about the UA content from the last year. Read it. You'll find people in that thread bellowing that THEY'RE DONE, that the entire 1DD process is an EVIL CORPORATE CASH GRAB, and that they will NEVER BUY WIZARDS PRODUCTS AGAIN. Many of them brag about filling out their surveys with "Extremely Dissatisfied" on every last question no matter what it is and leaving "I WILL NOT FALL FOR YOUR EVIL CASH GRAB" in all the written feedback boxes. You cannot tell me you haven't seen them, they've been everywhere since this started.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please do not contact or message me.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
If the stat they land on is Int I won't be as disappointed, but they seem to have prioritized incremental adjustments so it's likely to be Cha again.
I'm hoping we can convince them to revert to choosing stat in Survey 7.
OneD&D's big three Structural Elements that would benefit non-PHB classes:
Class Groups
Standardized Subclass ProgressionArcane, Divine, and Primal Spell ListsAll three of these are gone now.
RIP, Artificers, cause it doesn't look like you're getting anything new ever again.
Though maybe you might still get a spell every once in a while in a book release so WOTC look like they remember you exist.
How about if they split this UA warlock into its own class. Have Chain and Tome be on the warlock and Blade becomes the new Arcane half-caster.
Oh wait, right, there is no "arcane" they got rid of that list.
Also ready to TANK the fighter scores on the next UA for the same reason people tanked the spell lists (Wizards felt not unique enough because they gave their spells to everyone else) now fighter doesn't feel unique because everyone gets mastery.
Ugh, I forgot about that. Arcane list would have meant Artificers could actually get new spells outside Tasha's 😮💨
I think that the big take away is that they (WotC) aren't seeing that people are unhappy with some classes not because of what they have (in features) but because of what those classes still lack.
This is the biggest problem with the recent UAs for sure.
The solution to that was already covered in the video though - buff Weapon Adept/Expert to make Fighter Mastery more special than Everyone Else's Mastery.
Right? It should be obvious. Barbarian features scored better than Barbarians as a whole because all Barbarians can do is hit things. I wanted them to be able to sunder magic or something unique like that.
What's so shocking about people liking some changes and disliking others, exactly?
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)
Nonsense. People want the changes they do want and they don't want the changes they don't want. It's entirely self-consistent to be mad that the playtest is making some changes and simultaneously mad that it's not making other changes. Literally no one is talking about the abstract concept of change, except in the wildest of hyperbole. Each change is a concrete thing distinct from each other change.
Artificers were (like Bards) in an awkward spot with the three spell list: Arcane casters with healing spells.
I do very much like the flavour of having the three lists, but it did mean that they had to make some awkward-feeling adjustments to make some classes work with them.
I rather liked the different flavours of Arcane, Divine and Primal Bards, but those are presumably defunct now.
Spell lists were an interesting concept, but they didn’t mesh well with Bards and Artificers as diversified casters.
No actually, from what I have noticed most of the same people that are saying not enough is changing were the ones advocating for those changes and have largely complained when things arent pushed far enough or they point out things that need tweaking about the changes.
For example, I adamantly defended the new warlock direction. Loved druid templates, epic boons at 20, class groupings, 3 spell lists (thought maybe a 4th would be good). They all needed tweeks. Epic boons needed buffs, we needed to see magic items interact with class groups, warlock needed some more invocation changes and better high level features, druid templates needed more options and mathmatical buff. Ardling was one of my favorite new race options I had ever seen.
I was consistently in favor of big swings and experimentation. The execution of some of those things was pretty bad (see Playtest 4 Wild Shape), but not the concepts behind them or the desire to fix the underlying problems the devs were trying to solve.
I think it could have worked for Bards if they had unrestricted list access, but restricted schools until level 10 or so.
Artificer I agree had a lot of potential to be a mess.
Possibly on Bard, but barring a class spells by school has always been an iffy proposition. Plus I’m not sure giving them universal access is the best idea either; I did like the concept and execution of a lot of the class spells in the past two UA.
I agree with this to a degree. If I run a game I might still use UA Bard from expert play test with just adding in abjuration and necromancy from the primal list. But still enchantment,illusion,transmutation and divination sure from all lists. It was so much cleaner.
If they felt warlocks and sorcs got too much on wizard toes they could have found some school restrictions as well. Sorc bloodlines could have added or altered schools even.
No shit. People want some things to be changed and don't want other things to be changed. What are you even trying to say here?
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)
You're the one making the claim here, you need to "go through the threads." We're not going to support your assertion for you.
For me, doing this was (I thought) the entire point of making healing spells Abjuration. Well, that and Moon Druid I guess.
We'll have to see what they do with Bard in 8.
If you're talking about me, I fought harder than anyone else on this board in favor of the UA5 warlock. I think - and I said it loudly and repeatedly at the time, as well - that Pact Magic is fundamentallyt flawed and cannot be fixed because of people's unreasonable expectations of what it should be, i.e. full caster progression AND always-maximum spell slots AND short rest recharge, and yet somehow they think there's room to quadruple Pact Magic's spell capacity somehow. We know what full-caster short-rest always-max Pact Magic looks like - there is no fixing it. And I said so, loudly enough to catch significant heat for it.
There are, fundamentally, two camps of people for whom the 1DD playtest is - theoretically - relevant. There's the camp that thinks 5e is more-or-less perfect as is, and only needs the most minor of clean-up passes if even that. Eliminate a few well-known points of ambiguity, correct a few spelling or syntax errors, maaaaaaybe change a term or two - essentially, 'touch up the paint' without making one single substantive change to anything. These are the people that are currently absolutely dominating the entire process and utterly destroying any chance of real change.
The other camp are people who think 5e has a great deal of potential that the 2014 ruleset is most definitively not living up to. 5e is a fixer-upper - it's got a good foundation and it could really be something special, but boy howdy hoo does it need a lot of work to get there. There are areas of 5e that are extremely weak and need substantial redesign, and there are many areas of 5e that could use a lighter touch but are still in need of work. These are the people that wanted a 5.5-esque overhaul, something that really mattered and justified the expense and annoyance of having to buy new books.
The problem is that the first camp - the "5e is perfect!" lot that is currently demonizing and destroying the Fixer-Upper camp - has absolutely no intention of buying the new books. They've openly said so - many of the people on this board who've argued against the changes have stated outright that they will never buy the new books no matter what and there is absolutely nothing Wizards can do to change their mind. Those people do not deserve opinions on the new books. They already have their books, the 2014 edition they think is beautiful and perfect forever. They're actively campaigning to deny the Fixer-Upper people their books, hoping the whole thing gets called off, and the entire time most of them never had any intention of engaging with the process in good faith to begin with. A bunch of angry cranky reactionary grognards are actively blocking the process for everyone else out of sheer spiteful stubborn, and those cranky grognards will not be happy until
time and space folds and we all wind up in 1994 againthe new books are canceled outright.It's so far beyond infuriating I had to take over a month off this stupid website just to get a grip on it, and frankly I should probably still be gone. I just got pings from people responding to old posts of mine so I ended up dragged back in. And now the UA5 video confirms that every single thing of worth or value in UA5 has been stripped away. The grognards win.
Again.
Please do not contact or message me.
What a beautiful lament. I'd like to ask one question, though.
Source?
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)
Pick literally any thread about the UA content from the last year. Read it. You'll find people in that thread bellowing that THEY'RE DONE, that the entire 1DD process is an EVIL CORPORATE CASH GRAB, and that they will NEVER BUY WIZARDS PRODUCTS AGAIN. Many of them brag about filling out their surveys with "Extremely Dissatisfied" on every last question no matter what it is and leaving "I WILL NOT FALL FOR YOUR EVIL CASH GRAB" in all the written feedback boxes. You cannot tell me you haven't seen them, they've been everywhere since this started.
Please do not contact or message me.