Wait, there are people that think the Wizard is underpowered? *scratches head, wanders off*
per the class, wizards are fine, per the archetypes, wizards are underpowered. most of their archetypes are fluff only, with barely ay real differences between what they can do in battle and what they cannot. in the end better archetypes is what people want the most. hence why war and bladesinger are so well taken in by the masses. while things like knowledge, divination, transutation, illusions, are not really taken up by anybody. if you look it up closely you will see that everyone is pretty much all Evocation wizards. and for a good reason, the other archetype, while fun, do not have any real mechanics behind them in combat. Abjuration is cool, but in the end the shield is almost useless because wizards rarely get hit. this is why people preffer the blade singer to abjuration, because thats a real get in there archetype.
I for one really really loves me some wizards... but everytime i try to create one, i look at the schools archetypes and i'm just meh... none really attracts me. i did do a divinitation one human variant with lucky included... was fun... but getting all these dices back every long rest really kills it. in the end you just preffer not to use the mechanic at all. except when DM rolls a crit. compare that to the warlock, sorcerer, and bard... all of those also have full spellcasting abilities and their archetypes are awesome and very different. sure the sorcerer sucked archetype wise back then, but with the rest. its cool now.
so yeah... i dare say the wizard is underpowered if you compare his archetypes to the other classes.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
Wait, there are people that think the Wizard is underpowered? *scratches head, wanders off*
per the class, wizards are fine, per the archetypes, wizards are underpowered. most of their archetypes are fluff only, with barely ay real differences between what they can do in battle and what they cannot. in the end better archetypes is what people want the most. hence why war and bladesinger are so well taken in by the masses. while things like knowledge, divination, transutation, illusions, are not really taken up by anybody. if you look it up closely you will see that everyone is pretty much all Evocation wizards. and for a good reason, the other archetype, while fun, do not have any real mechanics behind them in combat. Abjuration is cool, but in the end the shield is almost useless because wizards rarely get hit. this is why people preffer the blade singer to abjuration, because thats a real get in there archetype.
I for one really really loves me some wizards... but everytime i try to create one, i look at the schools archetypes and i'm just meh... none really attracts me. i did do a divinitation one human variant with lucky included... was fun... but getting all these dices back every long rest really kills it. in the end you just preffer not to use the mechanic at all. except when DM rolls a crit. compare that to the warlock, sorcerer, and bard... all of those also have full spellcasting abilities and their archetypes are awesome and very different. sure the sorcerer sucked archetype wise back then, but with the rest. its cool now.
so yeah... i dare say the wizard is underpowered if you compare his archetypes to the other classes.
The wizard has the single strongest base class in the game, and it's Archetypes are almost more than it's balance budget can afford.
And I think you are making the mistake of conflating your anecdotal experience with broad norms.
In my experience, Transmuters, Abjurers, Conjurers, and Diviners are just as popular as Evocationists, and more popular than War Wizards or Bladesingers.
Wait, there are people that think the Wizard is underpowered? *scratches head, wanders off*
per the class, wizards are fine, per the archetypes, wizards are underpowered. most of their archetypes are fluff only, with barely ay real differences between what they can do in battle and what they cannot. in the end better archetypes is what people want the most. hence why war and bladesinger are so well taken in by the masses. while things like knowledge, divination, transutation, illusions, are not really taken up by anybody. if you look it up closely you will see that everyone is pretty much all Evocation wizards. and for a good reason, the other archetype, while fun, do not have any real mechanics behind them in combat. Abjuration is cool, but in the end the shield is almost useless because wizards rarely get hit. this is why people preffer the blade singer to abjuration, because thats a real get in there archetype.
I for one really really loves me some wizards... but everytime i try to create one, i look at the schools archetypes and i'm just meh... none really attracts me. i did do a divinitation one human variant with lucky included... was fun... but getting all these dices back every long rest really kills it. in the end you just preffer not to use the mechanic at all. except when DM rolls a crit. compare that to the warlock, sorcerer, and bard... all of those also have full spellcasting abilities and their archetypes are awesome and very different. sure the sorcerer sucked archetype wise back then, but with the rest. its cool now.
so yeah... i dare say the wizard is underpowered if you compare his archetypes to the other classes.
The wizard has the single strongest base class in the game, and its Archetypes are almost more than its balance budget can afford.
And I think you are making the mistake of conflating your anecdotal experience with broad norms.
In my experience, Transmuters, Abjurers, Conjurers, and Diviners are just as popular as Evocationists, and more popular than War Wizards or Bladesingers.
And I prefer Abjuration, Divination, Evocation, Illusion, and War Magic, but that's not to say that I don't think the other five are good.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
I like the bladesinger, but that's because I like being a sword-mage type. I would never actually play a bladesinger that wasn't, well, fighting with their weapon in a monster's face. (As a side note, also why I like rangers and paladins as well as arcane tricksters and eldritch knights. Haven't tried arcane archer yet).
Wait, there are people that think the Wizard is underpowered? *scratches head, wanders off*
per the class, wizards are fine, per the archetypes, wizards are underpowered. most of their archetypes are fluff only, with barely ay real differences between what they can do in battle and what they cannot. in the end better archetypes is what people want the most. hence why war and bladesinger are so well taken in by the masses. while things like knowledge, divination, transutation, illusions, are not really taken up by anybody. if you look it up closely you will see that everyone is pretty much all Evocation wizards. and for a good reason, the other archetype, while fun, do not have any real mechanics behind them in combat. Abjuration is cool, but in the end the shield is almost useless because wizards rarely get hit. this is why people preffer the blade singer to abjuration, because thats a real get in there archetype.
I for one really really loves me some wizards... but everytime i try to create one, i look at the schools archetypes and i'm just meh... none really attracts me. i did do a divinitation one human variant with lucky included... was fun... but getting all these dices back every long rest really kills it. in the end you just preffer not to use the mechanic at all. except when DM rolls a crit. compare that to the warlock, sorcerer, and bard... all of those also have full spellcasting abilities and their archetypes are awesome and very different. sure the sorcerer sucked archetype wise back then, but with the rest. its cool now.
so yeah... i dare say the wizard is underpowered if you compare his archetypes to the other classes.
The wizard has the single strongest base class in the game, and it's Archetypes are almost more than it's balance budget can afford.
And I think you are making the mistake of conflating your anecdotal experience with broad norms.
In my experience, Transmuters, Abjurers, Conjurers, and Diviners are just as popular as Evocationists, and more popular than War Wizards or Bladesingers.
Exactly, I don't see how comparing archetypes for balance is relevant at all. They are only pieces of a class. You could compare when classes get Extra Attack and say classes are wildly unbalanced, but that's silly because it ignores the entire rest of the class.
However, the issue of wizard archetypes not being very exciting - yeah, I can understand that and agree to some extent. But that is an entirely different issue than being underpowered.
(And now I have been sucked into the class balance discussion in the "What products we want in 2018" thread. :) I'm glad WotC is announcing their next book soon.)
Cross class Sub-classes in that they are sub-classes that groups of other classes could take. For example a subclass that could be taken by a fighter, ranger or rogue, or a arcane style caster one that a Wizard, Sorcerer or Warlock could take. This can add those to have some familiarity but the classes still offering distinct aspects (like various classes from a specific organisation or has that organisation's training).
That just sounds overly complicated for very little purpose. Call it a subclass and be done with it.
Not really if you consider that to do those things with individual per class sub-classes that works out to be multiple sub-classes needed to be created that would essentially be much the same (typically around some 3-5 sub-classes I'd expect but in some cases they could apply to any class at all). However with a bit of thought, it is not that difficult to create them, and in far fewer words (something published books have to concern itself with). I've personally made a Swashbuckler style one that works for fighters, rogues and rangers. It would be nice to see what kind of spin the developers would put on such things however.
Not really if you consider that to do those things with individual per class sub-classes that works out to be multiple sub-classes needed to be created that would essentially be much the sam.
I want you to reread what you wrote and tell me with a straight face how simple it would be.
I understand what you are getting at but I feel like that would seriously devalue the individuality of the subclasses. Yes there is no reason you can't make a swashbuckler clonoe for any combat class but really it comes to a point of why. If you want to be a swashbuckler just suck it up and play a rogue. I know this sounds jaded but if there was a version of swashbuckler for each other combat type class it would eventually end up being there is one PROPER choice of swashbuckler, all the other options would be inferior for one reason or another. Leave something like that up to people who want to homebrew their own subclasses, there are so many more useful things that their time and efforts can be focused on rather than shoehorning X subclass into a bunch of other classes.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
Dragonlance with Margaret Weis's and Tracy Hickman's involvement. Also preferably with the War of Souls and 5th Age retconned out.
Pretty much this.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Wait, there are people that think the Wizard is underpowered? *scratches head, wanders off*
per the class, wizards are fine, per the archetypes, wizards are underpowered. most of their archetypes are fluff only, with barely ay real differences between what they can do in battle and what they cannot. in the end better archetypes is what people want the most. hence why war and bladesinger are so well taken in by the masses. while things like knowledge, divination, transutation, illusions, are not really taken up by anybody. if you look it up closely you will see that everyone is pretty much all Evocation wizards. and for a good reason, the other archetype, while fun, do not have any real mechanics behind them in combat. Abjuration is cool, but in the end the shield is almost useless because wizards rarely get hit. this is why people preffer the blade singer to abjuration, because thats a real get in there archetype.
I for one really really loves me some wizards... but everytime i try to create one, i look at the schools archetypes and i'm just meh... none really attracts me. i did do a divinitation one human variant with lucky included... was fun... but getting all these dices back every long rest really kills it. in the end you just preffer not to use the mechanic at all. except when DM rolls a crit. compare that to the warlock, sorcerer, and bard... all of those also have full spellcasting abilities and their archetypes are awesome and very different. sure the sorcerer sucked archetype wise back then, but with the rest. its cool now.
so yeah... i dare say the wizard is underpowered if you compare his archetypes to the other classes.
The wizard has the single strongest base class in the game, and it's Archetypes are almost more than it's balance budget can afford.
And I think you are making the mistake of conflating your anecdotal experience with broad norms.
In my experience, Transmuters, Abjurers, Conjurers, and Diviners are just as popular as Evocationists, and more popular than War Wizards or Bladesingers.
You are totally free to love them all, but i really don't. and i am not basing myself on anything except wizards own survey of the classes and the archetypes when they actually wanted our feedback on the player handbook back a few months after it came out. back then, the wizard was top class. as i said it is a great class. but when it came to archetypes it was not the preffered classs at all. most people thought the archetype were too much fluff not enough mechanics.
as for myself... aside from the druid and perhaps the barbarian... not a single class is worth taking all the way to 20. those capstones compared to many archetype features... many archetype features are much better then those capstones. let's take wizard for exemple... its fun to have level 1 cantrips. even if just 2 spells. it is fun to have level 3 short rest spell slots. but if you start looking at your warlock class, you realise how easy it is to just put 5 level of warlocks and have much more because of invocations and archetypes and spells. sure one could say but you are missing out on level 9 spells... but the reality here is, you don't need level 9 spells to be abusive at that point.
and to back my claim, most min maxers for 5e, aren't taking 20 levels of a class, no one like literally, goes to level 20 for the capstone when it comes to min maxing. druid is a different thing, because infinite life is way too cool a capstone to pass by. i mean who wouldn'T want to heal 150HP every bonus action.
but hey, think or do what you want, that's the beauty of d&d. there is as many games as there are DMs.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
as for myself... aside from the druid and perhaps the barbarian... not a single class is worth taking all the way to 20. those capstones compared to many archetype features... many archetype features are much better then those capstones. let's take wizard for exemple... its fun to have level 1 cantrips. even if just 2 spells. it is fun to have level 3 short rest spell slots. but if you start looking at your warlock class, you realise how easy it is to just put 5 level of warlocks and have much more because of invocations and archetypes and spells. sure one could say but you are missing out on level 9 spells... but the reality here is, you don't need level 9 spells to be abusive at that point.
and to back my claim, most min maxers for 5e, aren't taking 20 levels of a class, no one like literally, goes to level 20 for the capstone when it comes to min maxing. druid is a different thing, because infinite life is way too cool a capstone to pass by. i mean who wouldn'T want to heal 150HP every bonus action.
but hey, think or do what you want, that's the beauty of d&d. there is as many games as there are DMs.
Hrm.... while I'm not going to argue about liking or not liking about the level 20 feature of some classes, but I do have to scratch my head when you start talking about passing up 9th level magic. From a min-maxing perspective, Wizards, Bards and Sorcerers would be passing on the Wish spell, which is huge. True Polymorph and Foresight are also awesome spells; I once had a warlock with True Polymorph that basically just spammed it during downtime to raise an entire army of supernatural minions. That remains true for just about every other spellcaster. Even if you don't use Foresight on yourself, its an insanely good buff to give out to your party, and they would adore you for it, making your group that much better.
Everything that I know about min-maxing suggests that if you don't get those high level spells? You're doing it wrong. (Where "it" is min-maxing a spellcaster).
Yes, Wizard is a class with a weak start, a weak multiclass unless you are going for just War Wizard or Divination Level 2 subclass traits, and relatively-weak subclasses in general (and too-many of them).
We hear complaints about the Ranger for these very-same reasons. Yet there appears to be tons of work to revise the Ranger, but less-so the Wizard. School of Invention and a few others.
Created a set of ribbons based around common magical items for Character Creation. It typically involves a spellcaster giving up their other spellcasting Ability Scores in lieu of a starting common magical item that suits them. For example, a Forest Gnome Wizard with a Staff of Birdcalls, a Tiefling Wizard with an Enduring Spellbook or a Ruby of the War Mage, a Human Wizard with a Hat of Wizardry or a Staff of Adornment, a Moon Elf (or Half-Elf of Moon descent) Wizard with a Moon-touched shortsword, a Mountain Dwarf Wizard with a Gleaming chain shirt, a Half Orc Wizard with a Dread Helm, a Dragonborn Wizard with a Cloak of Many Fashions, a Sun Elf Wizard with a Cloak of Billowing, a Firbolg Wizard with a Staff of Flowers, a Halfling Wizard with Heward's Handy Spice Pouch (Any) or a Tankard of Sobriety (Lightfoots) or even a Pipe of Smoke Monsters (Stouts), a Drow Elf or Deep Gnome or Duegar Wizard with a Hat of Vermin or Boots of False Tracks -- and probably my personal favorite, a Rock Gnome with a Clockwork Amulet.
The way this would work is that if a player dumps Wisdom and Charisma (an 8, 9, or 10 or whatever) and they choose a Wizard, then they start with one of these items. I'm trying to come up with other ways to make it fair, but the commitment to role-playing it effectively is really what I'd be looking for.
What I'd like to see is some sort of escalation of this. Some sort of official rules to go along with it all would be a huge boon. It could even scale -- for a continued example, the Drow Elf that chooses School of Necromancy gets another ribbon, Humans may get a ribbon for Evocation, Sun Elf for Bladesinger, Tiefling for War Mage, Forest/Deep Gnome for Illusion, Dwarf for Enchantment, etc.
Mephista...You are thinking of breaking the game... not min maxing... min maxing is not breaking the game, its being the strongest you can be for the situation you want. most min maxers don't break games voluntarily by passsing up 90 days doing true polymorph and getting an army because that literally undoable in your game if your DM knows how to react to it. from a min maxers stand point the only 9th level spell worth taking is wish, because you gain access to all spells reguardless of class. the others are unnecessary. you are thinking power gamer, power gamers are power hungry people who just want to break the game at all cost to gain the ultimate power. that said, if you are a wizard why would you ever want anything really ? you already have access to everything... but thats why i hate high levels... they are all about breaking the game and making it impossible to play and have fun without the story breaking apart. in any cases think what you want, think what you will about me, i do not care. i have my own opinion and i know im not the only onw sharing it. so yeah...
the one thing most people want in a game, for what i saw is the ability to create your own classes by just having points to which you ca choose your class features. EX: i start my character and i have 2 class features at level 1. i choose rage and sneak attack. now every level i choose another class feature. so at two i boost my sneak attack. at 5 i'm getting extra attack. etc...
so basically yes class features still have required levels, but players have the ability to not stick to a class per say as all abilities can be chosen. its more like talent trees. from my own experience about those wanting more diversity, this is pretty much what they want because they are power gamers and do not like current progression of classes. this could be a great thing to try in 5e. just see where it leads...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
You are thinking of breaking the game... not min maxing... ...you are thinking power game...
In my experience, most gamers consider "min-max" and "power game" to be synonyms. Both meaning to make choices based primarily on building a mechanically potent character. Similarly, my experience suggests that most gamers would refer to someone deliberately breaking the game as "a jerk" (or other synonymous and less family-friendly terms) rather than either a min-maxer/power-gamer.
...thats why i hate high levels... they are all about breaking the game and making it impossible to play and have fun without the story breaking apart.
Yeah, no. That's not what high levels are about at all - not now, not ever. Regardless of how that ends up being a thing that people incorrectly perceive to be true by ignoring the impact of their own decisions (i.e. high level is only impossible to play for you because of the way you are used to people building and playing characters and DMs planning campaigns - which is why it's really strange that you talk about things like "undoable in your game if your DM knows how to react to it" because if the DMs you play with knew how to react to things, high levels would be fine).
...the one thing most people want in a game...
Citation? I don't personally know of more than 2 or 3 people that want anything even kind of like what you describe, so it seems unlikely to me that "most" is anywhere near accurate.
A book of random small dungeons of every lvl. Things that are small and can be sprinkled in as side quests to a main story line. Unlike Tales of the Yawning Portal which had large almost campaign setting dungeons. I wand something more like the 4e "Dungeon Delve" book. Dark Sun would also be cool to visit. Dominaria in PlaneChase Ixilan in PlaneChase Would it be possibly for WotC to remake the Balders Gate Series or Planescape games using 5e rules?
By which I mean a set of "rules modules" (for want of a better phrase) for things such as rooftop chases, wilderness wanderings, crewing a ship, running a tavern, taming wild beasts... All easily scalable of course! :) (Basically, all the things I struggle with when running a campaign.) Preferably involving flow charts and bucket loads of dice and choices.
Birthright attempted to bring running a kingdom/religion/merchant empire to D&D and had war cards for large scale land and sea battles. For my money, they were too ambitious* and the project seemed to fail, but a smaller, plug-in module based system would certainly get my interest. "PC armies, cohorts, and strongholds" using this system could also be great.
*Too ambitious, or I was not smart enough to use it effectively.
Wait, there are people that think the Wizard is underpowered? *scratches head, wanders off*
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
We do bones, motherf***ker!
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
Tooltips (Help/aid)
I like the bladesinger, but that's because I like being a sword-mage type. I would never actually play a bladesinger that wasn't, well, fighting with their weapon in a monster's face. (As a side note, also why I like rangers and paladins as well as arcane tricksters and eldritch knights. Haven't tried arcane archer yet).
I've personally made a Swashbuckler style one that works for fighters, rogues and rangers.
It would be nice to see what kind of spin the developers would put on such things however.
- Loswaith
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
druid is a different thing, because infinite life is way too cool a capstone to pass by. i mean who wouldn'T want to heal 150HP every bonus action.
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
The Forum Infestation (TM)
This thread has really gone off-the rails.
Yes, Wizard is a class with a weak start, a weak multiclass unless you are going for just War Wizard or Divination Level 2 subclass traits, and relatively-weak subclasses in general (and too-many of them).
We hear complaints about the Ranger for these very-same reasons. Yet there appears to be tons of work to revise the Ranger, but less-so the Wizard. School of Invention and a few others.
Created a set of ribbons based around common magical items for Character Creation. It typically involves a spellcaster giving up their other spellcasting Ability Scores in lieu of a starting common magical item that suits them. For example, a Forest Gnome Wizard with a Staff of Birdcalls, a Tiefling Wizard with an Enduring Spellbook or a Ruby of the War Mage, a Human Wizard with a Hat of Wizardry or a Staff of Adornment, a Moon Elf (or Half-Elf of Moon descent) Wizard with a Moon-touched shortsword, a Mountain Dwarf Wizard with a Gleaming chain shirt, a Half Orc Wizard with a Dread Helm, a Dragonborn Wizard with a Cloak of Many Fashions, a Sun Elf Wizard with a Cloak of Billowing, a Firbolg Wizard with a Staff of Flowers, a Halfling Wizard with Heward's Handy Spice Pouch (Any) or a Tankard of Sobriety (Lightfoots) or even a Pipe of Smoke Monsters (Stouts), a Drow Elf or Deep Gnome or Duegar Wizard with a Hat of Vermin or Boots of False Tracks -- and probably my personal favorite, a Rock Gnome with a Clockwork Amulet.
The way this would work is that if a player dumps Wisdom and Charisma (an 8, 9, or 10 or whatever) and they choose a Wizard, then they start with one of these items. I'm trying to come up with other ways to make it fair, but the commitment to role-playing it effectively is really what I'd be looking for.
What I'd like to see is some sort of escalation of this. Some sort of official rules to go along with it all would be a huge boon. It could even scale -- for a continued example, the Drow Elf that chooses School of Necromancy gets another ribbon, Humans may get a ribbon for Evocation, Sun Elf for Bladesinger, Tiefling for War Mage, Forest/Deep Gnome for Illusion, Dwarf for Enchantment, etc.
Mephista...You are thinking of breaking the game... not min maxing... min maxing is not breaking the game, its being the strongest you can be for the situation you want. most min maxers don't break games voluntarily by passsing up 90 days doing true polymorph and getting an army because that literally undoable in your game if your DM knows how to react to it. from a min maxers stand point the only 9th level spell worth taking is wish, because you gain access to all spells reguardless of class. the others are unnecessary. you are thinking power gamer, power gamers are power hungry people who just want to break the game at all cost to gain the ultimate power. that said, if you are a wizard why would you ever want anything really ? you already have access to everything... but thats why i hate high levels... they are all about breaking the game and making it impossible to play and have fun without the story breaking apart. in any cases think what you want, think what you will about me, i do not care. i have my own opinion and i know im not the only onw sharing it. so yeah...
the one thing most people want in a game, for what i saw is the ability to create your own classes by just having points to which you ca choose your class features.
EX:
i start my character and i have 2 class features at level 1. i choose rage and sneak attack.
now every level i choose another class feature. so at two i boost my sneak attack. at 5 i'm getting extra attack. etc...
so basically yes class features still have required levels, but players have the ability to not stick to a class per say as all abilities can be chosen. its more like talent trees.
from my own experience about those wanting more diversity, this is pretty much what they want because they are power gamers and do not like current progression of classes. this could be a great thing to try in 5e. just see where it leads...
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
In my experience, most gamers consider "min-max" and "power game" to be synonyms. Both meaning to make choices based primarily on building a mechanically potent character. Similarly, my experience suggests that most gamers would refer to someone deliberately breaking the game as "a jerk" (or other synonymous and less family-friendly terms) rather than either a min-maxer/power-gamer.
Yeah, no. That's not what high levels are about at all - not now, not ever. Regardless of how that ends up being a thing that people incorrectly perceive to be true by ignoring the impact of their own decisions (i.e. high level is only impossible to play for you because of the way you are used to people building and playing characters and DMs planning campaigns - which is why it's really strange that you talk about things like "undoable in your game if your DM knows how to react to it" because if the DMs you play with knew how to react to things, high levels would be fine).
Citation? I don't personally know of more than 2 or 3 people that want anything even kind of like what you describe, so it seems unlikely to me that "most" is anywhere near accurate.A book of random small dungeons of every lvl. Things that are small and can be sprinkled in as side quests to a main story line. Unlike Tales of the Yawning Portal which had large almost campaign setting dungeons. I wand something more like the 4e "Dungeon Delve" book.
Dark Sun would also be cool to visit.
Dominaria in PlaneChase
Ixilan in PlaneChase
Would it be possibly for WotC to remake the Balders Gate Series or Planescape games using 5e rules?
5.5e
Yes, I went there.
"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation."
― Oscar Wilde.
Mini games for the bigger picture.
By which I mean a set of "rules modules" (for want of a better phrase) for things such as rooftop chases, wilderness wanderings, crewing a ship, running a tavern, taming wild beasts... All easily scalable of course! :) (Basically, all the things I struggle with when running a campaign.) Preferably involving flow charts and bucket loads of dice and choices.
Birthright attempted to bring running a kingdom/religion/merchant empire to D&D and had war cards for large scale land and sea battles. For my money, they were too ambitious* and the project seemed to fail, but a smaller, plug-in module based system would certainly get my interest.
"PC armies, cohorts, and strongholds" using this system could also be great.
*Too ambitious, or I was not smart enough to use it effectively.
Roleplaying since Runequest.