I'm seeing 84 first-party classes, and then you have racial class levels (ex: Dwarf Sorcerer), variant class levels (ex: Bardic Knack instead of Bardic Knowledge), and then of course there's monster classes.
And then there's prestige classes.
No matter how you count it, it's not far off. If you count prestige classes I'm certain 3.5e had more than twice the number that 5e has.
Subclasses: echoing the call that I want the subclasses to be distinct. I've whinged about this before: I personally HATE that 5E has so many variants of the party healer, with what feels like a bare minimum of differences between them. I don't want a warlock to feel like a cleric to feel like a monk.
I actually think this is a strength of the current system, not a weakness. A party shouldn't be absolutely required to have a Life cleric if they want any healing whatsoever, just like classes other than Fighter are allowed to do damage and classes other than Wizard are allowed to have utility. The more diverse the option pool is for playing any given broad character theme such as Team Healer Guy, the less a given table has to worry about strict, rigid party composition and the more they can all play something they find fun an interesting.
Like, I find the Life cleric to be incredibly boring. Super ******* boring. I don't think I could ever really get into playing a Life cleric, and I say this as someone fully aware of how generally Ohh Pee clerics-in-general are. I just can't with that boring milquetoast nubclass. But a Circle of Dreams druid? A fey guardian who can fight on the front lines with their team and whose magics allow them to ward their party and be exactly where they're needed at higher levels? Trading "You heal better, then you heal even better, then you heal even more better!" for "You can heal without expending precious spells or you can heal with spells too if you need to, you can safeguard your team's encampments, you can teleport pretty dang often, and also you can do all the Druid Shit"? Yes. I'd be more than down to try my hand at a Dreams druid sometime and be my party's medic that way. Which I wouldn't be allowed to do if only one specific subclass was allowed to have total dominion over such a broad character archetype.
Fair points! To me, on the page, all the healer-lite subclasses just feel same-y to me - like clerics but with slightly different mechanics or traits. Could be a failure of imagination on my part and/or symptomatic of the group I'm in (which leans heavily towards tactical and is really light on RP).
And yeah, it's probably my old school roots getting their bias in. I do like that 5E gives all the classes something to do each turn, regardless of level or class. I don't like how blurry the lines seem to be for a lot of the classes (EVERYONE's a potential spellcaster in 5E, which I don't like).
Question for the day: What tier of play do you like the best? Is it the lower levels when you need every last HP to stay alive and can get a thrill combatting Kobolds, the higher levels when you’re basically a demigod and can wield the powers of the multiverse, or somewhen in between? And why?
I think 5e’s spell system is more of a problem than class homogeneity. Right now, there is far too much overlap between different caster’s spell lists, particularly for the high end spells that folks feel they need to take. Additionally, while there are a fair number of spells, each level has a few “you should probably take this one” spells. That all means you’re not only likely to see something like Fireball show up in every campaign - you are very likely to see it show up on multiple different classed characters within the same campaign.
The game needs more big flashy spells and more playable spells unique to each class. It also would help to add some official rules for customising spells - we were promised that with Tasha’s, but just got “keep the spell the same and slap a fresh coat of paint on the flavour text” instead of “here is a chart if you want to change the damage type of a spell” to make something that feels more unique.
Additionally, I think there needs to be more support for specialisation. Right now, all spellcasters are effectively generalists - you can switch between fireball, divination, an ice attack, etc. all with relative ease. Circling back to “lessons that could have been learned from 4e, but were not”, 4e had a large number of feats encouraging folks to specialise in certain damage types. You could take a feat that might give you additional damage or effects on your Cold damage spells, encouraging a caster to focus on that type of spell - sometimes taking something strictly worse out of the box than another elemental option because those perks made it better for that individual character.
I am not sure any of this is going to get fixed in 6e - the 6e style feats we have seen thus far (such as in Dragonlance), still feel rather generic and like they’ll increase homogenisation rather than decrease it. Still, here’s looking forward to what we end up with.
Question for the day: What tier of play do you like the best? Is it the lower levels when you need every last HP to stay alive and can get a thrill combatting Kobolds, the higher levels when you’re basically a demigod and can wield the powers of the multiverse, or somewhen in between? And why?
From a gameplay perspective, I think the middle levels are best - balance seems to work a little better both between players and between players and monsters (or as well as balance in D&D can work) and there are enough options that you can build a character you want to play.
Low levels suffer from lack of choice (personally, I’m always going to start campaigns at level 3, since lack of subclass choice leads to some boring starting characters); high levels suffer from a dearth of monsters geared their direction and the already poorly balanced CR system falling apart.
That said, there’s nothing quite like watching a character grow from a small little level 3 into a level 20 character. Taking that whole journey and watching someone adapt to their ever-increasing power is a large part of the fun of an RPG.
Question for the day: What tier of play do you like the best? Is it the lower levels when you need every last HP to stay alive and can get a thrill combatting Kobolds, the higher levels when you’re basically a demigod and can wield the powers of the multiverse, or somewhen in between? And why?
Thus far the campaigns I've played/ran have only got to a maximum of late tier 2/early tier 3. I think mid-late tier 1/early tier 2 is my favourite to run, but I like playing mid tier 1, mostly because I like the risk it brings and the tension of only having a couple of hit dice to spend. I don't think the lack of options is much of a problem, tough that might just be because I mostly play spellcasters, Wizards in particular.
I’ve never played in T4 in the edition, but I have generally liked the T 3 stuff I’ve done the best. I only seem to single-class, and that when you start getting the really cool stuff you’ve been eying up in the class description for over a year. I was so happy when my pally finally got greater find steed, for example.
Question for the day: What tier of play do you like the best? Is it the lower levels when you need every last HP to stay alive and can get a thrill combatting Kobolds, the higher levels when you’re basically a demigod and can wield the powers of the multiverse, or somewhen in between? And why?
I only ever run campaigns.
I like running campaigns from 5th to 9th and from 16th to 20th best, though.
The first stage is historically when folks come into their powers and are able to do and learn new tactics and new ways of thinking.
The second is because they think they are like Gods, and it is a challenge to show they are not.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
Question for the day: What tier of play do you like the best? Is it the lower levels when you need every last HP to stay alive and can get a thrill combatting Kobolds, the higher levels when you’re basically a demigod and can wield the powers of the multiverse, or somewhen in between? And why?
Ive only run a high level campaign once, but I would say I like Tier 2 the best. Levels 5-10 have the party still a little squishy and very capable of dying, while also providing some of the more thrilling powers they can unlock and toy with. Plus its sorta the minimum levels you would want for some proper customization through multiclassing or feats.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews!Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Question for the day: What tier of play do you like the best? Is it the lower levels when you need every last HP to stay alive and can get a thrill combatting Kobolds, the higher levels when you’re basically a demigod and can wield the powers of the multiverse, or somewhen in between? And why?
Personally, I like Tier 2. You have a lot of capabilities, but you're still not superpowered yet. There's still some vulnerability there.
And I just realized that I have never, ever played at Tier 4. Not one time.
We're just on the verge of Tier 3 in our campaign, so I can't really answer for 5E. I definitely liked Tier 2 better than Tier 1; everyone, including me, has more options. I'm already running into power scale issues close to T3, though (some of that is play style, though, not mechanics); I'm wondering if I'll be able to keep challenging them up to and through T4.
Back in the day (1E), we did play up to about 25th level. The higher levels were definitely more fun, and it wasn't hard for the DM to challenge us, even at the highest levels.
I also like the tier 2 best. I’m only just getting above that tier recently, and while it’s working for one of my groups, in the other it’s pretty difficult to challenge my players. Plus, the second tier still gives the feeling of limited resources and capabilities, but still has enough power that the players can feel sufficiently capable. One thing I do like about the upper tiers, though, is the ability to use iconic monsters that I’ve been eyeing during my monster manual readthroughs- like vampires, beholders, and adult/ancient dragons.
Question for the day: What tier of play do you like the best? Is it the lower levels when you need every last HP to stay alive and can get a thrill combatting Kobolds, the higher levels when you’re basically a demigod and can wield the powers of the multiverse, or somewhen in between? And why?
Can't really say. I haven't played Tier 4 in 5e, and really haven't even played Tier 3 - the couple campaigns I'm in where we've gotten to double-digit levels, I'm playing multiclassed characters who don't have any Tier 3 features
Between 1 and 2 though, Tier 2 has been more fun. Very much a "just powerful enough to get yourself in real trouble" vibe, at least in the games I've been in
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Carp. I use a slightly different tiers system because I made *everything* into a tier system (for role playing purposes, no less -- now players don't say they are level x, they say they are a Novice, or master, or whatever. NPCs do it too.). I apologize for not using the stated format -- I am sure you still understood, but I felt I should apologize.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
Secondary question for today, if you could change one fundamental mechanic for a class in the game as part of the conversion from 5e->OneD&D, what would it be and why?
For example, you might change a spellcasters main casting stat between Int, Wis, or Cha, or you might change how a Barbarian's Rage feature works or how Paladins are able to apply Divine Smite
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews!Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Tier 2 is the sweet spot for adventuring. The characters can do things without being too overpowered. Tier 1 is fun for a little and it is usually done by the time it gets boring. Tier 3 has some monsters and stuff that I like, but the excitement in facing those thing is due to it being rare and the longer you stay in tier 3, the more mundane those threats feel and it kind of loses something. Tier 4 is where the game tends to jump the shark so to speak.
Secondary question for today, if you could change one fundamental mechanic for a class in the game as part of the conversion from 5e->OneD&D, what would it be and why?
For example, you might change a spellcasters main casting stat between Int, Wis, or Cha, or you might change how a Barbarian's Rage feature works or how Paladins are able to apply Divine Smite
Drinking potions being a bonus action. So dumb it takes a full action to chug some grape Fanta.
Secondary question for today, if you could change one fundamental mechanic for a class in the game as part of the conversion from 5e->OneD&D, what would it be and why?
For example, you might change a spellcasters main casting stat between Int, Wis, or Cha, or you might change how a Barbarian's Rage feature works or how Paladins are able to apply Divine Smite
The main thing (which I already allow in my games) is to make Warlocks use Intelligence instead of Charisma.
Aside from that, Monks could do with a slight overhaul. I would change their hit dice to d10s, allow them to dash as a bonus action without spending Ki, increase their starting Martial Arts die to d6, and make darts a monk weapon.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[REDACTED]
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
You mean like 3e?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Nooooooooootttt 3e had the regular classes....No wait, you are sort of right. But they didn't have as many classes as they have subclasses now.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
I'm seeing 84 first-party classes, and then you have racial class levels (ex: Dwarf Sorcerer), variant class levels (ex: Bardic Knack instead of Bardic Knowledge), and then of course there's monster classes.
And then there's prestige classes.
No matter how you count it, it's not far off. If you count prestige classes I'm certain 3.5e had more than twice the number that 5e has.
Fair points! To me, on the page, all the healer-lite subclasses just feel same-y to me - like clerics but with slightly different mechanics or traits. Could be a failure of imagination on my part and/or symptomatic of the group I'm in (which leans heavily towards tactical and is really light on RP).
And yeah, it's probably my old school roots getting their bias in. I do like that 5E gives all the classes something to do each turn, regardless of level or class. I don't like how blurry the lines seem to be for a lot of the classes (EVERYONE's a potential spellcaster in 5E, which I don't like).
Question for the day: What tier of play do you like the best? Is it the lower levels when you need every last HP to stay alive and can get a thrill combatting Kobolds, the higher levels when you’re basically a demigod and can wield the powers of the multiverse, or somewhen in between? And why?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I think 5e’s spell system is more of a problem than class homogeneity. Right now, there is far too much overlap between different caster’s spell lists, particularly for the high end spells that folks feel they need to take. Additionally, while there are a fair number of spells, each level has a few “you should probably take this one” spells. That all means you’re not only likely to see something like Fireball show up in every campaign - you are very likely to see it show up on multiple different classed characters within the same campaign.
The game needs more big flashy spells and more playable spells unique to each class. It also would help to add some official rules for customising spells - we were promised that with Tasha’s, but just got “keep the spell the same and slap a fresh coat of paint on the flavour text” instead of “here is a chart if you want to change the damage type of a spell” to make something that feels more unique.
Additionally, I think there needs to be more support for specialisation. Right now, all spellcasters are effectively generalists - you can switch between fireball, divination, an ice attack, etc. all with relative ease. Circling back to “lessons that could have been learned from 4e, but were not”, 4e had a large number of feats encouraging folks to specialise in certain damage types. You could take a feat that might give you additional damage or effects on your Cold damage spells, encouraging a caster to focus on that type of spell - sometimes taking something strictly worse out of the box than another elemental option because those perks made it better for that individual character.
I am not sure any of this is going to get fixed in 6e - the 6e style feats we have seen thus far (such as in Dragonlance), still feel rather generic and like they’ll increase homogenisation rather than decrease it. Still, here’s looking forward to what we end up with.
From a gameplay perspective, I think the middle levels are best - balance seems to work a little better both between players and between players and monsters (or as well as balance in D&D can work) and there are enough options that you can build a character you want to play.
Low levels suffer from lack of choice (personally, I’m always going to start campaigns at level 3, since lack of subclass choice leads to some boring starting characters); high levels suffer from a dearth of monsters geared their direction and the already poorly balanced CR system falling apart.
That said, there’s nothing quite like watching a character grow from a small little level 3 into a level 20 character. Taking that whole journey and watching someone adapt to their ever-increasing power is a large part of the fun of an RPG.
Thus far the campaigns I've played/ran have only got to a maximum of late tier 2/early tier 3. I think mid-late tier 1/early tier 2 is my favourite to run, but I like playing mid tier 1, mostly because I like the risk it brings and the tension of only having a couple of hit dice to spend. I don't think the lack of options is much of a problem, tough that might just be because I mostly play spellcasters, Wizards in particular.
[REDACTED]
I’ve never played in T4 in the edition, but I have generally liked the T 3 stuff I’ve done the best. I only seem to single-class, and that when you start getting the really cool stuff you’ve been eying up in the class description for over a year. I was so happy when my pally finally got greater find steed, for example.
I only ever run campaigns.
I like running campaigns from 5th to 9th and from 16th to 20th best, though.
The first stage is historically when folks come into their powers and are able to do and learn new tactics and new ways of thinking.
The second is because they think they are like Gods, and it is a challenge to show they are not.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
Ive only run a high level campaign once, but I would say I like Tier 2 the best. Levels 5-10 have the party still a little squishy and very capable of dying, while also providing some of the more thrilling powers they can unlock and toy with. Plus its sorta the minimum levels you would want for some proper customization through multiclassing or feats.
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Personally, I like Tier 2. You have a lot of capabilities, but you're still not superpowered yet. There's still some vulnerability there.
And I just realized that I have never, ever played at Tier 4. Not one time.
We're just on the verge of Tier 3 in our campaign, so I can't really answer for 5E. I definitely liked Tier 2 better than Tier 1; everyone, including me, has more options. I'm already running into power scale issues close to T3, though (some of that is play style, though, not mechanics); I'm wondering if I'll be able to keep challenging them up to and through T4.
Back in the day (1E), we did play up to about 25th level. The higher levels were definitely more fun, and it wasn't hard for the DM to challenge us, even at the highest levels.
I also like the tier 2 best. I’m only just getting above that tier recently, and while it’s working for one of my groups, in the other it’s pretty difficult to challenge my players. Plus, the second tier still gives the feeling of limited resources and capabilities, but still has enough power that the players can feel sufficiently capable. One thing I do like about the upper tiers, though, is the ability to use iconic monsters that I’ve been eyeing during my monster manual readthroughs- like vampires, beholders, and adult/ancient dragons.
Only spilt the party if you see something shiny.
Ariendela Sneakerson, Half-elf Rogue (8); Harmony Wolfsbane, Tiefling Bard (10); Agnomally, Gnomish Sorcerer (3); Breeze, Tabaxi Monk (8); Grace, Dragonborn Barbarian (7); DM, Homebrew- The Sequestered Lands/Underwater Explorers; Candlekeep
Can't really say. I haven't played Tier 4 in 5e, and really haven't even played Tier 3 - the couple campaigns I'm in where we've gotten to double-digit levels, I'm playing multiclassed characters who don't have any Tier 3 features
Between 1 and 2 though, Tier 2 has been more fun. Very much a "just powerful enough to get yourself in real trouble" vibe, at least in the games I've been in
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Carp. I use a slightly different tiers system because I made *everything* into a tier system (for role playing purposes, no less -- now players don't say they are level x, they say they are a Novice, or master, or whatever. NPCs do it too.). I apologize for not using the stated format -- I am sure you still understood, but I felt I should apologize.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
Secondary question for today, if you could change one fundamental mechanic for a class in the game as part of the conversion from 5e->OneD&D, what would it be and why?
For example, you might change a spellcasters main casting stat between Int, Wis, or Cha, or you might change how a Barbarian's Rage feature works or how Paladins are able to apply Divine Smite
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
The tiers in order of favorite to least favorite:
Tier 2 is the sweet spot for adventuring. The characters can do things without being too overpowered. Tier 1 is fun for a little and it is usually done by the time it gets boring. Tier 3 has some monsters and stuff that I like, but the excitement in facing those thing is due to it being rare and the longer you stay in tier 3, the more mundane those threats feel and it kind of loses something. Tier 4 is where the game tends to jump the shark so to speak.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Drinking potions being a bonus action. So dumb it takes a full action to chug some grape Fanta.
The main thing (which I already allow in my games) is to make Warlocks use Intelligence instead of Charisma.
Aside from that, Monks could do with a slight overhaul. I would change their hit dice to d10s, allow them to dash as a bonus action without spending Ki, increase their starting Martial Arts die to d6, and make darts a monk weapon.
[REDACTED]