That's actually pretty interesting, because I've realized that... for as iconic as the Thief archetype is... I have never once met someone who mentioned ever playing a Thief, and I've never seen someone play a Thief either in person or in any of the various D&D actual plays I watch.
That's actually pretty interesting, because I've realized that... for as iconic as the Thief archetype is... I have never once met someone who mentioned ever playing a Thief, and I've never seen someone play a Thief either in person or in any of the various D&D actual plays I watch.
Their third level trick is 'disarm traps or pick pockets as a bonus action' but, well, I don't recall ever seeing the action type required to do either one mattering, because both things almost always happen outside of combat.
That's actually pretty interesting, because I've realized that... for as iconic as the Thief archetype is... I have never once met someone who mentioned ever playing a Thief, and I've never seen someone play a Thief either in person or in any of the various D&D actual plays I watch.
Their third level trick is 'disarm traps or pick pockets as a bonus action' but, well, I don't recall ever seeing the action type required to do either one mattering, because both things almost always happen outside of combat.
Also the Use an Object action. I don't see that used very often either, but at least in theory there should be a lot of creative uses for this. The limit is really how much MacGyvering your DM lets you get away with.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
A lot of the problem with pick-pocketing is that a large majority of D&D monsters don't carry or use stuff. Use Object would be quite useful if using magic items was considered a Use Object action, but it's not.
A lot of the problem with pick-pocketing is that a large majority of D&D monsters don't carry or use stuff.
And with the ones that actually do use stuff, it's easier to just take it off their corpse.
Well, in theory you can do things like steal potions before they get used, or a mage's component pouch, but if that kind of thing is possible at all you can just spend your action doing it.
That's actually pretty interesting, because I've realized that... for as iconic as the Thief archetype is... I have never once met someone who mentioned ever playing a Thief, and I've never seen someone play a Thief either in person or in any of the various D&D actual plays I watch.
I play them. Fast hands is useful but thief's reflexes is great at that level range. Bypassing magic item restrictions depends on campaigns.
I realize that some of the things on my list are mechanically great. The question was what subclasses are unpopular. The ones I listed seem to be not played much or talked about all that often, or are considered to be so bad that most people avoid them.
The dungeon dude guys did a reasonable job of breaking down the subclasses by comparing them amongst each other for each individual class and comparing their answers to those of their community contributors. Their ranking are purely on mechanics and not role-playability since any class can be well played in the right setting.
Also, the most recent breakdown provided by DDB (I think) is here. If not requiring the most unpopular, then you might require at least not to take the most popular if just to shake things up.
Personally, I would like WotC's next non-adventure publication to be more options for the classes that goes back to try and re-balance some of these less popular classes. Particularly the early ones b/c the later ones probably suffer from a bit of 'power creep'. The class I'm most interested in seeing improved is the Way of the Four Elements Monk subclass particularly since it is one of the originals in the PHB itself.
Personally, I would like WotC's next non-adventure publication to be more options for the classes that goes back to try and re-balance some of these less popular classes. Particularly the early ones b/c the later ones probably suffer from a bit of 'power creep'.
What power creep? What later subclasses are clearly better than Barbarian (Totem), Bard (Lore), Cleric (Life), Druid (Moon), Fighter (Battle Master), Monk (Open Hand), Paladin (Vengeance), Rogue (Assassin), Sorcerer (Dragon), or Wizard (Evoker)? Sure, there's Hexblade and Gloom Stalker, but that's hardly enough to make a clear pattern.
Personally, I would like WotC's next non-adventure publication to be more options for the classes that goes back to try and re-balance some of these less popular classes. Particularly the early ones b/c the later ones probably suffer from a bit of 'power creep'.
What power creep? What later subclasses are clearly better than Barbarian (Totem), Bard (Lore), Cleric (Life), Druid (Moon), Fighter (Battle Master), Monk (Open Hand), Paladin (Vengeance), Rogue (Assassin), Sorcerer (Dragon), or Wizard (Evoker)? Sure, there's Hexblade and Gloom Stalker, but that's hardly enough to make a clear pattern.
Not arguing the general point but the Assassin subclass for Rogues is not that great, and I’d say the Swashbuckler and Soulknife are definitely better. I also don’t think Evocation is among the top choices for a Wizard, but there are a couple others in the PHB that are in that category so it doesn’t really matter, and I’d take Light over Life for Clerics.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Personally, I would like WotC's next non-adventure publication to be more options for the classes that goes back to try and re-balance some of these less popular classes. Particularly the early ones b/c the later ones probably suffer from a bit of 'power creep'.
What power creep? What later subclasses are clearly better than Barbarian (Totem), Bard (Lore), Cleric (Life), Druid (Moon), Fighter (Battle Master), Monk (Open Hand), Paladin (Vengeance), Rogue (Assassin), Sorcerer (Dragon), or Wizard (Evoker)? Sure, there's Hexblade and Gloom Stalker, but that's hardly enough to make a clear pattern.
I think he meant that most of the worst subclasses, if not all, were in the PHB. While it does have good options, I think overall that the average subclasses have only gotten better.
I agree with a lot of what you said, but I think you're wrong on a few things.
Barbarian (Totem) - Totem is probably the strongest but only by virtue of expanded resistances. Zealot is often considered as good or better.
Bard (Lore) - Lore is arguably the best, although I would personally put Eloquence higher.
Cleric (Life) - Life is good but I wouldn't say it's necessarily better than things like Grave or Forge.
Druid (Moon) - Moon is good but falls off in the 11 - 19 range. I personally think Shephard is better in those levels.
Fighter (Battle Master) - It's very good but now that you can get some of these maneuvers as a fighting style I don't think it's necessarily the strongest. Echo is probably the strongest and I'm not even sure it's close anymore.
Monk (Open Hand) - I think Shadow is just as good as this. I would even say shadow is better until level 17.
Paladin (Vengeance) - Vengeance is good but I wouldn't say it's without question the best. I suppose that's arguable though.
Ranger - As you said, the PHB subclasses here are pretty awful. Only a handful of people would argue that the PHB ranger subclasses are as even close to as good as those that have come later.
Rogue (Assassin) - I think you're the first person I've ever seen suggest assassin is the best. So much of their kit is tied into that first round of combat that if you happen to roll poorly on your Initiative, it's basically like you have no subclass. I personally think the AT is the best but that's still in PHB. I also think that Scout and Swashbuckler are stronger than Assassin though.
Sorcerer (Dragon) - The new Tasha's subclasses are better than this, as are many others.
Warlock - I agree, hexblade is probably the strongest.
Wizard (Evoker) - Evokers are very good, but not better than Chronurgy wizards. The level 10 ability of Chronurgy wizards makes it not close for any other subclass.
And at this stage, I just want to say that I am absolutely impressed by the fact that WotC have managed to create a fairly well balanced game and keep it that way through 6 years of publication, still going strong, and with almost no power creep, with some original subclasses and new ones being in both the ones that are best and worst considered. Kudos and thanks for this, it must not have been easy to resist the temptation...
I can't believe I'm doing this. . . but I actually agree with this. Besides a few obvious issues, i.e. new sorcerers/rangers having spell lists while older ones don't, sorcerers/rangers in general, a few badly designed subclasses (Battleragers, 4 Elements Monks, Purple Dragon Knights, Undying Warlocks, etc), and a few other minor issues, this edition has done a pretty decent job at staying well balanced and playable.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
And at this stage, I just want to say that I am absolutely impressed by the fact that WotC have managed to create a fairly well balanced game and keep it that way through 6 years of publication, still going strong, and with almost no power creep, with some original subclasses and new ones being in both the ones that are best and worst considered. Kudos and thanks for this, it must not have been easy to resist the temptation...
I can't believe I'm doing this. . . but I actually agree with this. Besides a few obvious issues, i.e. new sorcerers/rangers having spell lists while older ones don't, sorcerers/rangers in general, a few badly designed subclasses (Battleragers, 4 Elements Monks, Purple Dragon Knights, Undying Warlocks, etc), and a few other minor issues, this edition has done a pretty decent job at staying well balanced and playable.
What don't you like about the Battlerager? I know it gets some grief but I haven't seen anyone put it in the same breath as those other three.
And at this stage, I just want to say that I am absolutely impressed by the fact that WotC have managed to create a fairly well balanced game and keep it that way through 6 years of publication, still going strong, and with almost no power creep, with some original subclasses and new ones being in both the ones that are best and worst considered. Kudos and thanks for this, it must not have been easy to resist the temptation...
I can't believe I'm doing this. . . but I actually agree with this. Besides a few obvious issues, i.e. new sorcerers/rangers having spell lists while older ones don't, sorcerers/rangers in general, a few badly designed subclasses (Battleragers, 4 Elements Monks, Purple Dragon Knights, Undying Warlocks, etc), and a few other minor issues, this edition has done a pretty decent job at staying well balanced and playable.
What don't you like about the Battlerager? I know it gets some grief but I haven't seen anyone put it in the same breath as those other three.
If I had to guess, the others sound cool but don't perform, but BR is just all around lame in terms of features and flavor (arguably).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Oath of the Ancients Paladins and Enchantment Wizards are both popular.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Ancestral Guardian is mechanically solid whether or not people like it. Same for Nature cleric.
That's actually pretty interesting, because I've realized that... for as iconic as the Thief archetype is... I have never once met someone who mentioned ever playing a Thief, and I've never seen someone play a Thief either in person or in any of the various D&D actual plays I watch.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
Their third level trick is 'disarm traps or pick pockets as a bonus action' but, well, I don't recall ever seeing the action type required to do either one mattering, because both things almost always happen outside of combat.
Also the Use an Object action. I don't see that used very often either, but at least in theory there should be a lot of creative uses for this. The limit is really how much MacGyvering your DM lets you get away with.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
And also if your GM let you get away with reverse-pick pocketing hazardous things onto enemies, Fallout 3 style.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
A lot of the problem with pick-pocketing is that a large majority of D&D monsters don't carry or use stuff. Use Object would be quite useful if using magic items was considered a Use Object action, but it's not.
And with the ones that actually do use stuff, it's easier to just take it off their corpse.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Well, in theory you can do things like steal potions before they get used, or a mage's component pouch, but if that kind of thing is possible at all you can just spend your action doing it.
I was about to say, Ancients seems like one of the more flavorful paladin subclasses, and when in doubt I love me some Green Knight.
Not just flavorful, it's a powerhouse.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
I play them. Fast hands is useful but thief's reflexes is great at that level range. Bypassing magic item restrictions depends on campaigns.
I realize that some of the things on my list are mechanically great. The question was what subclasses are unpopular. The ones I listed seem to be not played much or talked about all that often, or are considered to be so bad that most people avoid them.
The dungeon dude guys did a reasonable job of breaking down the subclasses by comparing them amongst each other for each individual class and comparing their answers to those of their community contributors. Their ranking are purely on mechanics and not role-playability since any class can be well played in the right setting.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLQMqiULo_05Pf9RknbcprM6tJwOcxO6N4
Also, the most recent breakdown provided by DDB (I think) is here. If not requiring the most unpopular, then you might require at least not to take the most popular if just to shake things up.
Personally, I would like WotC's next non-adventure publication to be more options for the classes that goes back to try and re-balance some of these less popular classes. Particularly the early ones b/c the later ones probably suffer from a bit of 'power creep'. The class I'm most interested in seeing improved is the Way of the Four Elements Monk subclass particularly since it is one of the originals in the PHB itself.
What power creep? What later subclasses are clearly better than Barbarian (Totem), Bard (Lore), Cleric (Life), Druid (Moon), Fighter (Battle Master), Monk (Open Hand), Paladin (Vengeance), Rogue (Assassin), Sorcerer (Dragon), or Wizard (Evoker)? Sure, there's Hexblade and Gloom Stalker, but that's hardly enough to make a clear pattern.
Not arguing the general point but the Assassin subclass for Rogues is not that great, and I’d say the Swashbuckler and Soulknife are definitely better. I also don’t think Evocation is among the top choices for a Wizard, but there are a couple others in the PHB that are in that category so it doesn’t really matter, and I’d take Light over Life for Clerics.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I think he meant that most of the worst subclasses, if not all, were in the PHB. While it does have good options, I think overall that the average subclasses have only gotten better.
I agree with a lot of what you said, but I think you're wrong on a few things.
I can't believe I'm doing this. . . but I actually agree with this. Besides a few obvious issues, i.e. new sorcerers/rangers having spell lists while older ones don't, sorcerers/rangers in general, a few badly designed subclasses (Battleragers, 4 Elements Monks, Purple Dragon Knights, Undying Warlocks, etc), and a few other minor issues, this edition has done a pretty decent job at staying well balanced and playable.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
What don't you like about the Battlerager? I know it gets some grief but I haven't seen anyone put it in the same breath as those other three.
If I had to guess, the others sound cool but don't perform, but BR is just all around lame in terms of features and flavor (arguably).