Hmmm; I think you're underestimating druids for "Buffs/Heal" and "Control/Debuffs" at least in early/mid levels. (I haven't played enough high-level 5E to really judge there.) They're full casters with a wide selections of options, including some great area-control spells no one else gets. For healing, they've got Cure Wounds, Healing Word, Lesser and Greater Restoration, etc. And don't forget the expanded list for Land druids.
Absolutely. In fact, Druids may be the best single-class healer in 5e, because they have access to Healing Spirit.
Healing spirit is great, but it's even greater if you are standing on soil. Cast healing spirit as a bonus action. Turn into a giant badger as an action. Burrow 10 feet into the ground. Relax while the party deals with the bad guys.
I think that Warlocks are so diverse mechanically they probably need to be broken down to subclass level. While Agonizing Eldritch Blasts are a straightforward quality attack for tier 1, there are invocations and Pacts that can drastically impact their ability in other areas and the no-slot spell expansion potential of the Tome Pact can drastically improve utility.
Warlocks can also take a social feat and break it as thoroughly as any combat nova build with the Actor and Mask of Many Faces wombo combo. The ability to hide out of sight for a moment and step out as the BBEG or a random Duke or a city guard, with advantage and high CHA cannot be underestimated.
I personally like the Gloomstalker for the Dread Ambusher, you get an extra attack, that's at level 2 two attacks, level 5, 3 attacks, and an extra 1d8 damage plus Hunter's Mark for 1d6. Yes that is only in first round, but that's first round of every battle no rests needed. I don't use crossbows, but Sharpshooter is great.
Maybe I missed this in the thread, but could you explain your reasoning behind giving Fighters a B rating mid- and late-tier in Control/Debuffs? Compare any spellcaster classes with the Fighter, and they don't make the grade at all. I mean, access to wall spells, summons, terrain altering spells, spells like Bestow Curse (which take on a whole new level if you get creative), make the fighter's ability to knock creature prone, or cause AoE, or even disarm them (assuming you take Battlemaster, others have less CC/Debuff IMO) seem lackluster at best.
Also, speaking of older editions, there is one tradition that remains: full casters are in a tier of their own as soon as they get their higher tier spells. And while I agree that bards and wizards (and I would add cleric), take a step above the others with their versatility, druids and, to a lesser extent, sorcerers still have more power than most other optimized single class builds.
First off I don't understand why wizard and sorcerer have different tanking abilities. In my experience the sorcerer of the party while I was a wizard couldn't take mage armor so I had to save a casting for him the entire campaign.
... Why? Mage Armor is on the Sorcerer spell list. They could've learned it at any level.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
... Why? Mage Armor is on the Sorcerer spell list. They could've learned it at any level.
Sorcerers start with 2 spells known and only get 1 additional spell per level. It's not hard to see how Mage Armor might end up on the backburner.
That's not what Katharsis was saying. They implied that the Sorcerer couldn't learn Mage Armor, and that is simply untrue.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
From what I'm seeing, one of the main problems with this class ranking is really the fact that we're trying to do this through the four tiers of play. While melee and half-caster classes stand on even ground in early game, and sometimes even slightly above the full caster classes, as the game progresses there's no comparison. You wanna look at durability? Well yes the 20th level barbarian is great, but the wizard can make himself immune to damage for 10 minutes and the (circle of the moon) druid can get 126 hp back as a bonus action every round. Damage dealing? A decent fighter build can do 75 points of damage every round at 11th level, but the wizard can do 65 points as a bonus action with animate objects (sure it's non-magical, but the point still stands), and that's 1 of the uses of this spell. Infiltration? Scry and teleport. Information gathering? Detect thoughts. Traps and locks? Find Traps, Knock.
And the further up we go, the more ridiculous it becomes. Heck, how do you balance the ability to rage, swing a sword, shoot arrows or smite with something like Wish? Or True Resurrection? Or Gate? From what I'm seeing, the ratings here are more appropriate for the first 5 levels of play. Afterwards things change dramatically.
But, if we're gonna do it, averaging over all tiers my ratings would be
Tier 1 - Bard, Cleric, Wizard
Tier 2 - Druid, Paladin
Tier 3 - Fighter, Rogue, Sorcerer, Warlock
Tier 4 - Barbarian, Monk, Ranger
I added the additional tier to take into account that Bards, Clerics and Wizards take the edge over Druids and Paladins because of their versatility. Barbarian can go to tier 3 if they're optimized well. Sorcerers are down in Tier 3 because of their restricted spells known (Bard more than compensate for this with their other features and Magical Secrets, and they get about 50% more spells known).
Cool idea, but without breaking it down to the subclasses, its quite useless because there are such massive differences between the subclass.
But I would look forward if this would be enhanced to the subclasses, maybe as a community effort, because I getting this asked a lot, especially from MMORPG players who try D&D the first time.. Its easier for them to think of roles like this to narrow down the things they like and are used to.
You like barbarian and like to be a striker? Zealot or Berserker.. same, but enjoy being a tank? Ancestral Guardian.
Same but cleric? Forge for example
Also, even in the pure fighter classes - Samurai and Cavalier are soo different.
So I think right now its quite useless, and needs to be enhanced to the subclasses
it looks like if you combine a bard with a fighter, barbarian or paladin it would have no weaknesses
Well, the weakness is that when you make a combination like that, you're less good at the specific things as a single-class character at the same level. And, you have a problem where you require different attributes for different abilities from different classes ("Multiple Attribute Dependency" — MAD). Bard needs high charisma, which is a little useful to a paladin but doesn't do anything for barbarian or fighter.
I agree that not including subclasses in this ranking limits the usefulness of this classification exercise. Example: Most Druids are not very Tank-worthy. Only Circle of the Moon has access to high hp Wildshapes. Even there, the AC on those Wildshapes is not very impressive. So a 'B' on tankiness for them, but a 'D' on tankiness for other subclasses. That is a huge difference.
Rangers don't deal all that much damage at higher levels unless they use Swift Quiver, which is only usable once or twice per long rest and can be disrupted or dispelled. I would rate their DPS as A/B/B.
While I do appreciate the effort. I do agree that a ranking through the levels of play is only useful by looking at what role you are looking for to fill and than rank each subclass that is good in that role.
It seems nowadays that inside different classes there are quite a few different ways to develop your character.
The role which I miss is the taunt/agro pull. It's not quite crowd control. It's more like the classic MMORPG tank who draws agro from a important target, to avoid that it damages the rest of the party. So an effective tank has survivability but also needs to be able to force enemies in attacking him.
Another part that is more important to me is the role-playing possibilities as a certain subclass.
This isn't a video game but rather a cooperative story telling through game rules. Sure you need to have the mechanics fit what you want your character to be able to do in the rules.
But please, let's look at the immersion, without immersion and only optimizing this game becomes very dull and uninspiring. The way 4e felt to me, I was pushing the same button, over and over again because it was the most effective way.
How does my character tie into the world and what has his experience been. That needs to be reflected in the class and subclass as well. But I get that something that becomes very personal very quickly. So ranking that isn't as rewarding, as there is no 'right way' to do it. And yet, that's exactly what I want from RPG, the story needs to be served by the rules. But yes there are some subclasses that aren't built equally. It's so sad to see that a sorcerer seems one of the most constrained caster classes, because of the limited amount of spells and meta magic is set in stone. While I always had the feeling that they are the more fluid caster.
At least WotC is fixing this in the newer subclasses and at the same time it's sad to see that older subclasses which are clearly sub par, don't get fixed.
But I always think that a little tinkering by home brew is what can make the difference between a fun or frustrating game. Look at other subclasses for power reference and always keep a weakness or trade off.
Surprised to see this thread still alive, honestly and really appreciate the feedback. This was originally posted before even Xanathars came out and the only UA I consider I think was the revised ranger. Back then every class only had about 3 subclasses and I hadn't broken out the rating for each more an average based on the potential (again all my personal opinion) with so much more content added to the game, I wonder if anyone would be interested in an updated version of this? (again it was just meant to be a subjective guide for people unfamiliar with 5e or D&D, in general, to help them pick a class)
I would like to contribute but I must stay realistic, I have limited knowledge of all possible builds and I have little actual experience outside of the 5e Barbarian.
I would like to contribute where I can to shortlist which sub-classes are suitable for which role. As I feel that it could be miss guiding to only look at the class and not take into account the possible sub-classes.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Healing spirit is great, but it's even greater if you are standing on soil. Cast healing spirit as a bonus action. Turn into a giant badger as an action. Burrow 10 feet into the ground. Relax while the party deals with the bad guys.
Friends, Mage Hand, Message, Minor Illusion, Mold Earth, Prestidigitation, Charm Person, Comprehend Languages, Disguise Self, Find Familiar, Fog Cloud, Illusory Script, Silent Image, Sleep, Unseen Servant, Alter Self, Darkness, Darkvision, Detect Thoughts, Invisibility, Knock, Levitate, Locate Object, Misty Step, Spider Climb, Suggestion, Clairvoyance, Fly, Gaseous Form, Major Image, Nondetection, Sending, Tongues.
I'll stop there but that's Cantrips thru 3rd level spells of a Wizard that says a D rating in Stealth/Social is a weird choice.
I got quotes!
I think that Warlocks are so diverse mechanically they probably need to be broken down to subclass level. While Agonizing Eldritch Blasts are a straightforward quality attack for tier 1, there are invocations and Pacts that can drastically impact their ability in other areas and the no-slot spell expansion potential of the Tome Pact can drastically improve utility.
Warlocks can also take a social feat and break it as thoroughly as any combat nova build with the Actor and Mask of Many Faces wombo combo. The ability to hide out of sight for a moment and step out as the BBEG or a random Duke or a city guard, with advantage and high CHA cannot be underestimated.
I just took a glance here and putting Druids and Warlocks on the same level as Rangers sounds like someone didn't play the game at all.
I personally like the Gloomstalker for the Dread Ambusher, you get an extra attack, that's at level 2 two attacks, level 5, 3 attacks, and an extra 1d8 damage plus Hunter's Mark for 1d6. Yes that is only in first round, but that's first round of every battle no rests needed. I don't use crossbows, but Sharpshooter is great.
Maybe I missed this in the thread, but could you explain your reasoning behind giving Fighters a B rating mid- and late-tier in Control/Debuffs? Compare any spellcaster classes with the Fighter, and they don't make the grade at all. I mean, access to wall spells, summons, terrain altering spells, spells like Bestow Curse (which take on a whole new level if you get creative), make the fighter's ability to knock creature prone, or cause AoE, or even disarm them (assuming you take Battlemaster, others have less CC/Debuff IMO) seem lackluster at best.
Also, speaking of older editions, there is one tradition that remains: full casters are in a tier of their own as soon as they get their higher tier spells. And while I agree that bards and wizards (and I would add cleric), take a step above the others with their versatility, druids and, to a lesser extent, sorcerers still have more power than most other optimized single class builds.
... Why? Mage Armor is on the Sorcerer spell list. They could've learned it at any level.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Sorcerers start with 2 spells known and only get 1 additional spell per level. It's not hard to see how Mage Armor might end up on the backburner.
That's not what Katharsis was saying. They implied that the Sorcerer couldn't learn Mage Armor, and that is simply untrue.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
From what I'm seeing, one of the main problems with this class ranking is really the fact that we're trying to do this through the four tiers of play. While melee and half-caster classes stand on even ground in early game, and sometimes even slightly above the full caster classes, as the game progresses there's no comparison. You wanna look at durability? Well yes the 20th level barbarian is great, but the wizard can make himself immune to damage for 10 minutes and the (circle of the moon) druid can get 126 hp back as a bonus action every round. Damage dealing? A decent fighter build can do 75 points of damage every round at 11th level, but the wizard can do 65 points as a bonus action with animate objects (sure it's non-magical, but the point still stands), and that's 1 of the uses of this spell. Infiltration? Scry and teleport. Information gathering? Detect thoughts. Traps and locks? Find Traps, Knock.
And the further up we go, the more ridiculous it becomes. Heck, how do you balance the ability to rage, swing a sword, shoot arrows or smite with something like Wish? Or True Resurrection? Or Gate? From what I'm seeing, the ratings here are more appropriate for the first 5 levels of play. Afterwards things change dramatically.
But, if we're gonna do it, averaging over all tiers my ratings would be
Tier 1 - Bard, Cleric, Wizard
Tier 2 - Druid, Paladin
Tier 3 - Fighter, Rogue, Sorcerer, Warlock
Tier 4 - Barbarian, Monk, Ranger
I added the additional tier to take into account that Bards, Clerics and Wizards take the edge over Druids and Paladins because of their versatility. Barbarian can go to tier 3 if they're optimized well. Sorcerers are down in Tier 3 because of their restricted spells known (Bard more than compensate for this with their other features and Magical Secrets, and they get about 50% more spells known).
Cool idea, but without breaking it down to the subclasses, its quite useless because there are such massive differences between the subclass.
But I would look forward if this would be enhanced to the subclasses, maybe as a community effort, because I getting this asked a lot, especially from MMORPG players who try D&D the first time.. Its easier for them to think of roles like this to narrow down the things they like and are used to.
You like barbarian and like to be a striker? Zealot or Berserker.. same, but enjoy being a tank? Ancestral Guardian.
Same but cleric? Forge for example
Also, even in the pure fighter classes - Samurai and Cavalier are soo different.
So I think right now its quite useless, and needs to be enhanced to the subclasses
how would multiclassing affect this?
it looks like if you combine a bard with a fighter, barbarian or paladin it would have no weaknesses
Well, the weakness is that when you make a combination like that, you're less good at the specific things as a single-class character at the same level. And, you have a problem where you require different attributes for different abilities from different classes ("Multiple Attribute Dependency" — MAD). Bard needs high charisma, which is a little useful to a paladin but doesn't do anything for barbarian or fighter.
I agree that not including subclasses in this ranking limits the usefulness of this classification exercise. Example: Most Druids are not very Tank-worthy. Only Circle of the Moon has access to high hp Wildshapes. Even there, the AC on those Wildshapes is not very impressive. So a 'B' on tankiness for them, but a 'D' on tankiness for other subclasses. That is a huge difference.
I like it.
Rangers don't deal all that much damage at higher levels unless they use Swift Quiver, which is only usable once or twice per long rest and can be disrupted or dispelled. I would rate their DPS as A/B/B.
While I do appreciate the effort. I do agree that a ranking through the levels of play is only useful by looking at what role you are looking for to fill and than rank each subclass that is good in that role.
It seems nowadays that inside different classes there are quite a few different ways to develop your character.
The role which I miss is the taunt/agro pull. It's not quite crowd control. It's more like the classic MMORPG tank who draws agro from a important target, to avoid that it damages the rest of the party. So an effective tank has survivability but also needs to be able to force enemies in attacking him.
Another part that is more important to me is the role-playing possibilities as a certain subclass.
This isn't a video game but rather a cooperative story telling through game rules. Sure you need to have the mechanics fit what you want your character to be able to do in the rules.
But please, let's look at the immersion, without immersion and only optimizing this game becomes very dull and uninspiring. The way 4e felt to me, I was pushing the same button, over and over again because it was the most effective way.
How does my character tie into the world and what has his experience been. That needs to be reflected in the class and subclass as well. But I get that something that becomes very personal very quickly. So ranking that isn't as rewarding, as there is no 'right way' to do it. And yet, that's exactly what I want from RPG, the story needs to be served by the rules. But yes there are some subclasses that aren't built equally. It's so sad to see that a sorcerer seems one of the most constrained caster classes, because of the limited amount of spells and meta magic is set in stone. While I always had the feeling that they are the more fluid caster.
At least WotC is fixing this in the newer subclasses and at the same time it's sad to see that older subclasses which are clearly sub par, don't get fixed.
But I always think that a little tinkering by home brew is what can make the difference between a fun or frustrating game. Look at other subclasses for power reference and always keep a weakness or trade off.
Surprised to see this thread still alive, honestly and really appreciate the feedback. This was originally posted before even Xanathars came out and the only UA I consider I think was the revised ranger. Back then every class only had about 3 subclasses and I hadn't broken out the rating for each more an average based on the potential (again all my personal opinion) with so much more content added to the game, I wonder if anyone would be interested in an updated version of this? (again it was just meant to be a subjective guide for people unfamiliar with 5e or D&D, in general, to help them pick a class)
Berserk Sig by The Hollow
I would definitely best interested in that. Thanks for the offer.
It seems like a daunting task.
I would like to contribute but I must stay realistic, I have limited knowledge of all possible builds and I have little actual experience outside of the 5e Barbarian.
I would like to contribute where I can to shortlist which sub-classes are suitable for which role. As I feel that it could be miss guiding to only look at the class and not take into account the possible sub-classes.