One of the big complaints I’ve heard is that classes are losing their distinction. I would propose making “Class Distinctives”. Each class has distinctives that define the class and are present only as long as the player remains in the class. Once they take levels in another class, they lose their distinctives and begin gaining those of the new class. Additional subclass features align to these. Examples of distinctives would be:
This feels too drastic to me and one almost might as well just ban multi-classing. I’m also not sure that it really addresses the complaints about class distinctiveness. I think those are more related to the increasing flexibility of builds possible within a class (e.g. Paladins smiting with ranged attacks, Wisdom-based Warlocks) and some of the mechanical changes that iron out differences between classes (e.g. Pact Magic switching to half-caster spell slots). Personally, I generally like the increased flexibility, as it feels like the core archetypes of the classes are still present, but one can now take those archetypes in unusual directions. If one wants to discourage multi-classing, then I think that should be attained by ensuring that staying single-class is just as viable and rewarding as multi-classing, not by “punishing” players whose character concept or story includes multi-classing.
As mentioned by, ThelenyiWhinlaw, this is far too punishing the way you suggested.
To an extent I agree that it should be easy to quickly parse the defining features of a class, and this should be evident from level 1 and be developed throughout their level range. (This also ties into larger design issues with the multiclass system.)
Unfortunately, this runs into three issues:
1. No one can agree what the defining features of certain classes should be (see Ranger, Monk, Bard, etc. threads on here). WotC designers don't seem to know or want to choose.
2. Inconsistency in design of classes, features, and play styles. Some key features come online 1st level, some 2nd. Some classes have 1 defining feature, others multiple. Some class features scale with level, some with PB, some with stats, some don't scale.
3. Multiclass feature interactions. 2nd and 3rd order effects. Some features are instantly desirable and effective from a single level dip, often stronger in a different class than their own class. Some easily cover weaknesses that were designed to balance the class.
If something is to be done to avoid the complaint of classes overlapping or not being unique, and now would be the time for the designers to do so, they could focus on:
- Making the core feature of each class immediately accessible from level 1 so each level 1 character and single level multiclass dip instantly FEELS like you get to play that iconic concept.
- Make the distinctive class features scale based on the class levels, so as to avoid single level dips being on par with pure class characters, but making sure they provide a useful new/niche option and aren't underpowered to the point of useless. Also identify features, such as Pact of the Blade or concentration-less Hunter's Mark, that scale in name only, the real effect being gained instantly and always remaining powerful.
- Make the classes more limited in their access to features/abilities outside their "identity". This rewards subclasses, feats, and multiclass choices to broaden/mitigate your strengths/weaknesses, without diluting the core class identity. Wizards and sorcerers are arguably veering closer together in number of different spells available in a day and ability to modify spells.
Unfortunately, the designers don't seem to have clear visions for what each class should feel like at its core, or are unwilling to impose any limits on it. Instead, some of what we've seen are classes with broader, similar designs, but hopefully that's just to expand design space they can playtest classes in before focusing on more distinct and unique designs later.
Agree with the above. We shouldn't focus on one single feature being the "core identity" of the class, but rather what fantasy / archetype is that class attempting to realize. i.e.
Bard - Charismatic, comical manipulator who inspires their friends to greatness and embarrasses or humiliates their enemies.
Barbarian - Tough, powerful warrior who charges into battle head first at every opportunity and crushes their enemies.
Cleric - Passionate, caring, holy person who keeps their friends in the fight, and can shame or intimidate others into fleeing.
Druid - Wise, sneaky sage who could be anything, anywhere at anytime and brings the wrath of nature down upon their enemies.
Fighter - Strategic, pragmatic warrior who knows when, where, and how to fight, and uses their expertise with their weapons to control the flow of battle and defeat any opponent.
Paladin - Passionate, inspiring warrior who commands authority on the battlefield and smites their enemies.
Ranger - Wise, knowledgeable explorers who can use their experience to identify and exploit their enemy's weaknesses and errors.
Rogue - Crafty, quick improvisor who use their wit and skill to get themselves into and out of trouble at every turn.
Sorcerer - Strange, intuitive mage who's emotions and raw instincts can draw on the magic in the world instead to produce whatever effect they most need at this moment.
Warlock - Creepy, terrifying mages who have tapped into forbidden magics and entered dangerous binding pacts for the power to destroy or control the world.
Wizard - Intelligent, clever sage who know everything about everything from much studying who use that knowledge and magic to solve any problem they put their mind to.
One of the big complaints I’ve heard is that classes are losing their distinction. I would propose making “Class Distinctives”. Each class has distinctives that define the class and are present only as long as the player remains in the class. Once they take levels in another class, they lose their distinctives and begin gaining those of the new class. Additional subclass features align to these. Examples of distinctives would be:
Bard: Bardic Inspiration
Ranger: Hunter’s Mark
Rogue: Sneak Attack
Cleric: Holy Order / Channel Divinity
Druid: Wild Shape
Paladin: Divine Smite / Channel Divinity
Barbarian: Rage
Fighter: Martial Expert (Action surges, weapon expertise)
Sorcerer: Magic Font (Including meta magic)
Warlock: Pact Magic (Including Eldritch blast & Invocations)
Wizard: Spell Sculpting (Memorize, modify & ritual spellcasting)
This would preclude low level dips and allow class distinctives to take effect at level one, which was another problem with the playtest.
This feels too drastic to me and one almost might as well just ban multi-classing. I’m also not sure that it really addresses the complaints about class distinctiveness. I think those are more related to the increasing flexibility of builds possible within a class (e.g. Paladins smiting with ranged attacks, Wisdom-based Warlocks) and some of the mechanical changes that iron out differences between classes (e.g. Pact Magic switching to half-caster spell slots). Personally, I generally like the increased flexibility, as it feels like the core archetypes of the classes are still present, but one can now take those archetypes in unusual directions. If one wants to discourage multi-classing, then I think that should be attained by ensuring that staying single-class is just as viable and rewarding as multi-classing, not by “punishing” players whose character concept or story includes multi-classing.
As mentioned by, ThelenyiWhinlaw, this is far too punishing the way you suggested.
To an extent I agree that it should be easy to quickly parse the defining features of a class, and this should be evident from level 1 and be developed throughout their level range. (This also ties into larger design issues with the multiclass system.)
Unfortunately, this runs into three issues:
1. No one can agree what the defining features of certain classes should be (see Ranger, Monk, Bard, etc. threads on here). WotC designers don't seem to know or want to choose.
2. Inconsistency in design of classes, features, and play styles. Some key features come online 1st level, some 2nd. Some classes have 1 defining feature, others multiple. Some class features scale with level, some with PB, some with stats, some don't scale.
3. Multiclass feature interactions. 2nd and 3rd order effects. Some features are instantly desirable and effective from a single level dip, often stronger in a different class than their own class. Some easily cover weaknesses that were designed to balance the class.
If something is to be done to avoid the complaint of classes overlapping or not being unique, and now would be the time for the designers to do so, they could focus on:
- Making the core feature of each class immediately accessible from level 1 so each level 1 character and single level multiclass dip instantly FEELS like you get to play that iconic concept.
- Make the distinctive class features scale based on the class levels, so as to avoid single level dips being on par with pure class characters, but making sure they provide a useful new/niche option and aren't underpowered to the point of useless. Also identify features, such as Pact of the Blade or concentration-less Hunter's Mark, that scale in name only, the real effect being gained instantly and always remaining powerful.
- Make the classes more limited in their access to features/abilities outside their "identity". This rewards subclasses, feats, and multiclass choices to broaden/mitigate your strengths/weaknesses, without diluting the core class identity. Wizards and sorcerers are arguably veering closer together in number of different spells available in a day and ability to modify spells.
Unfortunately, the designers don't seem to have clear visions for what each class should feel like at its core, or are unwilling to impose any limits on it. Instead, some of what we've seen are classes with broader, similar designs, but hopefully that's just to expand design space they can playtest classes in before focusing on more distinct and unique designs later.
Agree with the above. We shouldn't focus on one single feature being the "core identity" of the class, but rather what fantasy / archetype is that class attempting to realize. i.e.
Bard - Charismatic, comical manipulator who inspires their friends to greatness and embarrasses or humiliates their enemies.
Barbarian - Tough, powerful warrior who charges into battle head first at every opportunity and crushes their enemies.
Cleric - Passionate, caring, holy person who keeps their friends in the fight, and can shame or intimidate others into fleeing.
Druid - Wise, sneaky sage who could be anything, anywhere at anytime and brings the wrath of nature down upon their enemies.
Fighter - Strategic, pragmatic warrior who knows when, where, and how to fight, and uses their expertise with their weapons to control the flow of battle and defeat any opponent.
Paladin - Passionate, inspiring warrior who commands authority on the battlefield and smites their enemies.
Ranger - Wise, knowledgeable explorers who can use their experience to identify and exploit their enemy's weaknesses and errors.
Rogue - Crafty, quick improvisor who use their wit and skill to get themselves into and out of trouble at every turn.
Sorcerer - Strange, intuitive mage who's emotions and raw instincts can draw on the magic in the world instead to produce whatever effect they most need at this moment.
Warlock - Creepy, terrifying mages who have tapped into forbidden magics and entered dangerous binding pacts for the power to destroy or control the world.
Wizard - Intelligent, clever sage who know everything about everything from much studying who use that knowledge and magic to solve any problem they put their mind to.