D&D 5E Unbalanced Sub-classes and how to fix them

[Aldarc]

I recall recently seeing a design discussion where it was said they intentially built one simpler subclass for each class for the just grab and go players. I wonder how many of the less interesting, underperform, doesnt deliver etc cases fall into that category when viewed by those who get into the builds part more?

Champion is mechanically straight forward and would need to get a lot of its character from the background and roleplay.

Mearls & Co. have also commented how they regret that the Champion and other Fighter subclasses fail on delivering on a class fantasy.

 

[5ekyu]

Mearls & Co. have also commented how they regret that the Champion and other Fighter subclasses fail on delivering on a class fantasy.

Since they would want all the classes to be used and various playstyles to find things to suit their needs, i am not surprised they would feel that way.

Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app

 

[Kinematics]

I'd put Storm Sorcerer (and Sorcerer in general) in the problematic list. Part of the problem is the name: 'storm' is the term used for lightning-based segmentation (eg: Storm Genasi), so from a certain point of view it makes sense that it's all based around lightning. On the other hand, an entire subclass is expected to encompass a complete theme, and from that perspective, you'd expect a Storm Sorcerer to encompass all things weather/storm related (all the way up to the Control Weather spell, which Sorcerer doesn't get access to).

But it doesn't. It's just a sorcerer that focuses on lightning instead of fire (which is its own kettle of unbalanced fish). It has some kinda nice traits, but there's a reason you don't have elemental specialization as a subclass option among the various spellcasters. It's just too narrowly focused a theme. If you want to be a sorcerer with a lightning theme, just get lightning spells (of the pathetic handful that are available).

Of course the original UA release included bonus spells, and those spells included things like Sleet Storm and Cone of Cold. So perhaps even the original design revolved around 'storms', and not just 'lightning'. Yet they ended up stripping it down to something far more trivial, because they had to make it possible for it to function within the ludicrously limited Sorcerer spell restrictions. The Sorcerer is just not capable of supporting that theme while also having enough spells to actually be able to survive and do anything mundane.

The only way I've been able to make it work is by giving it back the bonus spell slots, and pulling liberally from 3rd party sources for more spells that actually fit within the theme of a master of storms. (Note: Not the wiki homebrew spells; I've drawn from "The Middle Finger of Vecna"'s webpages, and "Elminster's Guide to Magic", which both seem pretty well designed and balanced.)

 

[Saeviomagy]

Most classes need a huge bucket of flavourful, always useable utility added to them. Casters mostly have it covered with cantrips, but anyone who doesn't have cantrips is basically wandering around using their stats and proficiency modifiers to faintly modify how often they fail at skill attempts.

 

[Mistwell]

I you don't use the "multiclassing" option in your game, I don't think any are overpowered. Doubly so if you use neither the "feats" or the "multiclassing" options.

 

[CapnZapp]

I think that is a better criteria than over/under powered, which are really party and DM dependent.

The issue with the sorcerer (and the berserker barbarian as the other main example) is that to be effective with them as written, you really need to play a cold, strategic style, which is the opposite of the fluff/theme of the class. The disconnect is irritating--there should be more reward for playing the wizard strategically than for playing the sorcerer.

I agree the third casters and the third martials have problems. Largely because people assume that a third caster really means a half caster and 2/3rds melee type (or vice versa for third martials). Usually I am pro-subclass, but I think the thirds would have been better as half caster classes (maybe one arcane half caster with subclasses based on the bard, wizard, sorcerer, and warlock).

The problem with the sorcerer is made complicated by the fact that if you pick the obviously best choices, it's perfectly fine.

So any fix needs to improve thematic choices without a straight buff.

In short, the Fire Draconic Sorq is fine. But we want more kinds of Sorqs to be fine.

Third casters such as Eldritch Knights are too fine - as long as you ruthlessly use your magic only to buff your martial combat and don't delude yourself into believing you hsbe any business casting power sorts of spells.

In this case too, the problem is how to improve thematic choices without straight buffs.

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

 

[CapnZapp]

I you don't use the "multiclassing" option in your game, I don't think any are overpowered. Doubly so if you use neither the "feats" or the "multiclassing" options.

Only problem with that view is that feats and multi-classing make up a significant part of the mechanical richness and depth of the edition.

It is entirely reasonable to expect WotC to successfully offer a balanced game WITH these essential subsystems.

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

 

[MechaTarrasque]

The problem with the sorcerer is made complicated by the fact that if you pick the obviously best choices, it's perfectly fine.

So any fix needs to improve thematic choices without a straight buff.

In short, the Fire Draconic Sorq is fine. But we want more kinds of Sorqs to be fine.

Third casters such as Eldritch Knights are too fine - as long as you ruthlessly use your magic only to buff your martial combat and don't delude yourself into believing you hsbe any business casting power sorts of spells.

In this case too, the problem is how to improve thematic choices without straight buffs.

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

I have long thought the biggest conceptual issue with the eldritch knight is that it should have used transmutation (or maybe conjuration) instead of evocation: changing the focus to being really good at getting close to enemies (and using fighter stuff to do damage) rather than trying to keep up to fighter damage with low level wizard spells. [Adjuration is fine, as sometimes you need resistance to fire to get close to the balor to hit it.] Admittedly concentration means you will often only get to use the spell's benefits to get close once, but it is a poor fighter who can't make the bad guy's caster's life miserable when he/she gets within reach.

 

[CapnZapp]

I have long thought the biggest conceptual issue with the eldritch knight is that it should have used transmutation (or maybe conjuration) instead of evocation: changing the focus to being really good at getting close to enemies (and using fighter stuff to do damage) rather than trying to keep up to fighter damage with low level wizard spells. [Adjuration is fine, as sometimes you need resistance to fire to get close to the balor to hit it.] Admittedly concentration means you will often only get to use the spell's benefits to get close once, but it is a poor fighter who can't make the bad guy's caster's life miserable when he/she gets within reach.

I guess you're right.

I have never even contemplated taking an evocation spell as an EK. To me the analysis is blindingly obvious - don't take spells that make you spend your action on Cast a Spell instead of Attack and don't take spells with Concentration. You're not a Wizard that actively tries to stay out of trouble, you're a Fighter that actively seeks it out!

Instead spells should either help your (martial) offense or your defense (or be purely out-of-combat utility). Preferably without consuming your actions.

Shield for instance, is an excellent EK spell. In fact, you could do worse than spending all your slots on Shield, and never using another spell in your lifetime!

 

[5ekyu]

I guess you're right.

I have never even contemplated taking an evocation spell as an EK. To me the analysis is blindingly obvious - don't take spells that make you spend your action on Cast a Spell instead of Attack and don't take spells with Concentration. You're not a Wizard that actively tries to stay out of trouble, you're a Fighter that actively seeks it out!

Instead spells should either help your (martial) offense or your defense (or be purely out-of-combat utility). Preferably without consuming your actions.

Shield for instance, is an excellent EK spell. In fact, you could do worse than spending all your slots on Shield, and never using another spell in your lifetime!

Actually, while it would have been fine by me if EK allowed the **choice** of any two wizard schools (conceptually - might need balancing - maybe one school early then a second later, etc) I thought the evocation aspect was pretty obvious as to its focus - getting some large AOE effects for the cases where it is needed. I also found that the idea of using slots for evocation was less important than say opening up scrolls and such as options for when the EK cannot get into his normal damage producing strength.

For example, a 5th level EK can use a fireball scroll (possibly crafted by his party caster) with (Int+2 Prof+3) at the early part of a fight while the enemy is closing with a decent chance of success (esp if assistance such as guidance etc are provided.) Also opens up all the "ability to cast spell) requirements.

meanwhile, i agree, the slots spent in combat boil down to mostly abjurations that allow things needed or utilize other actions they are not using. with shield being the most obvious choice.

Personally i think the specific call out to evocation was a bad idea but it can be fine in a typical environment if played well. but i would have definitely preferred illusion, transmutation, conjuration or even necromancy as options.

One school at 3rd, another at 10th another at 14th - whatever the breaks are.