I do, and I'm ok with that. I don't think that new options are necessarily needed. I played through 3e/3.5e/Pathfinder and I don't want that bloat for 5e.
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
D&D 5E What Unearthed Arcana Subclasses Would You Allow in a Campaign?
- Thread starter Hexmage-EN
- Start date
Sword of Spirit
Legend
Classes and subclasses have built-in, non-optional fluff in my campaigns. Some of them are broader (like Champion Fighter or Thief Rogue) while others are more specific (Oath of Devotion paladins are specifically connected to the LG member of the Empyrean Pantheon).
Earlier in the edition I used to try to incorporate new published subclasses into the fluff. Eventually they started making a bunch of really niche subclasses. A while ago I decided that any new subclasses would have to be approved on a case by case basis. Some of them might not get approved ever, and others it might make sense for a certain backstory. We also stick to official WotC sources.
Because UA material isn't in its final form, I can't analyze how or if it's going to fit into my world. With mechanical things that are more in the background influencing numbers, I wouldn't have a problem testing them out. But with things that influence the fluff of my world (such as subclasses how I use them), I'm not going to introduce an element that isn't in its final form and have to retcon things later when the final form comes out. Therefore it is very unlikely that I would allow any UA subclasses, unless it's for some sort of one-shot or specialty adventure that is explicitly not part of the my multiverse's continuity. (I tend to run non-continuity adventures for new players so they can get playing that dragonborn or tiefling out of their system, and that's the place to play that UA subclass too.)
Earlier in the edition I used to try to incorporate new published subclasses into the fluff. Eventually they started making a bunch of really niche subclasses. A while ago I decided that any new subclasses would have to be approved on a case by case basis. Some of them might not get approved ever, and others it might make sense for a certain backstory. We also stick to official WotC sources.
Because UA material isn't in its final form, I can't analyze how or if it's going to fit into my world. With mechanical things that are more in the background influencing numbers, I wouldn't have a problem testing them out. But with things that influence the fluff of my world (such as subclasses how I use them), I'm not going to introduce an element that isn't in its final form and have to retcon things later when the final form comes out. Therefore it is very unlikely that I would allow any UA subclasses, unless it's for some sort of one-shot or specialty adventure that is explicitly not part of the my multiverse's continuity. (I tend to run non-continuity adventures for new players so they can get playing that dragonborn or tiefling out of their system, and that's the place to play that UA subclass too.)
Flamestrike
Legend
Lore Master Wizard was broken beyond recognition. Brute Fighter also was bad.
The rest are OK.
The rest are OK.
Tales and Chronicles
Jewel of the North, formerly know as vincegetorix
If you dont mind: would you care explaining the problem with it? I know many people had problem with the Brute, but beyond ''its a better champion than the champion'', I personally loved that one. In the end, it was scraped, so I guess there was a problem with it I did not notice.
In my most recent houserule document I replaced Undomitable by the +1d6 to saves from the brute, to make a throwback to the old idea of the fighter having better saves.
Flamestrike
Legend
It outclasses every other Fighter Archetype by simply making the base Fighter, better.
Not only is that poor design (it doesn't have a unifying theme) it's layering an insanely strong number of abilities on an already strong class.
It's not 'broken' like the Loremaster is, but it shares a number of the latters design faults, and has no place in any reasonable game.
Marandahir
Crown-Forester (he/him)
That doesn't mean a Barbarian-light subclass doesn't belong for Fighters. Just that the Brute's mechanics were too powerful and un-unified.
Flamestrike
Legend
I didn't mention barbarian light.
I just said it was OP and non thematic when compared to other fighter subclasses.
Marandahir
Crown-Forester (he/him)
For sure. I wasn't disagree with you!
Micah Sweet
Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
Is that just for ease of use, or do you believe that options not in a hardback are inherently worse? And, if so, how?
Tallifer
Hero
Aye: I prefer my own character sheets and macros for 5E on roll20 to the official 5E ones anyway.
Similar Threads
