D&D 5E Anyone else finding character advancement pretty dull?

[Blue]

Now I've been a player for 6 months and I've noticed that I find character advancement really dull, something I never found in 3.5. Even playing as a wizard, I've found spell selection etc boring.

I'm the exact opposite - I enjoy 5e leveling much more than I did 3.5 leveling.

First, no dead levels. Finally getting enough XP to level and getting ... nothing but some math (HPs) was horrible. Most fo the classes had dead level - heck some spellcasters in 3.x had almost nothing BUT dead levels. If all you get is an increase in casting, and in 5e you get casting plus a feature - well, that's more exciting. The only dead level are if you take two martial classes to level 5, the second Extra Attack gives nothing.

The second point was that with prestige classes and feat requirements, we usually planned out a character levels in advance, if not a whole 1-20 build. "I need to have X ranks of this skill, which means I need to take at least one level of a class that has it as a class skill so I can go to lvl+3 max ranks instead of half of that, but I can't lose a point of BAB otherwise I have to wait another three levels for the feat I want next level...". The planning was needed to be able to hit the numbers needed to get the features we really wanted further down the road without delaying them too long.

Sure, the character creation mini-game was fun (and why I still occasionally build a superhero in Champions even though I haven't played in years), but leveling a character was just putting in place the choices already made for the most part, unless the character was diverging due to story or RP reasons.

Third, I have more freedom in building what I want (though less options at this point - which I approve of for other reasons). In 3.5 if I was going with a weapon wielder, I was pretty much limited to about 1/3 of the classes if I didn't want to lose BAB, which with iterative attacks was also the gateway to multiple attacks and being able to hold up your contribution at the higher levels. 5e your proficiency increases every level.

That's limiting, but spellcasters were much worse. Any multiclassing spellcasting among the core classes would level you too far behind since it wasn't additive. And DCs were by spell level, not character level. Prestige classes with +1 caster level were the only way to pick a different class and still be able to cast higher levels. In 5e, between all casting adding for spell slots and being able to upcast spells there's a lot more freedom in choosing what class I want to take for any new level.

To sum up: 5e does't lock features behind prerequisite gates so I can pick the next level I want to be, every level of every class brings something interesting, an more freedom in picking among the class choices because they stack better without overwhelming with a book a month.

 

[Morrus]

I can see where you’re coming from. Some of my players have observed that levelling up isn’t as exciting as it once was. I’m not sure I could pin it down though.

 

[billd91]

I'm quite content with 5e advancement. The whole concept of packing in new and special things to avoid dead levels that came as part of 3e's evolution was an annoyance. I don't need a stream of cookies to keep me interested - minor increments is great. That just leads to more and more unnecessary complexity. Simpler is better in many ways.

 

[TwoSix]

Considering the choice you make most often is "what class do i take my next level in" (assuming multiclassing is allowed), I would think the easiest option to increase modularity is to add classes of limited scope. Classes that are only 3-5 levels long, and are only able to be multiclassed into at higher levels. Similar, but not indetical to, what someone described above as Shadow of the Demon Lord's method.

 

[GlassJaw]

On the whole, it's a bit dull. Fine, but dull.

This is basically where I'm at. I certainly don't dislike it but there are some things about the system where I could use a bit more crunch.

Some things I'd like to see:
- Expanded subclasses: More options within a subclass, mix-and-matching of subclasses (some balance issues with the current system would arise, however), "universal" subclasses that are available to multiple classes

- More granular feat system: There's no question that feats need to be recosted. The problem feats have been discussed in great detail. To make the feat system more interesting, I'd like to see more frequent choices but a complete recosting of all the feats, including breaking up feats in smaller pieces.

- Detach ASI/feat from class. This would give a small bump to multi-classing, which is needed.

 

[GlassJaw]

This.

We have a long discussion about Pathfinder 2 and missed opportunities; and how 5E desperately needs more crunch on the player side.

What I call deep crunch, not breadth-crunch. Meaning more decision points for new AND existing characters. (New subclasses allow you to create new characters but does nothing to increase the complexity of existing ones)

I have predicted this for years.

Give us an Advanced Player's Handbook now!

Yeah I'd be all over this. I've started to homebrew some things but life gets in the away of any significant design.

Not to detail too much: I've followed the PF2 playtest very little. Are there any threads someone can point me to that sum up some of the changes and the feedback Paizo has been getting?

 

[grimslade]

I like the leveling experience in 5e. I like not having to fiddle and tweak my 'build' to be optimum so I wouldn't let my party down. Character design was a fun minigame when I wasn't playing, but it was ultimately empty. BECMI, AD&D, 2E leveling was similar. Small gains except for spell casters and once you got to high enough levels not much change at all. I don't mind it. The play of the game is more important now, not the pencil whipping 'strategy' of feat and multiclass stacking, avoiding trap feats and Prestige classes. I enjoy that very much.
The flattened math means that leveling will not be as 'exciting' as 3.x. There will not be an Advanced Player's Handbook, because that would break the simplified rules of 5e. WotC would need to change whole systems to accommodate a more complex game. The whole modular approach that was talked about during the Next development could bring in some great complex leveling, but why? The mini-game of character creation was a barrier to entry. Feats and multiclassing are more complex options, but they start to chip away at the math of the game and are pretty limited. Adding more complexity would chip away further at the solid core gameplay.

The addition of Psionics will be a test of what 5e can handle as far as a system addition. If we wind up with the different school of magic approach, 5e is not going to get more complex until the end of its life cycle. Think Book of Nine Swords or Magic of Incarnum at the end of 3.5 If we get a more robust spell point system, there is hope of more complexity coming down the pike as it shows that the designers are willing to flex the system a bit.

 

[delericho]

Considering the choice you make most often is "what class do i take my next level in" (assuming multiclassing is allowed), I would think the easiest option to increase modularity is to add classes of limited scope. Classes that are only 3-5 levels long, and are only able to be multiclassed into at higher levels. Similar, but not indetical to, what someone described above as Shadow of the Demon Lord's method.

That's pretty much Prestige Classes. I'd rather we didn't go down that road again.

 

[TwoSix]

That's pretty much Prestige Classes. I'd rather we didn't go down that road again.

If they had no requirements other than level, why not? The most onerous part of Prestige Classes was the requirement to build towards them, removing that would make the concept much more workable.

 

[Aldarc]

From my experience as a DM, one of the appeals of the warlock class is not just its flavor but how it provides greater player empowerment over constructing the character. You simply have more decision points as you level than most classes: patron, pact, invocations, spells, etc. It doesn't really matter how comparatively effective the warlock is; the appeal exists because many players like having those choices.