D&D 5E Classes that Suck

[FrogReaver]

Saying what classes suck depends entirely on your definition of "sucking."

If you're pessimistic, you may find even the smallest hint of being less powerful than an average being "sucky."

If you're less pessimistic, you may determine sucking to mean being unable to even come close to functional.

If you're literal, you may determine sucking as being a vacuum cleaner.

It should be worth noting that a class "sucking" is purely an opinion. It doesn't matter exactly how many people you've seen agree with you or how many people actually do agree with you.

In my opinion, the wizard sucks. Especially in this edition. You just have all prepared spells as an unlimited use until spellslots are out? Yuck. Unnecessary buff. If they wanted the wizard to actually not suck (again, imo), they'd give them less spells known and better defensive abilities. Maybe add a spell that gives a small bonus to dex saves.

But I know that's an opinion people will hardly ever share. But my playstyle is so incompatible with the wizard's that anytime I play it, it feels like being the class nerd who pulls out his notes and raises his hand first and wants to shout for attention when the teacher just wants to take attendance.

Best time I ever had playing a wizard was one that was setup to help the party survive as many bad situations as possible. I mostly used spells like silent image or fog cloud early on. I held back most combats and just used a cantrip until I felt we desperately needed something. Best time I've ever had playing a wizard.

 

[NotAYakk]

Here is my stab. This goes with upgrades to other classes at level 6 and above.

Ranger:
Class feature variants (concentration free hubter's mark)
Primal companion (base class feature starting at 1; HP scales with class level)
BM (rewritten, upgrades companion)
HM upgrades at various levels (lasts days on first target at 6, capstone is free apply on hit and +wis damage, T3/4 grants save penalties)
Burn spell slots for +skill checks, +to hit, and +saves (ranger-smite).

Warlock:
Dip defence (some features now stack with class level, such as EB)
Tool upgrades (Blade: Convert range spell attack to melee spell attack with +dex/str damage, Tome: 1 spell/day, more known, Chain: Familiar +3 HP/level, +prof to lots, bonus action attack)
Hexblade: Migrate some of Hexcurse to base class. No cha-to-attack but stacking cha-to-damage.
Capstone takes an action (usable in combat)
Mystic arcanum cast as highest level slot
Second pact at T3 (gain benefits of 2nd pact, all of them).

Monk:
ASI upgrades; +1 str/dex/con free, then feat or +1 mental/+1 any.
(Perfecting body and soul. Some small print.)
MA can use magic monk weapons to enhance unarmed attacks. Like 4ed ki focus.
MA can do (str+dex/2) damage optionally (makes str useful).
4E monk gets 1 ki discount on abilities.
Upgraded Ki spending (can dodge+flurry for 2 at higher level)
First Ki every turn free at 20.

Sorcerer:
Nix flexible casting. Get 1 metamagic at 2.
MM is short rest recharge.
Capstone: 1 free MM on every spell. You can also purchase another effect with points (!)

I think that makes every class more thrmselves.

Blade pact is a functioning melee damage dealer via melee eb.

Ranger gets a pet baseline, which boosts every subclass and gives them something at 1. Also makes them not "fighter with druid spells" but something distinct.

Sorcerer gets piles of metamagic. Embarassing amounts.

Monk converges to 20/20/20/?/20/? at higher levels. Punches for 1d10+2d6+7 (19.5) x4 with flame ki weapon while dodging, 20 AC.

 

[Mort]

It should be worth noting that a class "sucking" is purely an opinion. It doesn't matter exactly how many people you've seen agree with you or how many people actually do agree with you.

I don't think that's quite accurate. A class "sucks" if it can't effectively fill any necessary role within the party.

There were clear examples in 3e (IMO) but 5e the classes are much closer together. There are certainly better and worse classes but none that are truly so far behind the curve so as to fail that definition.

 

[Asisreo]

I don't think that's quite accurate. A class "sucks" if it can't effectively fill any necessary role within the party.

I respect your opinion, but something sucking is purely an opinion. I could say something sucks and no amount of evidence can prove or disprove it. It's an opinionated safe-word.

Airplanes suck, coca-cola sucks, you suck, I suck (not actually insulting you). There isn't any data you can show me that can actually disprove "suck."

I could define a class sucking as unable to do 1hp of damage. You can disagree with it, but it's my definition alone.

Now, you can hope to prove or disprove something being underpowered, but you can't say something sucks without knowing it's literally just your opinion.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

It's 2020... haven't you all fixed these classes for yourselves by now? These same complaints were coming up 5 years ago!

Most of us probably have. Doesn’t change what’s in the books.

I can give Known Spells casters known Spells equal to half class level + casting mod, and give rangers Hunters Mark as part of Favored Enemy, and they don’t have to use a Bonus Action to cast it against favored enemies, and add most of the recent UA “replacements” as Enhancements, but I still have to take into account what the actual class is and does in a forum discussion about how rangers are designed.

 

[Weiley31]

Sorcerers and Monks should get extra Sorcery/Ki points based on their Wis/Cha modifier. Monk should have it's capstone changed to 10 Ki points instead of 4. Sorcerers than take Metamagic Adept for two more Meta Magic options and two additional points.(Or just go ham and combine both Spell Points and Sorcery Points together.*

Monks should have a Ki Adept Feat that gives them some extra Ki too with another goodie and a bonus to an ability score.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

The OP is a hot mess of hyperbole. No classes in 5e suck. There are just some that are better than others.

If these classes did ‘suck’ then people wouldn’t have successful, contributing characters that are fun to play... which is the only requirement for a class not to ‘suck‘ by my book.

I guess we have different definitions of sucking. If yours is "literally, truly, completely unplayable in a fun way" mine is "worse enough when compared to another that it is noticeable in gameplay".

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

It's 2020... haven't you all fixed these classes for yourselves by now? These same complaints were coming up 5 years ago!

I wasn't playing D&D 5 years ago. I'm sorry if you've heard these discussions before, I guess?

I also have been thinking more about this recently, because the Class Feature Variants UA will probably be put in a book soon. If it's in a book without addressing the problems with the classes that should be fixed, that's not good.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I disagree with all of your assessments except Ranger. That monk and warlock are both on this list tells me you probably don’t give your players enough opportunities for short rests.

I give them opportunity for short rests, but those aren't the only things lacking with those classes. Sure, Warlocks get spell slots back on a short rest, but with 2 slots, they're still limited to EB spamming most of the time.

 

[Guest 6801328]

The Katana class makes all other classes look sucky.