D&D 5E Classes that Suck

[Northern Phoenix]

Does a single good subclass make the whole class not suck anymore?

Yes because the character is always the base class and subclass (+the other parts).

 

[TwoSix]

Does a single good subclass make the whole class not suck anymore?

Yes, because it shows that the initial subclasses simply didn't get the balance between class and subclass right.

 

[Mort]

Does a single good subclass make the whole class not suck anymore?

The real issue is that some classes (such as paladin) have a strong base class so even the lackluster sub-classes make for a strong character. Other classes (ranger seems to be the prime example) have a lackluster base class and rely on sub-classes for improvement which can cause issues when the sub-class is also lackluster.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Yes, because it shows that the initial subclasses simply didn't get the balance between class and subclass right.

No, it makes that one subclass be the only one that doesn't suck as much. (I think this is a glass half-empty vs. glass half-full thing here)

 

[TwoSix]

No, it makes that one subclass be the only one that doesn't suck as much. (I think this is a glass half-empty vs. glass half-full thing here)

What if there were only 2 subclasses? One was Hexblade level and one was kind of blah?

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

What if there were only 2 subclasses? One was Hexblade level and one was kind of blah?

If WotC made a class with only 2 subclasses, one of them was great, and another was awful, the class sucks. Sure, one subclass sucks and the other is at least playable, but if they didn't make the class good enough to be playable in any subclass, that's the fault of the class.

 

[TwoSix]

If WotC made a class with only 2 subclasses, one of them was great, and another was awful, the class sucks. Sure, one subclass sucks and the other is at least playable, but if they didn't make the class good enough to be playable in any subclass, that's the fault of the class.

Well, I guess if one person's opinion is right and awesome (

Spoiler

it's mine

, and one person's opinion is wrong and sucks, I guess this whole topic sucks.

 

[Chaosmancer]

If WotC made a class with only 2 subclasses, one of them was great, and another was awful, the class sucks. Sure, one subclass sucks and the other is at least playable, but if they didn't make the class good enough to be playable in any subclass, that's the fault of the class.

I find myself disagreeing, because of how things are designed.

I'm going to take the Warlock as an example. The blade pact, kind of sucked, it was just close enough to working that everyone wanted it to do cool things, but just couldn't deliver.

However, that was because of the mechanics of the subclass. The class itself is much better designed. It still has issues, but declaring the class sucks because of a bad subclass makes it harder to fix the problem, because it misidentifies the problem.

Another example is the Inquisitive Rogue. It isn't a very good subclass, but it works decently because the rogue class is great. But, if we wanted to fix the inquisitive, it wouldn't work to try and fix the rogue itself.

For Sorcerer? The issue is in the base class, the subclasses are just in addition to that, But the Oath of the Crown we were just discussing is bad itself, the paladin base class is mostly fine.

 

[Undrave]

I find myself disagreeing, because of how things are designed.

I'm going to take the Warlock as an example. The blade pact, kind of sucked, it was just close enough to working that everyone wanted it to do cool things, but just couldn't deliver.

However, that was because of the mechanics of the subclass. The class itself is much better designed. It still has issues, but declaring the class sucks because of a bad subclass makes it harder to fix the problem, because it misidentifies the problem.

Another example is the Inquisitive Rogue. It isn't a very good subclass, but it works decently because the rogue class is great. But, if we wanted to fix the inquisitive, it wouldn't work to try and fix the rogue itself.

For Sorcerer? The issue is in the base class, the subclasses are just in addition to that, But the Oath of the Crown we were just discussing is bad itself, the paladin base class is mostly fine.

I feel like it'd be hard to decide which half of a character suck: class or subclass. Maybe a majority thing? If only 1 subclass is good, then the class sucks, but if only 1 combination doesn't work then it's the subclass?

Or maybe it has something to do with what came first?

Or maybe instead of 'this class sucks' we should talk more about individual subclasses?

 

[Chaosmancer]

I feel like it'd be hard to decide which half of a character suck: class or subclass. Maybe a majority thing? If only 1 subclass is good, then the class sucks, but if only 1 combination doesn't work then it's the subclass?

Or maybe it has something to do with what came first?

Or maybe instead of 'this class sucks' we should talk more about individual subclasses?

Well, generally, we can point to the abilities that aren't working. Like, for the ranger, it is very easy to see what the issues are with Favored Enemy, Favored Terrain, and Primeval awareness. Which leads to a pretty easy case that those are weaknesses in the class itself that needs addressed, while the beastmaster had seperate issues that just compounded that.