Level Up (A5E) Class redesign

[Haldrik]

I agree that there are ways to avoid the problem, and this is definitely one of them. I also suspect that these will be less common problems for players seeking out a product titled, in some form, "5e Advanced". Such players are much more likely to identify as some form of optimizer, and thus will likely seek out and deride whichever "trap options" exist. I humbly submit that a cure to that would be to design the game the better emphasize all three pillars equally, and give every class options to excel in these pillars, and allow the classes to make these choices in isolation. To borrow from my own writeup in a different thread:

Bards are the party face. Rangers handle the exploration pillar. This leaves social skill challenges with the Bard running point everyone else essential being sidekicks. The solution comes from giving each character and each class unique ways to contribute to each pillar. A (poorly executed) example would be the Fighter's Extreme Athlete. The Fighter's excellent conditioning allows them naturally excel at swimming and climbing (outside of heavy armor, anyway). But the Fighter could have access to other choices to help them excel in a variety and encounters. A great-axe fighter may have a background as a lumberjack, and thus know their way around a forest better than most. A mercenary would excel at bartering. A bodyguard? Intimidation, perception, insight. These not only increase choices points at level up but also help flesh out more who the character not only is but was.

Ideally, this would involve incorporating backgrounds more into the class design themselves, giving specific bonuses (I'm thinking less "static bonus to d20 roll" and more "skill tricks") and abilities (sometimes derisively referred to as "ribbons") to characters. This is especially ideal for those players who don't plan out their characters' entire intricate background to the slightest detail in advance. By a lowish level (somewhere around 3-5) your character would have selected the abilities that collectively make up their background and the roles they can play and contribute in each pillar. These pillars don't have to be balanced by class, necessarily; it would make sense for the Bard to pick up more social pillar abilities, the Ranger more exploration, the Fighter more combat, etc. But you're never left with the choice between combat effectiveness and social effectiveness. You're not left to decide "should my character take this bonus to swords, or to weaving?"

I agree, the default features for every character should be equally competent at social encounters, and exploration encounters, as well as combat encounters.

They would do so in different ways, but all of them comparable in competence.

At the same time, the customizer might want to swap out one feature for an other. Some abilities have dual-use, useful for both combat and civilian uses. So, siloing is more for thematic convenience.

Generally, background/culture might be the design space to focus on social encounters? It would also be the place to go when founding a stronghold or college, or other institution, that attracts members.

 

[Haldrik]

For me, it is to many choices. Every level you choose at least one feat, 2 feats every other level. Each feat category has 7-8 choices. So I have to select 1 out 8 or 2 out of 16 choices every single level. I know there are people that like this, but I am not one of them.

Yep, that used to be what I wanted to do too. Basically you get rid of multiclassing by allowing a character to be built anyway you like (just need to meet the pre-requisites). Complete flexibility of character creation and then then simple "builds" (that is what I called the predetermined classes) for dummies like me. After get a tasted of something close to that, I realized that wasn't what I wanted. I am reserving that type of freedom to my Immortal level games where I want a different play experience.

I still dont see the problem. If the default offers no choice (except maybe at the level when gaining a generic feat), then what is the problem?

Someone who doesnt want choices, just use the default.

If your preference is to defer choices until Immortal Tier, no one would stop you.

Does it bother you if other players are taking advantages of options that make the game more fun for them?

 

[dave2008]

I'm not sure that direct 5e compatibility is the worthiest goal. Easy to enough to convert adventures, maybe even monsters and spells? Sure. Balancing 5e Fighter with an Advanced 5e Fighter? That doesn't seem nearly as necessary to me.

Maybe, but that would be the preference for me. 4e achieved something like this with allowing original 4e classes to work equally as well along side 4e essential classes. It doesn't have to be the same at every level, but if they are roughly equivalent at 5th, 10th, 15th, & 20th lvl that would be good IMO. This is even more important because they want it to be compatible with the standard MM. If you make the Level UP! fighter more powerful it will make the MM monsters relatively weaker, which is not a good idea. Personally I think @Morrus and his team are up to the task of making the Level Up classes roughly equivalent to 5e classes in overall power.

 

[dave2008]

If your preference is to defer choices until Immortal Tier, no one would stop you.

No, I want Immortal gaming to be a different play experience.

Does it bother you if other players are taking advantages of options that make the game more fun for them?

Of course not, but I am expressing my desire which is the point of these discussions. I don't want the design to be:

1. So rigid that every option is of equal value (even if level dependent)
2. Have so many choices that it drives me away from the game (like pF2e)

If it is done well, #1 isn't a big issue, but PF2e also indicates that if you give equal choices at each level, those choices tend to provide little benefit (individually), which I also find less interesting. However, if you make each level the equivalent of a 5e feat, then it probably will not be broadly compatible to basic 5e.

Issue #2 for me personally is not solved by ignoring options that are provided in the book. I know you don't understand that and I thought the same way. But PF2e showed me that I do indeed find it impossible to ignore all of those shinny choices. And then I get overwhelmed, and then I put the book down.

But again, I am not asking Morrus to design this for me. He needs to do what he wants and what he thinks the gaming public wants. I just know if it ends up like what you want, I will most likely not be buying it.

 

[ChaosOS]

So while this is also a general system thought, I'd love to see martials get exploration-relevant features at high levels that help them stay relevant out of combat with spellcasters. For example, an exploration system that accounts for planar effects might also let the fighter ignore planar effects for an hour each day. Not everything should be about "Well this is the level wizards get teleport!"

 

[Haldrik]

To me, the best middle ground would be a separate book in a boxed set.

How about this as a middle ground, that would also take into account one of my concerns.

The Level Up! character building book is what it is. One section presents all the defaults. An other section presents all of the swappables.

However, the separate book in the boxed set is the setting guide!

The setting guide has all of the default builds that are most typical − for that setting! These builds are tailored to emphasize the tropes of that specific setting. So, the setting guide is stand-alone book. If any players want to customize the characters in that setting, they need to use the Level Up! character building book.

 

[TwoSix]

Maybe, but that would be the preference for me. 4e achieved something like this with allowing original 4e classes to work equally as well along side 4e essential classes. It doesn't have to be the same at every level, but if they are roughly equivalent at 5th, 10th, 15th, & 20th lvl that would be good IMO. This is even more important because they want it to be compatible with the standard MM. If you make the Level UP! fighter more powerful it will make the MM monsters relatively weaker, which is not a good idea. Personally I think @Morrus and his team are up to the task of making the Level Up classes roughly equivalent to 5e classes in overall power.

I agree that I'd like to see LU classes on the same playing field as 5e classes, but I also don't think they need to be balanced against their 5e counterparts. I'm OK if the LU sorcerer is stronger than the 5e sorcerer, or vice versa.

If the LU sorcerer is simply the 5e sorcerer with more and better choices, than it can replace the 5e sorcerer. If it's different but somewhat stronger, than we simply leave the 5e sorcerer as an option for those who prefer it.

Basically, LU should focus on parity among its own options; but those options shouldn't be wildly weaker than a champion fighter or much stronger than a hexblade sorcadin.

 

[dave2008]

How about this as a middle ground, that would also take into account one of my concerns.

The Level Up! character building book is what it is. One section presents all the defaults. An other section presents all of the swappables.

However, the separate book in the boxed set is the setting guide!

The setting guide has all of the default builds that are most typical − for that setting! These builds are tailored to emphasize the tropes of that specific setting. So, the setting guide is stand-alone book. If any players want to customize the characters in that setting, they need to use the Level Up! character building book.

I see no need for setting guide personally and Morrus has made no mention of one. Furthermore,, since this is not going to be on DMsGuild, they can't really talk about official D&D settings.

However, you don't need to appeal to me - your not going to win me over. Work on Morrus if you want to get your ideas in the book.

 

[Gradine]

Maybe, but that would be the preference for me. 4e achieved something like this with allowing original 4e classes to work equally as well along side 4e essential classes. It doesn't have to be the same at every level, but if they are roughly equivalent at 5th, 10th, 15th, & 20th lvl that would be good IMO. This is even more important because they want it to be compatible with the standard MM. If you make the Level UP! fighter more powerful it will make the MM monsters relatively weaker, which is not a good idea. Personally I think @Morrus and his team are up to the task of making the Level Up classes roughly equivalent to 5e classes in overall power.

The MM (and DMG) are terrible at monster design to begin with. One might need guidance on CR and Encounter Design to appropriate balance an encounter for a Level UP! party, but that kind of work is necessary anyway, given player skill level and, again, the relative imbalance within the MM already.

I would offer that, personally, ideally a Level UP! PC will have more options but not necessarily be stronger on the combat side (although versatility is itself a form of power). My ideal Level UP! PC would, however, run circles around most of their base PHB counterparts in the social and exploration pillars.

In general, I think it's possible as well as preferable (in my humble opinion) for the 5e Advanced book to be compatible with the MM without being compatible with the PHB. Especially if, as it seems, they are also looking into re-designing the skill system for 5e Advanced.

 

[Haldrik]

broadly compatible to basic 5e.

I have tinkered with translating the Player Handbook classes and races into feat units, and it works fine. Occasionally a feature shifts to a different level, but it works out well.