D&D 5E New D&D WotC survey! On classes.

[doctorbadwolf]

Huh. I'd like for them to give us an actual spellcasting paladin. To date I don't think I've seen a paladin cast a spell. All the slots go to smiting.

I’ve never seen a Paladin that used even most of their slots for smiting, much less all of them.

Music is mathematics given soul. How people don't see that as an expression of magic is beyond me. While "oh, my great grandpoppy had relations with a dragon" is never even questioned.

This. Also singing is a fundamental part of being alive. It absolutely boggles me that anyone could possibly have trouble imagining song being magical.

 

[Maxperson]

I’ve never seen a Paladin that used even most of their slots for smiting, much less all of them.

True. They save some slots for smiting in the next fight. The point is that I don't see them casting spells with those slots.

 

[Aldarc]

I will also add that one of the things that I also tried to address in my feedback were the effects of the subsequent power creep of subclasses in Xanathar's and Tasha's on the core PHB subclasses or class features. For example, it's more difficult for the core PHB subclasses of the Sorcerer to compete with Sorcerer subclasses that get either bonus spells or access to the cleric's entire spell list. Or that some core PHB subclasses only become more competitive when they have access to things like the weapon attack cantrips that were introduced in later books.

If I had my way? There would only be four classes: Mage, Priest, Thief, and Warrior. All other classes (and their subclasses) would be rewritten to be subclasses of one of these four.

Are you familiar with Shadow of the Demon Lord by Robert Schwalb? It's an interesting glimpse into an Alternative 5e.

 

[R_J_K75]

Man, I would so change the way the spell section is done:

I dont think its too much to ask that they take a long hard look at how the spell section, (and the rest of the PHB) is laid out. Im not talking about the first read through but more from an at-the-table standpoint. My eyesight isnt that great anymore, add on a few beers and its pretty hard to read a whole description such as Spiritual Hammer on the fly. They need to make a system thats two fold, heres the entire book if you want it, but heres the really important stuff if you need it at a glance. Hiding/stealth is a perfect example of page flipping to get the whole picture, cover, light, etc. Its seems it almost needs its own chapter. IDC if the book ends up with 100 chapters, Id prefer 100 two page chapters that make sense and are complete than 10 huge ones. if you want to know everything about jumping...turn to the 1 page jump chapter that includes magical items, spells, and anything else that you need to know. I say get rid of the PHB and DMG format. its antiquated and only hinders the game, go with a single core book. Start with a good ToC/index and you should be able to quickly find what you need. The more I play 5E as a player the cracks are showing more and more and Id pay for a 5.5E now.

 

[R_J_K75]

For example, it's more difficult for the core PHB subclasses of the Sorcerer to compete with Sorcerer subclasses that get either bonus spells or access to the cleric's entire spell list.

The amount of spells available to a cleric is and always has been overwhelming to me as a player. This needs to be addressed as well. Id go so far as to get rid of divine and arcane descriptors and give spell casting classes the ability to take whatever spells they want within their limits. The way the different spell casting classes, learn, memorize and cast spells needs to be one concise system. Any mechanical benefit from having classes cast spells differently can be roleplayed away. We've all seen Airplane! you dont need to be a cleric to cast healing magic but just a nun with a guitar.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I fear, also, that the class that will be described as strong will get nerfed into suckiness to narrow the gap instead of improved the best ones. If this had been the goal, they'd have boosted the martial to solve LFQW in 3.5, instead of solving it by nerfing wizards a little and having nearly nobody play at level above 10+ (so even if wizards were still quadratic, nobody would know).

I mean, 3.5E was was 2003, that's 18 years ago. 18 years before 3E came out was 1982, before MM2, before Unearthed Arcana, and so on. It's an extremely long time. AFAIK none of the same designers as 3.5E are decision-makers or rules-designers on 5E. Sorry for any old-feeling generated by these facts lol!

So I'm not sure that fear can be justified. 3.XE was an entirely different edition of D&D with very different goals to 5E - opposed goals in many ways, like the intentional inclusion of trap options, or that the designers of that edition actually said stuff that suggested they thought casters should be "better" than non-casters.

They may well fail to bring classes up, but already the range in 5E is vastly narrower. You mention LFQW, and that's already not really present in 5E. Yeah, there is still an issue where casters gain a bit too much at higher levels, because of WotC's unwillingness to kill certain sacred cows they resurrected after 4E, but there's no class/subclass in 5E where you're likely to feel worthless, just "kind of weaker".

 

[R_J_K75]

I’ve never played into the so-called classic bard trope and only seen one character that matched that trope.

I played a 3.x bard that was an Indiana Jones type archeologist. Really fun PC. I havent played a 5E bard yet but reading the class they dont seem quite right but then again I've yet to play one.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I don't have a problem with bards, at least not as big of a problem as @Snarf Zagyg has, anyway. I think that "sound magic" can work really well in a heroic fantasy setting. I imagine things like the Wishsong from the Heritage of Shannara series of books. I imagine the bells that the Abhorsen uses in Sabriel. I imagine the shouts that the Dragonborn uses in The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim.

Because that's not "a Bard thing".

You're right that nobody wants to play those.

Because if you're picking Bard, in D&D, that's never what a Bard in D&D has been, and in other fantasy, bard-type characters relatively rarely use "sound-based magic". They used "sound-based magic" a lot less, I'd suggest than people who are just straight-up wizards or warriors. This actually highlights a major design issue with Sorcerers, not Bards, ironically enough. Sorcerers are designed to fill this common-in-fantasy-fiction spontaneous-caster role, but in practice, they are not a great class for that, and the "Bloodline" stuff is vastly more restrictive than enabling (as is their weird spell list, which is inexplicably missing stuff in 5E, though Tashas helps). Sound-magic-person is a Sorcerer, probably, in D&D, not a Bard.

So like, you do have a problem with Bards - you try and make it "the trope", but no, that's what a Bard is in 5E - a versatile jack-of-all trades-type character. That's what the Bard was in 2E. It's not really what the Bard was in 3.XE, but that Bard was kind of a trashfire, design-wise (even if 3.5E improved it a bit) - there's a reason it was the butt of more mockery than any other class in that edition, and it wasn't how people played it, it was how its abilities worked. 4E had a strong support Bard, which wasn't identical to any Bard before or since in the same way that stuff like the Avenger just doesn't exist in 5E. Conceptually, though, it was closest to the 2E/5E Bard.

Looking in fiction for examples of D&D Bards, though, is basically a doomed activity (the closest you're likely to get is Kvothe), because D&D Bards aren't really trying to ape a specific fictional thing, they're their own thing. Just like D&D Clerics, D&D Sorcerers (who, compared to fictional "spontaneous casters" are extremely weird because they use fixed spells shared with Wizards and the like, which just doesn't happen with spontaneous casters in fiction - or despite my huge knowledge of fantasy fiction - sorry, it's true - I can't think of an example), and so on.

I’ll just chime in to say that bards are my favourite class, and I have played/DMed for/seen others play a lot of bards in my day. I’ve never played into the so-called classic bard trope and only seen one character that matched that trope.

Same here. It feels like the problem is more likely to be with the groups @CleverNickName is playing with, rather than the class. I've seen this sort of thing in action, in that some people get kind of mad if your bad doesn't fit that stereotype, and start rolling out memes and trying to convince you to play it the way he describes, that's actually outside pressure to do that, nothing to do with the mechanics, design, or real concept. And frankly just don't play with people like that.

I played a 3.x bard that was an Indiana Jones type archeologist. Really fun PC. I havent played a 5E bard yet but reading the class they dont seem quite right but then again I've yet to play one.

There's no concept you could do with a 3.5E Bard that you couldn't with a 5E Bard. It encompasses everything that class could do and is also a better caster and potentially a better fighter.

 

[R_J_K75]

There's no concept you could do with a 3.5E Bard that you couldn't with a 5E Bard. It encompasses everything that class could do and is also a better caster and potentially a better fighter.

Think I'll make one for my next character and call it Zamfir. He'll be half man, half golem from Lamordia. Like Trapjaw it'll have a removable appendage, that instead of a weapon, will be an instrument. Hmm now you got me thinking.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Think I'll make one for my next character and call it Zamfir. He'll be half man, half golem from Lamordia. Like Trapjaw it'll have a removable appendage, that instead of a weapon, will be an instrument. Hmm now you got me thinking.

That is a pretty fun idea. I'd been thinking of using that Lineage for my next character too, if it fits the setting we're in.