D&D (2024) What do you want & expect to see in 2024's 5.5e?

[Amrûnril]

Agreed. SS and GWM are some of the only Feats that people inclined towards character optimization seriously consider over +2 to your primary ability score. That makes them the best-balanced Feats, in my book. Others could use a buff to bring them up to that level.

I'd agree a lot of feats could use buffs, but bringing them all to this level woud have the downside of leaving non-primary ability score increases even further behind.

Ultimately, I think characters relying on single ability scores for so much of their combat effectiveness is the game's biggest balance issue, and both feats and non-primary scores end up as casualties of that.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

increased character complexity/customization, so characters of a class feel less samey.

 

[Osgood]

I’d bet money it will be called either Anniversary or Gold Edition rather than any numerical designation. It’ll make it feel less like a true edition change and hype up the big 5-0 milestone.

As for what I think the PHB will have:

• Races revised, per Tasha’s (flexible ASI, languages, etc.), plus cleaning up the ones that saw revisions along the way like dragonborn and tieflings.
• Overall class structure will be about the same, but with some sprucing up here and there. Several of the subclasses will see some major overhauls though. (Personally, I’d love to see a major revision to the Ranger and the Sorcerer.)
• Feats revised and/or expanded.
• Skills and (especially) Tools revisions/clarifications.
• Alignment remains, but made optional.
• Some spell revisions.
• Downtime and exploration revisions (ideally more attention on traps).
• Mostly minor rules clarifications and expansions throughout.

 

[Charlaquin]

I'd agree a lot of feats could use buffs, but bringing them all to this level woud have the downside of leaving non-primary ability score increases even further behind.

Ultimately, I think characters relying on single ability scores for so much of their combat effectiveness is the game's biggest balance issue, and both feats and non-primary scores end up as casualties of that.

Oh, sure. I mean, if I had my druthers, Strength would add to damage with all weapons (melee and ranged), Dex would add to hit with all weapons (again, melee and ranged. Get rid of the finesse/non-finesse divide completely), and Con would add to all physical saving throws. Likewise for the mental stats, Int would add to hit with spell attacks, Cha would add to spell save DCs (alternatively, Int to spell attacks and spell save DCs with Cha adding to spell damage), and Wis would add to all mental saving throws. But that’s well beyond the scope of 50AE or whatever they end up calling it.

 

[ECMO3]

Rogues are supposed to excel in non-combat situations. You're not really talking about paladins having less skills than rogues, you're talking about everyone who isn't a bard or rogue. Rogues are basically there to give a non-magical utility option, while wizards are the magical utility guys. Bards for some reason are both, but that's another issue.

Paladins are in line or better than most options in the non-combat department. Can always play a half elf if you need more (great option for pallies!)

Having an unlosable horse that doesn't depend on the DM is pretty nice too.

Yes and no. You are right it is unfair to compare to a Rogue or Bard but even when you look outside Rogues and Bards Paladins are still lacking compared to most classes. You are also right about half elves, but that is something that another class could take too to even be further ahead.

Since TCE, Barbarians get more skills than Paladins, and Rangers get more skills and can get expertise as part of the class chassis. Rangers also have subclasses that can make them the dominant class at either scouting (gloom stalker) or charisma checks (Fey Wanderer) on top of the extra skill(s), expertise and exploration features. Wizards, Warlocks, Clerics, Druids and Sorcerers have only 2 skills (not counting subclasses) but they are full casters with both utility cantrips and utility spells.

So it is really just Paladins, Fighters and Monks on the bottom rung, and when you consider Paladins are reliant on strength where fighters and Monks aren't I think they take a back seat to those as well, before you even consider subclasses.

 

[ECMO3]

I'd agree a lot of feats could use buffs, but bringing them all to this level woud have the downside of leaving non-primary ability score increases even further behind.

Ultimately, I think characters relying on single ability scores for so much of their combat effectiveness is the game's biggest balance issue, and both feats and non-primary scores end up as casualties of that.

I don't think they are more powerful than every other feat. For example, unless you have extra attack, magic initiate with one of the blade cantrips is going to boost weapon damage in tier 2 and 3 more than GWM will and if you take MI you get a spell and another cantrip to boot.

There certainly are some weak feats but considering all 3 pillars, many/most feats offer a fair trade against an ASI, these two included.

 

[Horwath]

Agreed. SS and GWM are some of the only Feats that people inclined towards character optimization seriously consider over +2 to your primary ability score. That makes them the best-balanced Feats, in my book. Others could use a buff to bring them up to that level.

from other books, Fey touched and Crusher come close.

 

[DEFCON 1]

My only real issue with feats is that I don't think a lot of them do what is always talked about as the point of them... this idea that feats let you "customize" your character. Because any feat that just lets you do what you are already doing but better isn't "customizing" your PC at all in my opinion.

If you are a warrior who uses a great weapon and your PC was built for using that great weapon really well... taking the Great Weapon Master feat is merely just taking what you already are and adding bigger numbers to it. I do not call that "customization". Who your PC is hasn't changed. In your table's party you are still the character who has mastered using great weapons and who does massive amounts of damage with them. You never needed a feat to really prove that. You haven't customized, you are still what you always were.

Even a feat like Actor doesn't really give you much of anything that many tables already has access to and which you already are built for if you've made a PC for whom taking the Actor feat would make sense. A CHA bump? You already have high CHA, so okay it's now higher. Advantage on Deception and Performance? You've already built your PC to be really good at both of those skills already (otherwise you probably wouldn't have taken the Actor feat supposedly for "flavor" to prove it) so Advantage is again just bigger numbers for something you are already doing. The only thing you get which is "special" and is "additive functionality" to your character is the voice mimicry thing. But while I can't speak for anyone else, I personally don't think that's really all that great of a feature because I know for at least my table, if I have a player who has built a disguise-focused PC whose whole schtick in the social pillar is to pretend to be other people... I'm so happy to see this rare butterfly of a character concept that I am never going to shiat on them by getting all squirrely and saying crap like "Wellllllllll... while you might look like this person, your voice sounds different and thus I'm going to give you Disadvantage on every Deception check you make when you speak." That would basically be me saying that I think your character design desire is stupid and I'm not going to let you play it. And to thus essentially force that person to take a feat to take Actor just to get over that roleplay hurdle I believe is a terrible way to DM.

So to me... all the feats should mainly be giving out abilities that add completely new game rules and functionality that characters otherwise couldn't get. Nothing would be just "what you are already doing but higher numbers", the feats would mainly be adding new things to the character to let them do things they otherwise couldn't do. And if we want to add a little bit of "higher number" functionality as well, then fine. But that shouldn't be the reason why someone would want to take the feat in the first place. Again... all in my own personal opinion.

 

[HammerMan]

Hexblade warlock. Swap CHA for INT. Swap the level 6 specter ability for the Archfey misty step. You’re 80-90% to a swordmage.

Yeah that is a good homebrew but I think you also need some hombrew spells burning blade frost backlash (I guess infernal wraith helps) and my favorite Incendiary sword (throw sword it hits ground and explodes then reforms in hand) are all good ones.

 

[Nefermandias]

The return of the monster classes, and the template-transitional classes, and the racial parangon racial classes. At least in a book of alternate rules.

Archetypes as pathfinder, or the option to can replace class features.

Racial feats.

The return of the (ki) martial maneuvers from Tome of Battle: Book of Nine Swords, now when the anime and the donghua (Chinese animation) becoming so popular. The binder with the vestige pact magic was an interesting idea.

I would like more classes beyond the artificier and the coming-soon mystic. When the blood-hunter?

So basically, you are asking for a return to late 3.5?