Level Up (A5E) Classes: Winner and Losers

[WanderingMystic]

Generally-speaking, you won't get every archetype you can think of or want in core rules. That's what supplements are for.

Oh I completely agree. I just think that with how heavily the leaned into the elemental damage abilities an actual elementalist seems like a good core choice. ]

 

[jwade1980]

Winner: Fighter, tons of depth and the new combat maneuver system really shines with them. Will be my first character I make with A5E.

Loser: Ranger, would love to see more melee options, but that's a personal thing I know. Archetypes are pretty snoozy too. Warden especially. Wildborn provides the magic variant but fluff/flavor for it is pretty lacking and uninspired. Beast Master I suppose beats the others out.

 

[Legendweaver]

As far as sorcerers go I was left wanting for more archetypes. I want elemental options, I want to see what a psionic or a necromantic one would look like.

Have you seen this collection of Sorcerer subclasses? I can't speak to whether they're balanced, but when I found it, I remember thinking "now, these feel like arcane bloodlines!"

Thinking of Sorcerers in context of Level Up also got me thinking its reframing of race+background as Heritage/Culture/Background/Destiny. I started imagining a build-your-own-archetype for sorcerers based around a similar set of modular elements each with their own ability progressions - for example:
1. An ancestry and/or power source (dragon blood, fiend blood, angelic bloodline, ...etc)
2. A magical theme (or themes) in which they're particularly strong (maybe taking advantage of LU's broader definition of magical schools)
3. A unique casting flair or style (something affecting both casting aesthetics and effects)
4. A Limitation (must kill before each sunset, telling a lie prevents them from casting for a day, must not strike the first blow, etc - a "Wilder's block," for those familiar with the Wheel of Time)

This would really lean into the concept of a sorcerer as a rare, one-of-a-kind magical being, and really set it apart from wizards and warlocks.

 

[lichmaster]

Have you seen this collection of Sorcerer subclasses? I can't speak to whether they're balanced, but when I found it, I remember thinking "now, these feel like arcane bloodlines!"

Thinking of Sorcerers in context of Level Up also got me thinking its reframing of race+background as Heritage/Culture/Background/Destiny. I started imagining a build-your-own-archetype for sorcerers based around a similar set of modular elements each with their own ability progressions - for example:
1. An ancestry and/or power source (dragon blood, fiend blood, angelic bloodline, ...etc)
2. A magical theme (or themes) in which they're particularly strong (maybe taking advantage of LU's broader definition of magical schools)
3. A unique casting flair or style (something affecting both casting aesthetics and effects)
4. A Limitation (must kill before each sunset, telling a lie prevents them from casting for a day, must not strike the first blow, etc - a "Wilder's block," for those familiar with the Wheel of Time)

This would really lean into the concept of a sorcerer as a rare, one-of-a-kind magical being, and really set it apart from wizards and warlocks.

The next step to make it really different is to abandon Vancian Magic and embrace something like Elements of Power.

 

[glass]

The next step to make it really different is to abandon Vancian Magic and embrace something like Elements of Power.

Wait what? A5e has vancian magic? I assumed they would use AE-style readying like O5e does.

_
glass.

 

[lichmaster]

Wait what? A5e has vancian magic? I assumed they would use AE-style readying like O5e does.

_
glass.

The system of D&D and A5E as well are pretty much the definition of Vancian magic: you cast a specific spell with very little customization of it. The only additional flexibility is given by upcasting, metamagic and some feats or class features, but the spells themselves are very rigid.
Non vancian magic is pretty much the opposite, take a look at the W.O.I.N (O.L.D) magic system, or elements of magic to have an example: you literally invent a spell on the fly

 

[glass]

The system of D&D and A5E as well are pretty much the definition of Vancian magic: you cast a specific spell with very little customization of it.

No, the definition of vancian magic is you prepare/memorise a fixed number of instances of any given spell, and once you use each instance it is gone until the next day (when you can prepare/memorise the same spells again or different one). As used in every edition of D&D except 5e.

Trying to broaden it to "any magic system I do not like" may not be uncommon, but neither is it helpful.

So to be clear; A5e's work like O5e's? Yes or no?

_
glass.

 

[lichmaster]

No, the definition of vancian magic is you prepare/memorise a fixed number of instances of any given spell, and once you use each instance it is gone until the next day (when you can prepare/memorise the same spells again or different one). As used in every edition of D&D except 5e.

I didn't want to be this pedantic, but since it's needed let's go.. The above statement is wrong: 3.5E was also non-vancian in the sense you refer to, as you didn't have to memorize the same spell multiple times to cast it more than once. That happened in 2e, and only if you weren't using any Player's Options (in Spells & Magic there were ways to go beyond this aspect of Vancian magic).

Trying to broaden it to "any magic system I do not like" may not be uncommon, but neither is it helpful.

That not what I said, nor my intent, it's your inference.

In general, Vancian magic refers to both the fixed nature of spells and the fact that you can only cast a fixed number of them.
You can relaxe it a bit by having a more flexible number of spells you cast (by not forgetting a spell you cast, albeit being still subject to the max number of spells per each spell level, by upcasting or using metamagic to alter slightly some spells), but it's still the same spells you cast.
To make it truly non-Vancian, the spells themselves should be flexible enough that you make them up on the spot, like in Ars Magica, WOIN, Elements of Magic, etc.

So to be clear; A5e's work like O5e's? Yes or no?

This is a different and very simple question, whose answer is yes.

 

[getquarked]

So the overall winner of A5e is exploration based campaigning, i.e, travelling between regions. So on that note, I'd say over O5e, the ranger is the winner. If you don't have exploration in your campaigns, then yeah hes weak, but in a campaign where you track supply and things are a little more tightly run, its incredible how useful one may be.

also... bards are the winner b/c instrument types meaning something are dope

 

[Stone Dog]

Bards also can prevent strife and possibly some fatigue build up on a journey, see the Entertain activity.