D&D (2024) Subclasses should start at 1st level

[Charlaquin]

At this point, I would prefer a subclass scheme that goes 1st level, 2nd level, 6th level, 10th level, 14th level. 1st level would offer more basic benefits that you would expect the subclass to have such as additional relevant skills, bonus spells, weapon proficiencies, armor training and possibly a ribbon feature, while 2nd level would get the real crunchy unique feature that the rest of the subclass will build on.

I’d be fine with that even if the unique crunchy feature didn’t come until 3rd level, honestly.

 

[Minigiant]

Counterpoint: 1st and 2nd level are supposed to be Rookie levels and you aren't intended to be complete until level 3.

 

[Charlaquin]

Counterpoint: 1st and 2nd level are supposed to be Rookie levels and you aren't intended to be complete until level 3.

But this doesn’t address the problem of subclasses having less design space the later they’re acquired. It also ignores the fact that some classes do get to have their subclasses at 1st level. Apparently one more nice thing non-casters aren’t allowed to have.

 

[Maxperson]

But the magical ranger gets to be a ranger from 1st level, whereas the scout has to wait until 3rd level. Until then they’re just the same as anyone else who happened to train in Nature and Survival (which by the way Scout actively disincentivizes).

If a subclass has a meaningful character and story element to it (which in my opinion, it should), you should get to play that character’s story immediately.

You're conflating class with specialty. The magical ranger can't be a super duper hunter until 3rd level. He can't be a magical beast master until 3rd level. Nor can he be an underdark sneaky gloomstalker until 3rd level. Just like the rogue, he's only somewhat decent at what he will become at 3rd level, then he advances in skill into his specialty.

There's no difference. Both start out decent and then get better. Neither one starts out fully in their concept at 1st level.

 

[Minigiant]

But this doesn’t address the problem of subclasses having less design space the later they’re acquired. It also ignores the fact that some classes do get to have their subclasses at 1st level. Apparently one more nice thing non-casters aren’t allowed to have.

The only class that needs its subclasses at level1 are cleric and sorcerer do to the way subclass drastically changes how they play.

It's not a noncaster thing. It D&D had a scholar or aristocrat class,it would need subclass at level 1 as well.

But you'd still be a Rookie at level1.

It actually makes more sense that a nonmagical ranger doesn't work at level 1 because you are purposely ignoring magic and sttempting to overcome that.... in a magical world.

 

[Charlaquin]

You're conflating class with specialty. The magical ranger can't be a super duper hunter until 3rd level. He can't be a magical beast master until 3rd level. Nor can he be an underdark sneaky gloomstalker until 3rd level. Just like the rogue, he's only somewhat decent at what he will become at 3rd level, then he advances in skill into his specialty.

Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer are 1st level features. The ranger gets to be a wilderness expert and monster hunter from 1st level. They get better at those things as they level up, sure, but they get to be the concept from the beginning. But Scout, the thing people point to as the alternative to a non-spellcasting ranger, doesn’t get to be a wilderness expert until 3rd level and arguably doesn’t ever get to be a monster hunter.

 

[Charlaquin]

The only class that needs its subclasses at level1 are cleric and sorcerer do to the way subclass drastically changes how they play.

Which is only possible because they get their subclasses at 1st level. Having subclasses start at 3rd level, or even 2nd level, significantly curtails the subclasses’ ability to change how the base class plays, which is precisely why I’m advocating for all subclasses to start at 1st level. Doing otherwise is leaving valuable design space on the table.

It's not a noncaster thing. It D&D had a scholar or aristocrat class,it would need subclass at level 1 as well.

It’s a noncaster thing in 5e. Every class that gets a 1st level subclass is a caster. Because only casters are allowed to do anything interesting.

But you'd still be a Rookie at level1.

That’s fine, I don’t have a problem with that.

It actually makes more sense that a nonmagical ranger doesn't work at level 1 because you are purposely ignoring magic and sttempting to overcome that.... in a magical world.

I’m not having this argument with you again.

 

[Horwath]

But the magical ranger gets to be a ranger from 1st level, whereas the scout has to wait until 3rd level. Until then they’re just the same as anyone else who happened to train in Nature and Survival (which by the way Scout actively disincentivizes).

If a subclass has a meaningful character and story element to it (which in my opinion, it should), you should get to play that character’s story immediately.

Scout:
1st level: proficiency in Nature and Survival
2nd level: expertise in Nature and Survival
3rd level: skirmisher
6th level: superior mobility
10th level: Ambush master
14th level: Sudden strike

 

[Charlaquin]

Scout:
1st level: proficiency in Nature and Survival
2nd level: expertise in Nature and Survival

The Scout subclass doesn’t grant features until 3rd level, and that fact actively discourages players from taking these skills from their background or class, or using their limited expertise slots on them.

3rd level: skirmisher
6th level: superior mobility
10th level: Ambush master
14th level: Sudden strike

None of these features really express wilderness expertise or monster hunting. They’re entirely stealth and mobility focused features, which while certainly beneficial for a survivalist type character, don’t really express the archetype in any significant way.

 

[Horwath]

The Scout subclass doesn’t grant features until 3rd level, and that fact actively discourages players from taking these skills from their background or class, or using their limited expertise slots on them.

None of these features really express wilderness expertise or monster hunting. They’re entirely stealth and mobility focused features, which while certainly beneficial for a survivalist type character, don’t really express the archetype in any significant way.

As this is a thread about 1st level subclasses, I have just made a suggestion how a Scout subclass could work from 1st level and still not be too much features at 1st level.