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

[Minigiant]

Except that it would be jarring as heck to be playing your class one way through the tutorial levels and then have it drastically change at 3rd. Also, you can’t have full casting or half-casting start at 3rd level.

My point is if specialty subclass alters your class that much, not only should it not be level 1 to overload the 1st level...

... it should be its own class.

 

[Charlaquin]

My point is if specialty subclass alters your class that much, not only should it not be level 1 to overload the 1st level...

... it should be its own class.

Do you feel that way about Sorcerer, Warlock, and Cleric subclasses?

 

[Minigiant]

Do you feel that way about Sorcerer, Warlock, and Cleric subclasses?

Some of them. The Hexblade should be its own class. The Blasty clerics are too different from battle clerics that they could split as well.

But WOTC is anti new classes.

 

[Charlaquin]

Some of them. The Hexblade should be its own class. The Blasty clerics are too different from battle clerics that they could split as well.

Well, I agree about Hexblade, but that’s a problem caused by it being an attempt to fix the blade pact boon, rather than a fully-realized subclass of its own. And the only real difference between blasty clerics and battle clerics is heavy armor vs. a bonus cantrip. That’s definitely not a distinction worth an entirely separate class.

But WOTC is anti new classes.

So let’s do with subclass what WotC won’t with class.

 

[Vaalingrade]

So let’s do with subclass what WotC won’t with class.

Like PF archetypes. Just straight overhaul the class by replacing class features.

Including subclasses that say to take them at level 1 instead after it's far too late to be reasonable.

 

[Minigiant]

Well, I agree about Hexblade, but that’s a problem caused by it being an attempt to fix the blade pact boon, rather than a fully-realized subclass of its own

Agreed.

And the only real difference between blasty clerics and battle clerics is heavy armor vs. a bonus cantrip. That’s definitely not a distinction worth an entirely separate class.
So let’s do with subclass what WotC won’t with class

There's no need to repeat WOTC's overreacting style. There is a lot of design "missed" because the cleric is both Blasty and Fighty. It is why Cleric Domains QUICKLY got broken once out the PHB.

 

[Yaarel]

Like PF archetypes. Just straight overhaul the class by replacing class features.

Including subclasses that say to take them at level 1 instead after it's far too late to be reasonable.

Swapping features is fine. It is kinda what 1DD is doing − take this default or swap it for something else you want.

(I didnt understand how "level 1" is "far too late to be reasonable".)

 

[The Myopic Sniper]

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

The reason I like 1st level for proficiences/training/ribbons and the crunchy stuff at 2nd rather than 3rd is that all the full-casters get a decent power buff at level 3 with extra higher spell slots as well a huge assortment of new 2nd level spells. Full casters have plenty to do at level 3 without adding another boost there. If we moved to a 1/2/6/10/14 scheme for all subclasses, martial would obviously have to get a power spike at level 3 to compensate, but that could be done by rearranging the current features or adding a new feature since martials need a buff anyway. Half-casters probably don't need as much of a buff because they gain an extra spell-slot and spell, but the half-casters don't need as much as a buff as something like the Monk, 1D&D Playtest Rogue and even the Fighter and Barbarian, so half-casters could probably benefit from simply reshuffling where features are on the class list.

 

[Vaalingrade]

(I didnt understand how "level 1" is "far too late to be reasonable".)

Level 1 'instead' of far too late.

 

[Charlaquin]

The reason I like 1st level for proficiences/training/ribbons and the crunchy stuff at 2nd rather than 3rd is that all the full-casters get a decent power buff at level 3 with extra higher spell slots as well a huge assortment of new 2nd level spells. Full casters have plenty to do at level 3 without adding another boost there. If we moved to a 1/2/6/10/14 scheme for all subclasses, martial would obviously have to get a power spike at level 3 to compensate, but that could be done by rearranging the current features or adding a new feature since martials need a buff anyway. Half-casters probably don't need as much of a buff because they gain an extra spell-slot and spell, but the half-casters don't need as much as a buff as something like the Monk, 1D&D Playtest Rogue and even the Fighter and Barbarian, so half-casters could probably benefit from simply reshuffling where features are on the class list.

Ah, I see. When you explain it like that, yeah, that makes total sense.