D&D 5E Sell me on 5th…

[Zardnaar]

Others have covered it a bit, but just in general, having species, class and other modeling options that can produce PCs that vary significantly from the pre-2Ed editions.

While AD&D introduced some new classes & races, 2Ed took the first major steps with introducing kits, then vastly expanding race options with the softcovers. Then the Player’s Options books arrived…

And 3.X expanded upon that.

After more than 45 years in the hobby, I’ve played most of the stereotypical race/class combos from pre-2Ed that lingered on even afterwards. So when I sit down at a gaming table to start a new D&D campaign, I have those character concepts ready to go and can generally create one pretty quickly- I’ve even played some in 3.5 while I was still generating the character (I was late for the first session). But I’d much rather try something askance from the same old same old.

So being able to create and play things like a full caster in heavy armor, a “Paladin” with arcane spells, or a 2-headed bipedal fey dog-man engages my creativity at a different level. I invest more in the PC.

Ah rgr.

In 5E if you're proficient in armor you can cast in it.

Paladin with arcabe spels doesn't really exist. An arcane "paladin" it either a hexblade warlock or multiclass Paladin/Sorcerer. Hexblades also a popular dip eg hexblade 1/Sorcerer XYZ.

The charisma based classes multiclass really well togather.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

Well because you waited nearly a decade to check this out, there a quite a lot of options.

Like there are over 40 species to pick from, Most Classes hover around 10 subclasses, and there is good number of spells and feats.

 

[Zardnaar]

Well because you waited nearly a decade to check this out, there a quite a lot of options.

Like there are over 40 species to pick from, Most Classes hover around 10 subclasses, and there is good number of spells and feats.

Heh you're talking to a 3.5 player. Many options is relative.

3000 odd fears vs 100 odd. 3.5 has way more classes as well.if you played a new 3.5 class every 4 to 6 months you would be running out around about now.

 

[Corinnguard]

complete revision of classes and races found in Morrus's Level Up Advanced 5e.

I am not sure I would call Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition a complete revision of the classes and races. More like an expansion of what's already in 5e. In the latter, your character is defined by your race, your background and your class/subclass. A5e otoh defines your character by your Heritage (who your parents were), Culture (the society you grew up in), Background (the job you had before you became an adventurer) and Destiny (the reason why you became an adventurer in the first place) in addition to class/archetype. And the neat thing about Heritage and Culture is that they don't have to match. You can be of the Human heritage and had grown up in Mountain Dwarf culture, for instance, and gained the cultural traits of a Mountain Dwarf.
As for the classes in A5e, the base version of each class has more features in them that cover the pillars of combat, exploration and social interaction. You no longer have the subclass providing all of the crunch for a given class.

 

[GothmogIV]

I’ve been playing since ‘77, and I’ve gotten to try most of the D&D stereotypes across the various editions. My fave so far has been 3.X, because of the flexibility.

As 3.5Ed ran its course, I started playing odder and odder characters, built using unusual classes & races. I haven’t gotten to play everything I wanted in that edition, and still design PCs with that ruleset. As time passed the more exotic they got.

I didn’t like 4Ed as much, but- again- had more PC concepts on paper than I ever got to play. I really liked that version of the Warlock, and some of the other options appealed to me on their own merits, inspiring different character concepts from 3.X.

But what I saw from the 5Ed playtest reports kinda left me cold. And many of the subsequent threads here over the years haven’t much moved me. However, a close friend is thinking about getting into 5Ed, and I’m wondering if I’m not giving the system a fair shake.

So, I’m looking for an overview of the races & classes available for PCs, to see if any of my unplayed characters would be supported by the latest edition, or if there are new esoteric options that might inspire me to create new heroes.

Wat’cha got?

Pros: a lot of material out there. A very robust community with tons and tons of resources. Easy to play online (like on a VTT). Solid action economy. It's easy to learn, and to play.
Cons: the character builds are crazy. There are an insane number of classes and subclasses with endless access to bonus actions, reactions and--coming soon!--feats. The characters become too powerful too quickly, and once you hit Tier II, it feels much more like a superhero game than a fantasy game. The challenging rating system is useless.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Heh you're talking to a 3.5 player. Many options is relative.

3000 odd fears vs 100 odd. 3.5 has way more classes as well.if you played a new 3.5 class every 4 to 6 months you would be running out around about now.

Oh, it's worse than that. Even if we exclude PrCs, ACFs, and all "variant" classes (e.g. there's only one Paladin, we ignore the "Samurai" that's just a Fighter, no NPC classes, etc.), playing three different classes per year from mid-2000 to now, so 3x23 = 69 (nice) classes you could have played, you would only have run out...in early 2022 (by my count, 61 different classes). Change that to five months, and you'd need 61x5/12 = 25 years, 5 months to work through them all.

And this is JUST "base" classes, a surprising number of which really are actually distinct. Throw in additions Pathfinder made, like Magus, Summoner, Alchemist, Oracle, etc., then even the one-every-four-months pattern wouldn't be enough. Between those, feats, ACFs, and PrCs, the content of 3.x alone is enough to keep a group occupied for at least another decade, probably two, and that if they work at breakneck speed all the time.

Even 4e, with its mountains of feats and powers, pales in comparison to the sheer, overwhelming volume of stuff you could put together in 3.X, and Pathfinder adds a further decade of other bits and bobs on top, not to mention the piles of (sometimes, actually quite good) 3PP it brought along for the ride.

 

[FrogReaver]

Here’s my sell. You are soo familiar with 3e/3.5e material that no specific implementation is new to you and that’s kind of boring. Its probably why you are trying more and more exotic options. 5e will be new and interesting just by having mechanical representations you aren’t familiar with. Some concepts won’t work as well as they do in 3e, other will work better in 5e than 3e, and others that you never dreamed of from 3e will just work. Id suggest you start by embracing the options 5e gives as is. Learn them first and then treat them as building blocks. You’ll never be as granular as 3e in 5e, but there’s some really cool stuff there.

Some ideas for starting - based on coolness not necessarily power

• echo knight fighter
• bladesinger wizard
• genie pact warlock
• Glamour Bard
• Tempest Cleric
• Moon Druid
• Vengance Paladin - (concept is just cool)
• open hands or shadow monk
• gloomstalker ranger
• divine soul sorcerer (sorcerer with access to all cleric spells - yes please!)
• any artificer, infusions are really cool

 

[bedir than]

5e does a stronger job of capturing the story of the character, rather than the mechanics of the build.

It doesn't need 3000 classes/subclasses because the mechanics are simpler and it can tell 2750 of those stories just as well (and many of them better)

 

[EzekielRaiden]

5e does a stronger job of capturing the story of the character, rather than the mechanics of the build.

It doesn't need 3000 classes/subclasses because the mechanics are simpler and it can tell 2750 of those stories just as well (and many of them better)

Conversely, those 2750 stories will only end up being, like, 30 different stories. Because ultimately there's no difference. That's the whole point. That's the benefit and the problem of "Custom Lineage," for instance; it can cover everything, because it isn't really anything. And, clearly, plenty of people are cool with that. Two characters being pretty much indistinguishable mechanically, despite theoretically being very different stories, is no impediment.

However, given what the OP has said, I am disinclined to think they're such a person.

 

[Oofta]

As someone who has played every edition of D&D, my sales pitch is simple. It's the best version ever, at least for me and the handful of old timers I've played with.

In comparison to 3E, it may seem like there's fewer options but in my experience there are simply fewer feat taxes and don't underestimate the flexibility granted by subclasses and backgrounds. I have a guy in my campaign that's a fighter with a shady past, he's the acting rogue. Multi-classing works much like 3E and opens up a lot of options as well. There may be fewer species (I haven't counted) but depending on supplements allowed there are over 50, many have subraces. May not have exactly what you want (sadly I still can't redo my gnoll barbarian Bowzer) but there are options for custom races in the DMG if the DM is okay with it.

As far as the naysayers, there's a relative handful of posters with an axe to grind and they feel the need to remind us of it constantly. Most of the disagreements are simply a question of preference and choice. I can't guarantee every DM or group will work for you because there's a lot of different styles out there. I'd say ignore the haters and check it out for yourself, you're the only one who can figure out if the game works for you.

What's the worst that can happen?