One of the things that demonstrates different D&D interpretation styles is how people view character customization. See, I look at it and see:
Well, of course there are differetn opinions on what customization means, for me (and I venture other fiddlers out there) cutomization is about the individuality of your character and to have full control of it.
1. Start with a race (from a half dozen or more choices), ability scores (with a lot of customization), background (of probably dozens of choices), and alignment (if desired)
Races do indeed provide a baseline of characteristics, however they only bring out an archetype (or stereotype) to play for or against, the subrace being only a pretext to jsutiffy variable bonuses, though on the most recent ed your character's race only works to enforce sterotypes and get a 20 on your prime attribute. No matter how many, Backgrounds won't necessarilly have what it is neede to express the character you want, and will carry some extra [unwanted] baggage and will bring out at best a perk or two. And on ability scores, they aren't really a customization tool unless you get the ability to get a 5 or a 3 on a score you deem critical to be low.
2. Add an adventuring class (of which you will have around a dozen or more choices), and equip your character as desired
Again class is only a baseline, and there are many common class-race combos. And mundane equipment isn't exactly something that defines a character, more an extension of said character¿s individuality.
3. Add a subclass (of which you will have multiple choices for each class), either immediately or in the first few levels
With the exception of cleric domains, subclasses so far are more situational crunch with empty flavor or the actual implementation of your class -like the warden and blackguard, or the promised warlord subclass- they are bundled together for better support because the design team didn't consider them worthy enough of being full-fledged classes on their own. SO they don't really bring out that much to the table, just are a way to actually have 30+ classes were it seems there are only 10 or something. Each of theses actual classes is a baseline on itself with common combos for races
4. Then add a feat/specialty (of which you will have many choices) at about level 4 or 5
The point is so fat feats are pointing out to be huge power boosts mainly directed to combat and flooded with unwanted baggage, no longer the fine tunning the used to be. No more my wizard knows how to fight with a sword, or shinning in the dark, spare enemies regardless of who deals the finishing blow, being truly dedicated to singing, or using your blood to heal. while there seem to be plans to gain additional proficiencies via stat grinding during actual downtime, that kind of things become harder to emulate when starting at higher levels and as such are at the whims of the DM, not something one can be confident will actually happen
5. Multiclass if you want to
It remains to be seen how flexible multiclassing will be. although multiclassing its a mean to evolve organically a character, which is a very different axis from character customization.
6. Add additional feats as you level up
With the way things are shaping out, that only means more unused extra bits, hardly good for customization
And I think, "how is that not enough character customization?"
I just don't see "I don't want to be like every other fighter" as a valid criticism, since it is rarely accurate. It simply sounds more compelling than saying, "I don't want to be like every other Str 12, Dex 16, Con 12, Int 13, Wis 15, Cha 10, chaotic good, wood elf, giant killer ranger with a priest background who wields shortswords, a longbow, and throwing daggers, and prefers studded leather armor. And 4-6 highly flavorful suites of special features that I can select isn't going to cut it." Really? This is a class-based system. There is going to be plenty of customization for a class-based system. Any more customization and you hardly have a class-based system.
Actually what you describe here doesn't differ too much from the cookie cutter builds one chan find on charop, except for the background which will only bring out a slight perk an nothing more. A Litmus test for customization: if after going manually for every single option available to you in order to translate your cahracter concept into a palyable character you can find your actuall build sans ability scores (or worse those too) posted on a random forum out there, there isn't as much customization as you'd think, class based or not.
I love skill-based systems. D&D is the only game that I actually like a class-based system in. So I find arguments that amount to saying, "that's too much like a class-based system" rather foreign to my preferences.
Play what you like, it just makes me shake my head like a boat was missed somewhere.
not necessarilly, class is a tool, a great tool whihc helps define your mechanical role on a party and to balance it, however embracing that doens't encesarilly implies I want to play the same character over and over and over with differetn dressing each time. D&D in particualr is very good for customizing, I also like stat grinders (I find the more realistic), but they are very limited on customization and the other alternative -full point buy- isn't that palatable either, it isn't a matter of all or nothing you know. Just because I find a class system the most useful of th ebunch, doens't mean I'm necesarilly looking for someone rigid and set in stone.
