5e Character Guides - why rate all features?

[André Soares]

Yep. And they definitely should. I’m all for including sections about common and strong multi class options in guides and explaining what makes them strong and advice on when to take the multi class levels

That still doesn’t mean every ability needs a rating nor that the ratings actually hold up under even very limited assumption changes. (Such as getting the ability 5 levels later due to a multi class etc).

You seem to be ignoring the reasons as a whole and choosing to focus on part of it only.

Having a timing guide for multiclassing AND rating every level choice are complimentary. seeing when not to pick a class andhaving a rating of each class level helps the player setting their priorities.

 

[Dessert Nomad]

Hmm, do I want to take the level of fighter first or wizard? Oh, I can avoid this red bit if I take fighter first.

Except that the none of the guides I've seen actually tell you that in the section that's ranking basic class abilities, you have to look on the multiclassing table to see that, and it's... really in that category of stuff where if you can figure that out from the chart, you don't need the wizard ranked red also, and if you can't, then just having the red mark in the guide probably isn't enough to clue you in. And please go on to explain the usefulness of things like a wizard guide that gives distinct color code for each of proficiencies, saves, spell casting, spell book, and ritual casting. But then for each school only color codes the school, not the individual abilities of each school, even though they actually do come up at particular levels.

It's weird stuff that makes guide makers happy because they get to use colors more, I don't agree that it's actually useful, but like I said I don't mind it.

 

[André Soares]

Except that the none of the guides I've seen actually tell you that in the section that's ranking basic class abilities, you have to look on the multiclassing table to see that, and it's... really in that category of stuff where if you can figure that out from the chart, you don't need the wizard ranked red also, and if you can't, then just having the red mark in the guide probably isn't enough to clue you in. And please go on to explain the usefulness of things like a wizard guide that gives distinct color code for each of proficiencies, saves, spell casting, spell book, and ritual casting. But then for each school only color codes the school, not the individual abilities of each school, even though they actually do come up at particular levels.

It's weird stuff that makes guide makers happy because they get to use colors more, I don't agree that it's actually useful, but like I said I don't mind it.

Several of the guides in this forum rank proficiencies...

 

[FrogReaver]

Except that the none of the guides I've seen actually tell you that in the section that's ranking basic class abilities, you have to look on the multiclassing table to see that, and it's... really in that category of stuff where if you can figure that out from the chart, you don't need the wizard ranked red also, and if you can't, then just having the red mark in the guide probably isn't enough to clue you in. And please go on to explain the usefulness of things like a wizard guide that gives distinct color code for each of proficiencies, saves, spell casting, spell book, and ritual casting. But then for each school only color codes the school, not the individual abilities of each school, even though they actually do come up at particular levels.

It's weird stuff that makes guide makers happy because they get to use colors more, I don't agree that it's actually useful, but like I said I don't mind it.

I think they just don’t know how to do it any other way. This style made perfect sense in 4e where nearly everything was a choice.

 

[Yunru]

It's weird stuff that makes guide makers happy because they get to use colors more, I don't agree that it's actually useful, but like I said I don't mind it.

I don't know what you're on about...

 

[André Soares]

I don't know what you're on about...

I know what YOU are on hahahah

(can I have some please?)

 

[Blue]

Except that the none of the guides I've seen actually tell you that in the section that's ranking basic class abilities, you have to look on the multiclassing table to see that

Look, the OP talked about rating features that are mandatory. If you think those don't exist, go argue farther up the chain.

 

[BookBarbarian]

I always prefer the guides that don't rank things based on a good-to-bad scale but on a most-likely-to-be-useful-in-more-situations scale.

In that regard I don't mind the ranking of base class features.

 

[Dessert Nomad]

Look, the OP talked about rating features that are mandatory. If you think those don't exist, go argue farther up the chain.

Fortunately, I do think they exist, as I have been talking about them, and how they don't appear to serve a useful function. The post you were responding to pointed out that none of the guides that I have seen actually include sufficient information about mandatory features to guide someone in making the decision you said they were useful for. In other words, the information needed to conclude "Oh I can dodge the red bit if I take fighter first" isn't actually contained in the guide. (And, while I didn't mention it, in general the 'features that you get regardless of when you take the class' vs 'features you get only when you take the class at first level' are not, in my experience, called out in guides).

 

[Seramus]

It helps to understand the relative power level of every feature, to gain a greater and more holistic understanding of the entire class. That's an important part of System Mastery.

It also gives more insight into what the guide writer considers powerful, which may or may not line up with what you consider to be powerful.