D&D 5E (2024) A critical analysis of 2024's revised classes

[djotaku]

I am not a fan of 2024 but haven't done the deep dive in why ( Just intial negative impressions). So I am looking forward to this even if I dont have much to contribute.

What's interesting is that I just went along with 2024 being better at the time. I have both 2014 and 2024 books. Ran campaigns with 2024 - no issues. But I have one campaign that was started as 2014 that we went back to. I cracked the books open again and, at the very least, the 2024 books are missing a lot of character. Maybe it make sense to move all the subclasses to 3rd level or maybe it didn't, but it sucks they're all called "sublasses" now. Before they had really cool names for the subclasses. Did it make things a little harder for new players? Sure! But for anyone with an ounce of intelligence it should have been pretty apparent pretty quickly that these are all "subclasses" it's just that each one has a cool name. In the same way that we all drive "Cars" on the street, but some cars are "SUVs" some are "compacts" and so on.

I was also sad that the books didn't have the silly dad humor on the first page that the 2014 books have. Like the DMG talking about how to kill your party or the Xanathar book talking about how the authors of the book didn't kill his fish.

About the only thing that is 99.9% better about 2024 is the DMG. It is MUCH, MUCH better for a new DM. However, I did write a blog post a little bit ago comparing Dungeon Master books ( Comparing Game Master / Dungeon Master books across TTRPGs ) and part of my conclusion was that D&D (and other systems) should make a "How to DM Book" that changes minimally across systems and versions and then a DMG/GMG that is for more advanced topics. Because while I found the 2014 DMG useless for learning D&D when I was new to the game, I found the 2024 one to be lacking in some of the more advanced topics from the 2014 book.

 

[Weiley31]

It's very odd. Rage makes barbarians reckless, but if they need to sneak, they become very controlled and quiet. But still really angry. If they're not raging, not so good at stealth. Surely there was a better way?

Adventures in Middle-Earth 5E's Slayer(Barbarian) class describes their Rage in one of two ways: the angry HULK SMASH and the cool, zen-like focus where a Slayer is locking in basically. This allows the player to flavour how their character demonstrates/pictures/whatever the Rage.

 

[Clint_L]

Here is the description of Rage from the intro to Barbarian in the current PHB:

Barbarians are mighty warriors who are powered by primal forces of the multiverse that manifest as a Rage. More than a mere emotion—and not limited to anger—this Rage is an incarnation of a predator’s ferocity, a storm’s fury, and a sea’s turmoil.

Some Barbarians personify their Rage as a fierce spirit or revered forebear. Others see it as a connection to the pain and anguish of the world, as an impersonal tangle of wild magic, or as an expression of their own deepest self. For every Barbarian, their Rage is a power that fuels not just battle prowess, but also uncanny reflexes and heightened senses.

Personally, I'm not sure that "rage" is still the best term for what WotC is describing here, especially given that they also call it "primal power" later in the class description. On the other hand, "I would like to rage!" is iconic so I get why they chose to keep the word rather than rebranding it like they did with monk's Ki. "I would like to use primal power!"...nah, not as good.

But arguing about whether or not Rage would help you stealth or whatever is kind of ignoring how they specifically define Rage for the 2024 barbarian. Note, for example, that they link it to a predator's ferocity, so in terms of stealth I think you are meant to think of a tiger stalking prey.

Incidentally, Rage is not linked to reckless attacks; you can do those whether or not you choose to use Rage.

Setting semantics aside, the 2024 barbarian is better than the 2014 one and still a good class, but because other classes improved more (monk, in a somewhat similar niche, for example, not to mention fighters) they've probably slipped back in my personal tier rankings, at least at higher levels. They're still amazing in Tier 1 play but overall I now consider them weaker than fighters, monks, and paladins when considering frontline warriors (and yes, monks can now be considered a frontline warrior, if they want to be, as well as the best skirmisher).

At least berserker barbarian still maths out as the best damage dealer in the game, last time I checked.