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

[CreamCloud0]

But I want level 1 to have some features for a subclass. Yes yes multiclassing, but the problem there is that WotC didn't remove or rework them..

i don't really care about getting my subclass features at 1st and understand and agree with the points made for delaying them to third but i do agree we should remove multiclassing and solve that separate issue

 

[GobHag]

…why?

I don’t think multiclassing is at all relevant to this change. The point was so players who might be trying a class for the first time don’t feel like they have to read every subclass that exists for that class before they can start playing it.

Because I want my choice of subclass to matter immediately.

And I'll take those new player grievances as the price I pay--I'm a proponent of easy respeccing anyways. I also dislike the 'level 1-2 are tutorial levels' design paradigm

 

[Not a Decepticon]

I haven't played or run PF2e, but I have the books from a humble bundle and I think that's for sure one thing they are doing right with classes/subclasses.

Pathfinder is generally much better with classes and choices buuut they have so many options they can feel too small to be really important and cause chocie paralysis (former PF2 player in my group had both of these comploaints). There is a fine balance and I feel PF2 is on opposite end from 5e.

There’s no reason it can’t be a level 1 thing if you want it to. Just because the subclass feature comes online at level 3 doesn’t mean you can’t have been a member of that subclass since level 1.

As a DM I would not be comfortable with that because what happens if a player changes their mind? Also, I have seen players who hate idea of commitment that goes with Oaths/Domains/Patrons and just never take level 3 because of that, up to even having to write a way for them to trade these class levels for another class since they no longer had fun with this. I doubt these players owuld like playign with patron from the start.

 

[Charlaquin]

Because I want my choice of subclass to matter immediately.

And I'll take those new player grievances as the price I pay--

Well, it’s the price they would pay.

I'm a proponent of easy respeccing anyways. I also dislike the 'level 1-2 are tutorial levels' design paradigm

that’s part of 5e. Take it or leave it.

 

[Not a Decepticon]

i don't really care about getting my subclass features at 1st and understand and agree with the points made for delaying them to third but i do agree we should remove multiclassing and solve that separate issue

I personally like multiclassing. All fun builds I want to try include it, I do not think I would liek the game so much if it was removed.

 

[CreamCloud0]

I personally like multiclassing. All fun builds I want to try include it, I do not think I would liek the game so much if it was removed.

Okay, to clarify, i don’t think the concept behind multiclassing is bad and should be removed, being able to combine class archetypes and features, BUT i think the current incarnation of multiclassing is pretty terrible, classes have to be designed in consideration of the combinatorial potential of each other, a class you multiclass into IMO should not provide the same progression as if it were your primary class.

My preferred implementation would be everyone is technically monoclass, but with a very high degree of options of customisation that still lets you pick up other classes features, just in a way that doesn’t have to affect how the baseclasses are designed.

 

[Greg K]

That's likely the idea...but then Stealth could simply be one of their class skills. It makes sense for a Barbarian hunter to stalk their prey silently. Other class skill lists were tweaked, so it's not an unreasonable addition.

It creates the disconnection when Stealth is not something their class training could involve...but becomes something they get good at just by Being Angry.

Agreed. I would rather have seen Stealth as a class skill and Expertise as a class feature that could be applied to a choice of class skills in which the character has training.

 

[Clint_L]

Yah, it's not that difficult to explain the wait in most cases. A lot of gods have multiple domains anyway, so you can look at it as some general training before they pick their specific focus of devotion.

I’ve had players choose to play clerics as atheists, pantheists, one who basically worshipped every god, one who invented their own god…

There’s no right way to do it.

 

[Clint_L]

It creates the disconnection when Stealth is not something their class training could involve...but becomes something they get good at just by Being Angry.

WotC is very specific that rage is not just being angry, or even being angry at all.

 

[eclair~]

Gonna take a break from these, if not halt them altogether.

'Cause honestly, it's not like it matters. The revised rules have had a divided reception, and people who dislike the 2024 changes to stuff are already well aware of how changes to class features and game mechanics can negatively impact the characters they enjoy playing. Likewise, people who like the revised rules most likely don't mind the loss of features or capabilities that other players are disappointed by the lack of.

I don't see WotC going back and doing a Tasha's-style set of optional features to address 2024 critics' issues with the classes. They're not going to add back Magical Inspiration or Focused Aim or Land's Stride or any other omitted or nerfed feature when there really was no good reason to not retain most of those features—unless you genuinely believe that people who don't care about them justify taking away these features and options from people who do. And furthermore, I don't see the people who support the changes to the classes or disagree with others' issues with them being able to provide any good rationale as to why these features were dropped, why it's fine for several classes now to not do or not do as well things they previously could when others get their versatility significantly expanded, why certain classes get limitations others don't have or miss out on things others get.

I provided my two cents on several OneD&D surveys, and the final product ultimately shows that the designers didn't care what I thought or what I enjoyed about their game. And I think that, rather than pondering what might have been, it's not worth giving any more consideration to said final product.