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

[Not a Decepticon]

Just start the game at level 3, not like we're all reaching level 20 too quickly.

I would agree but my brain immediatelly tells me of builds that need to start with 1-level dip. But I could work with that in some circumstances.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

my preferred multiclass rules would be even split between classes, but those splits usually are terrible.
you really need to work something special to make fighter 6/wizard 5 be better than fighter 11 or wizard 11.

So, I have special rule where MC characters gain more class levels that single class but with same HP/HD and proficiency bonus.

View attachment 424563

IE:
at 5th level you have class features of 3rd level in both classes HPs/HDs of 2+2 and 5th HP increase is of lower HP class.
at 8th level that is repeated and now you have 5 levels in both classes but only HPs of 4+4 class and proficiency bonus normal for 8th level(+3)
at the end you have 13 levels worth of features in both classes but HPs as normal; 10 for one class and 10 for other class, with prof bonus of +6.

Yes. Even splits usually are not great. This is why I use full + half as baseline.

And scrap subclass for that.

 

[CreamCloud0]

I like the multiclass rules as they are now.

But my preferred multiclass option is how final fantasy XI classes work:

You have one primary class and one secondary class.
Secondary class is always half the primary class level and a select few abilities are not available as subclass.

For D&D, I'd make it:

Level 1:

Option 1:
chose species, background and main class and a feat.

Option 2:
Instead of chosing a main class, chose two secondary classes. You get reduced features (like level 1 as muticlass as it is now, you must chose wither pact magic or spellcasting trait)

Level 2:

Option 1:
Chose a secondary class (a class that is half your total character level)

Option 2:
Chose a subclass (as they are now but improved to be as valuable as a class of half your level)

So combining this two options at both levels you either have:

Main class + subclass
Main class + secondary class

Two secondary classes + one subclass
Three secondary classes.

Resoning behind it:

Subclasses can be designed in a way that they are never combined with other subclasses. They are highly specialized.

So no eldritch knight + blade singer combination.

But you get a lot of freedom from being able to substitute a subclass for a secondary or even have 3 secondary classes without a specialization.

I am not sure how I'd design feat and subclass progression.
Probably just using total character level seems like a good idea. Another question is how spell levels add up,since it is possible to have a spell progression that is up to 1.5 spell levels.

Maybe spellcasters only add 2/3 caster level towards total spell progression as main class and 1/3 as subclass. And most caster specializations add 1/3 caster level progression. And you round fractions up (like eldritch knight and arcane trickster). Math is a bit ugly.

But spellcaster table could also be adjusted to have 30 levels instead of 20. And you get another spell level every 3 levels.

i don't hate the subclass vs second class decision but i do have to consider that between the various classes the subclasses were not created in equal importance.

 

[ECMO3]

my preferred multiclass rules would be even split between classes, but those splits usually are terrible.
you really need to work something special to make fighter 6/wizard 5 be better than fighter 11 or wizard 11.

As a player multiclassing is probably my favorite part of 5E compared to older editions. I certainly don't want it any more restrictive than it is and I think it is a huge improvement over 3E where you lost experience if there was a split.

TBH what I would really like is to do away with the minimum and make it wide open like it is in BG3. I am playing a PC right now who is currently an Eldritch Knight 6/Elemental Eye Warlock 4 and I would really like to get 1 level of Druid, but I can't because of my 8 Wisdom.

I just don't see what the restrictions do for the game.

 

[RhaezDaevan]

I'm sad the class reviews aren't going to continue. I was enjoying them.

 

[DragonLancer]

Same. Although not everyone will agree, I do like to read others views on classes where they feel they are buffed or nerfed.

For what we have so far...

In my Tuesday night campaign, one player has a halfling barbarian at 6th (World Tree) and he's a tough little so and so. Puts out good damage and tanks well. His World Tree healing has saved the party on many occasions. No complaints on how good that class has proven to be.

In both my Sunday and Tuesday campaigns someone has a bard. One is Human (9th) and the other is Warforged (6th), both have gone School of Lore. Lore seems to be the best way to play bards. But other than a couple useful spells, to me looking in from the DMs screen, bard feels really weak and bland. I'm used to how effective they were under Pathfinder/ 3.X so I might be being coloured by that.

The Sunday campaign has an Aasimar cleric (Life domain) at 9th level. Amazing healer and caster but feels subpar as a melee combatant - which is a shame because I like clerics as second tier fighter types. No complaints though. The class does it's job and well.

 

[pukunui]

Someone else could always continue them …

I'm sad the class reviews aren't going to continue. I was enjoying them.

 

[Zardnaar]

Someone else could always continue them …

I did the Artificer

 

[pukunui]

I did the Artificer

I meant in this thread.