D&D 5E Character Concepts you cannot make in 5E

[Lokiare]

What are some character concepts you cannot make in 5E that you could in previous editions. Please explain why you cannot make them also.

For me I find it hard to make a light armor, heavy weapon fighter with any penchant for skills or socialization. This is due to having to put your highest stats in Dex to make up for the AC loss, thus making you a very low damage heavy weapon user. Then you also cannot use non Dex based skills with any hope of being successful for any but the easiest checks.

For the life of me I can't figure out how to make a defender Wizard either. Their extremely low hp and low AC make it difficult. If you were to take the Dwarf and armor feat then you would have the AC, but then you still wouldn't have the hp. The only hope is to spam defensive spells and then you low out in effectiveness as anything but a damage soaker.

 

[Wulfgar76]

For me I find it hard to make a light armor, heavy weapon fighter

Make a barbarian.

For the life of me I can't figure out how to make a defender Wizard either.

Make a wizard, dip 1 level in Fighter.

 

[Lokiare]

Make a barbarian.

Then it wouldn't be a Fighter, it would have an entirely different feel to it and play entirely differently. I just want a Fighter that can use light armor and a heavy weapon.

Make a wizard, dip 1 level in Fighter.

Again, then it wouldn't be a Wizard. It would be a gish. Completely different feel.

The solution would be some class features or a sub-class that has special spells or features that would allow this to happen.

 

[Ichneumon]

Why do you want your strong, not-dextrous fighter to wear light armor?

 

[Cadence]

Then it wouldn't be a Fighter, it would have an entirely different feel to it and play entirely differently. I just want a Fighter that can use light armor and a heavy weapon.

Again, then it wouldn't be a Wizard. It would be a gish. Completely different feel.

Just so I'm on the right page, you want things that weren't part of the standard class list in any edition until 4th... and any substitute that isn't just like the one you can get in 4th feels completely different?

All these "I'm really disappointed in the final 5e playtest packet" threads and posts almost make me want the AC against missile weapons for characters engaged in melee, and against melee weapons for those casting spells, to be based only on the actual armor being worn -- just to hose those concepts.

But seriously, even though I'm not a fan of it, I do think they should have support for all the core class ideas in 4e presented in the base PhB. If they can afford to put Kender in, then it really doesn't seem like it's asking too much.

 

[Ichneumon]

But seriously, even though I'm not a fan of it, I do think they should have support for all the core class ideas in 4e presented in the base PhB. If they can afford to put Kender in, then it really doesn't seem like it's asking too much.

Kender are all but guaranteed to only appear in Dragonlance material. But having all the 4e class concepts available would be good to see.

 

[n00bdragon]

Character concept I can't make: A fighter with all the versatility and power that a wizard has but in a distinctly fightery form.

 

[Savage Wombat]

I can't recreate my friend's psionic githzerai monk, but you don't see me complaining. I can wait for the rules expansions.

 

[Mistwell]

I can create any character concept I desire with 5e.

Because the rules are not the game.

When you learn this, you will probably enjoy all versions of D&D more.

 

[Melhaic]

It looks like we are stuck in negative loops, Lokaire: you clearly can't stand 5e (because its not 4e redux), I can't stand your whiny, predictable posts. But, here we are again. Relax. Just play 4e, man. Nobody is going to make you switch.

More on topic, I'm not even sure what a defender wizard is supposed to look like. An armored abjurer? Just sounds bassackwards to me.