D&D 5E (2024) Class Tier List 1 Year Later.

[EzekielRaiden]

Does the DM make a huge difference? Yes. For example, I will tend to throw up obstacles for optimised characters, and things that help mechanically weaker ones. And I tend to view combat as interludes between the important story stuff. Does it matter? Well it's always been part of D&D, and D&D has done okay over the last 50 years. Could it be fixed? Not without excluding a huge number of players, who would simply shift to playing Not-D&D and give their money to a different company.

There are several arguments in here. Some of them I agree with. Others I do not.

I sincerely believe D&D would be in a better place if the GM were not required to be secretly attaching a ball-and-chain around the characters who coincidentally chose inherently powerful things, while secretly dropping power boosts on the characters who coincidentally chose inherently weaker things. Because that would mean both that players could genuinely just...pick whatever they think sounds awesome, up to the limit of reasonableness, and that GMs could stay focused on creating scenarios (combat or not!) that are fun, rather than having to constantly play game design whack-a-mole to patch over the problems.

 

[Zardnaar]

If a "Random DM" is so impactful that they can swing a class from being the best option in the game to being second-worst, isn't that literally proof of what I've asserted to you all along, that mediocre or flawed GMs can absolutely ruin a 5e game and the system offers no method to address this other than "find a GM that doesn't do that"?

Like at this point I'm wondering what I was supposed to think all those times you asserted that 5e wasn't so overwhelmingly dependent on having an actually great GM. Because now you're literally constructing tier lists based on that very thing which you have, dozens of times, assured me was not true.

Its not the best class in the game. Except at higher levels.

Its probably about a B but see my OP. The classes I rated over it peak earlier and are better over the main levels the games played at.

ENworld over rates exploration pillar and assumes you have the money, time and access to all the extra spells you want.

Every other class is more self contained.

Also the games changed. The "meta" of 5.5 RAW encounter design.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

There are several arguments in here. Some of them I agree with. Others I do not.

I sincerely believe D&D would be in a better place if the GM were not required to be secretly attaching a ball-and-chain around the characters who coincidentally chose inherently powerful things, while secretly dropping power boosts on the characters who coincidentally chose inherently weaker things.

They are not required to do that. It's purely a matter of style. That's kind of the point of D&D - you are not required to play D&D in any particular way.

Because that would mean both that players could genuinely just...pick whatever they think sounds awesome, up to the limit of reasonableness,

That's what I aim for. I know others like things much more grounded.

and that GMs could stay focused on creating scenarios (combat or not!) that are fun, rather than having to constantly play game design whack-a-mole to patch over the problems.

Sometime the whack-a-mole leads to interesting story twists. I've never found it got in the way, anyway.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Its not the best class in the game. Except at higher levels.

Its probably about a B but see my OP. The classes I rated over it peak earlier and are better over the main levels the games played at.

And I still just flat-out do not understand how you can argue that the Wizard has nothing to offer while the Sorcerer is the best thing you could possibly pick. Better than all but two other classes, which are merely peers.

That's my sticking point here. You are asserting the Sorcerer is amazeballs. It is almost without peer. Nobody does it better than the Sorcerer does, the very best options in the game are simply side-grades.

And yet the only differences you have pointed out are:

• Metamagic, which you've already said really isn't THAT amazing, it's just nice to have
• Level 6 abilities, which you admitted just a moment ago don't actually make that much difference
• Subclasses overall, which only includes abilities at...3 and 6

So are you seriously claiming to me that it is...the level 3 abilities...which somehow boost the Sorcerer up to being one of the best classes in the entire game, while the Wizard languishes as very nearly the worst class in the whole game.

 

[Zardnaar]

And I still just flat-out do not understand how you can argue that the Wizard has nothing to offer while the Sorcerer is the best thing you could possibly pick. Better than all but two other classes, which are merely peers.

That's my sticking point here. You are asserting the Sorcerer is amazeballs. It is almost without peer. Nobody does it better than the Sorcerer does, the very best options in the game are simply side-grades.

And yet the only differences you have pointed out are:

• Metamagic, which you've already said really isn't THAT amazing, it's just nice to have
• Level 6 abilities, which you admitted just a moment ago don't actually make that much difference
• Subclasses overall, which only includes abilities at...3 and 6

So are you seriously claiming to me that it is...the level 3 abilities...which somehow boost the Sorcerer up to being one of the best classes in the entire game, while the Wizard languishes as very nearly the worst class in the whole game.

You haven't seen a sorcerer in action im guessing?

If the DM is using a few monsters the sorcerer twins their favorite control spells and clowns on them.

If its a group its a heightened AoE control spell. If its a few chromatic orb can wreck house.

If its a large mob of CR 2-4 clerics and druids can clear them using spirit guardians and conjure animals.

Wizards been power crept out by the other casters. They dont have the emanations. Invokers and Abjurer both got indirectly nerfed (5.5 monsters hit harder, buckets of hp). Bards can aquire the power spells and have a few very nasty subclasses.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

You haven't seen a sorcerer in action im guessing?

I play one. Right now. Every Monday. Jalt Kalthor (clan name first, as is traditional in Djerad Thymar), Draconic Sorcerer.

I have not seen the incredible amazeballs results you describe. I have contributed, sometimes significantly. I am not a one-man apocalypse like you portray the Sorcerer to be.

 

[Zardnaar]

I play one. Right now. Every Monday. Jalt Kalthor (clan name first, as is traditional in Djerad Thymar), Draconic Sorcerer.

I have not seen the incredible amazeballs results you describe. I have contributed, sometimes significantly. I am not a one-man apocalypse like you portray the Sorcerer to be.

What level are you? And what metamagic options? What type of dragon Sorcerer and are you using 5.0 material?

Blaster/controller/hybrid?

 

[EzekielRaiden]

What level are you? And what metamagic options?

7th level now. Just got 4th level spells recently. Subtle and Careful metamagics. Careful has been quite useful, as noted. Subtle was vitally necessary at early levels, as I said to Mr. Farquhar earlier, and as I have actually seen opponent mages perform counterspell, it will be useful in the future if I want to make my spells immune to that. (There may also be some need in the future to cast spells without others knowing I'm doing it.)

I don't bother with Twinned because 5.5e made it suck and severely reduced the spells it can be applied to, and Quickened is, as you say, stupidly inefficient early on. I forewent Heightened to start with because early on it is also terribly expensive for its effect (as in, it's literally all of your points for the day when you first get metamagic), since it only applies to one single target, not every target of the spell. If it affected all targets but cost 1+spell level, then I probably would've picked it up instead of Careful.

 

[Zardnaar]

7th level now. Just got 4th level spells recently. Subtle and Careful metamagics. Careful has been quite useful, as noted. Subtle was vitally necessary at early levels, as I said to Mr. Farquhar earlier, and as I have actually seen opponent mages perform counterspell, it will be useful in the future if I want to make my spells immune to that. (There may also be some need in the future to cast spells without others knowing I'm doing it.)

I don't bother with Twinned because 5.5e made it suck and severely reduced the spells it can be applied to, and Quickened is, as you say, stupidly inefficient early on. I forewent Heightened to start with because early on it is also terribly expensive for its effect (as in, it's literally all of your points for the day when you first get metamagic), since it only applies to one single target, not every target of the spell. If it affected all targets but cost 1+spell level, then I probably would've picked it up instead of Careful.

Subtle situationsl. Really good socially and vs counterspell.

As long as youre mot encountering counterspell every other encounter I would skip it.

Careful nit sure about.

Youre missing out on twinned command, tashas hideous laughter, hold person, tashas mind whip, hold monster at 9th lvl.

AKA some of the most powerful effects.

Damage wise you've never used hold person, next round innate sorcery and Chromatic Orb? No hex+ Scorching Ray+ innate sorcery?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Damage wise you've never used hold person

Hold Person is a) boring and b) generally sets up another party member to kill steal before you get chance to follow up with anything.

It's also on the spell list for Bard, Cleric and almost everyone else, so a good one for the sorcerer to skip to avoid duplication.

No hex+ Scorching Ray

Most players don’t optimise to pick up spells from another class’s list.