D&D 5E Classes that Suck

[Asisreo]

This is totally irrelevant, given the Bladesinger subclass is in the number one subclass for Wizards (albeit narrowly). All the same criticisms apply to the Bladesinger's name perhaps even more strongly.

Furthermore, the Bladesinger was in the same book as the PDK, so has the same level of people able to access it, so that also negates any arguments there.

I'd argue the bladesinger's name is much more defining than Purple Dragon Knight because it's distinction from a regular wizard pops out in the name. *blade*singer. It's obvious that this will be the only wizard that has any form of martial focus, something quite a few people desire. It also tells the flavor, their eloquence, quite in the open. A singer is graceful as they perform and you can imagine the bladesinger doing so as well.

The PDK is less popular than the equally ridiculously-named Echo Knight, which comes from a book which has sold far fewer copies (AFAIK) than Sword Coast, and had only been out like a month when the survey we're discussing landed. Compare that to the Bladesinger, and it's pretty obvious that people are actually looking at the abilities and themes of subclasses. Looking at the popular subclasses they're pretty much all either ones with a strong theme (sometimes a bit edgelord-y) or strong mechanics, or those with both.

Echo Knight seems to be a reference to a strange piece of pop culture that seems to have leaked into the D&D community, for obvious reasons. It's popularity may be due to the rising popularity of the piece of media. Ghosts that attack your enemies from a limited range while you command them is a very desired niche.

(As a semantic aside, I can't speak worldwide, but if you say "cavalier" in the UK, people think "perfumed fop in a fancy hat on a horse who lost a war due to ineptitude", not "armoured knight" - I strongly suspect that the number of English-speakers who think of a D&D-style cavalier when they hear the term is, well, more limited than you think.)

It was my first thought when hearing the name. Anyone who plays games that involve medieval units have probably encountered the term "cavalier" and I think the overlap between those who enjoy medieval strategy games and D&D to be quite a large overlap.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I'd argue the bladesinger's name is much more defining than Purple Dragon Knight because it's distinction from a regular wizard pops out in the name. *blade*singer. It's obvious that this will be the only wizard that has any form of martial focus, something quite a few people desire. It also tells the flavor, their eloquence, quite in the open. A singer is graceful as they perform and you can imagine the bladesinger doing so as well.


Echo Knight seems to be a reference to a strange piece of pop culture that seems to have leaked into the D&D community, for obvious reasons. It's popularity may be due to the rising popularity of the piece of media. Ghosts that attack your enemies from a limited range while you command them is a very desired niche.


It was my first thought when hearing the name. Anyone who plays games that involve medieval units have probably encountered the term "cavalier" and I think the overlap between those who enjoy medieval strategy games and D&D to be quite a large overlap.

I mean, none of that answers any of my major points, so I guess you don't disagree with the rest of them. At best Bladesinger is not quite as bad, name-wise as PDK (the main problem is really the "Purple", it's so lame). But it's from the same book, has the same issue (if to a lesser degree) and is #1, rather than what, dead last?

Maybe a more interesting point can be found with unpopular vs. least popular. When people are only picking one thing, it doesn't really matter if something is "unpopular" or not, if it's still the least popular. And whilst I doubt PDK is popular, you do get this thing - it happens with books, movies, even people, where people say that they like them, but, when it comes down to the picking, that kid is still last for your team. And so you can say "Well Timmy is a nice guy and everyone likes him, look I did a poll!" but when Timmy is picked last for dodgeball every single time, even though he is well-liked, you gotta look at why that is.

Turns out Timmy has terrible reflexes and can't throw to save his life, and when it comes down to it, people pick everyone before him. He's a cool guy, but that's not good enough.

PDK is the worse version of Timmy. Tarquin. He's got a stupid name (sorry Tarquins of the world...). He's not particularly popular. And on top of that, he's not at all good at dodgeball. That's why he gets picked last.

 

[Minigiant]

The issues withthe PDK is it is both ultra specific as a archetype and not very interesting in settings without PDKs being a major faction.

Rallying Cry is a warlordy ability
Royal Envoy is a knightly feature
Inspiring Surge is another warlordy thing
Bulwark is another warlordy thing

So basically it's a knightly warlord and competes directly with the more customizable battlemaster.

 

[Ashrym]

The issues withthe PDK is it is both ultra specific as a archetype and not very interesting in settings without PDKs being a major faction.

Rallying Cry is a warlordy ability
Royal Envoy is a knightly feature
Inspiring Surge is another warlordy thing
Bulwark is another warlordy thing

So basically it's a knightly warlord and competes directly with the more customizable battlemaster.

Customizable and more combat-oriented. The battle master gets mentioned a lot but the complaints stemmed from wanting non-combat abilities.

The battle master doesn't have the royal envoy ability, which is the reason to go bannaret when the goal is more social ability. Or samurai. Or even cavalier.

"I wanted more out of combat options but then every choice I made was for better combat" demonstrates incongruent behavior.

Plus, the versatility in battle master is not seen. Players pick the same maneuvers for the most.

 

[FrogReaver]

Customizable and more combat-oriented. The battle master gets mentioned a lot but the complaints stemmed from wanting non-combat abilities.

The battle master doesn't have the royal envoy ability, which is the reason to go bannaret when the goal is more social ability. Or samurai. Or even cavalier.

"I wanted more out of combat options but then every choice I made was for better combat" demonstrates incongruent behavior.

Plus, the versatility in battle master is not seen. Players pick the same maneuvers for the most.

perhaps the thought process is that damage a battlemaster gets is essential to keep up with the Paladins is the world. In which case desiring both the damage and more social abilities is what the actual Request is. That’s a request I don’t find at all unreasonable.

 

[Asisreo]

I mean, none of that answers any of my major points, so I guess you don't disagree with the rest of them. At best Bladesinger is not quite as bad, name-wise as PDK (the main problem is really the "Purple", it's so lame). But it's from the same book, has the same issue (if to a lesser degree) and is #1, rather than what, dead last?

I wasn't going to address every point you made for the sake of brevity so I chose the ones I thought were the most important.

To address your other points briefly: Yes, being least popular doesn't mean it's unpopular. Those have two separate meanings. The reason it's brought up is because the arguments usually starts with how people hate this, that, or another while that's not what the polls gave. It wasn't an unpopularity poll, it was a popularity poll. It's the difference with movies being on the bottom of my "favorite movies to-watch list" and movies being in my "least favorite movies to watch" list.

Isolating it to players that have all options available still runs into the issue that the most favorite options are the free ones. The free ones are iconic and familiar and most players who bought the other options also played with the free ones beforehand.

Maybe a more interesting point can be found with unpopular vs. least popular. When people are only picking one thing, it doesn't really matter if something is "unpopular" or not, if it's still the least popular. And whilst I doubt PDK is popular, you do get this thing - it happens with books, movies, even people, where people say that they like them, but, when it comes down to the picking, that kid is still last for your team. And so you can say "Well Timmy is a nice guy and everyone likes him, look I did a poll!" but when Timmy is picked last for dodgeball every single time, even though he is well-liked, you gotta look at why that is.

Turns out Timmy has terrible reflexes and can't throw to save his life, and when it comes down to it, people pick everyone before him. He's a cool guy, but that's not good enough.

PDK is the worse version of Timmy. Tarquin. He's got a stupid name (sorry Tarquins of the world...). He's not particularly popular. And on top of that, he's not at all good at dodgeball. That's why he gets picked last.

Both of our metaphors fall flat in this instance anyways. It's not like an election where there's only 2 options and it's not like a basketball pick where everyone has to even participate. The dragon knight isn't being voted into office against a Champion, they can coexist together. At the same time, the PDK isn't required to be put in, along with the other fighter subclasses. No party even requires a fighter in the first place.

But let's take it as it is. The percentage of those who played a fighter that chose a Purple Dragon Knight. This could mean that a wide range of players tried it once and never again (Bad experiences, uninteresting, etc.) Or it could mean that only a few players tried it and many of them continuously play them (fun for those who tried).

Let me be clear, I never played PDK at all. I've seen the features and they don't seem weak, they just seem like something I'm not interested in as a fighter. Whether the subclass is good or not in play isn't something I can opine, but I can say that just because something was on the bottom of the "most played fighter" class doesn't make it bad.

That same survey puts fighters more than double the popularity of a Druid and wizards are middle of the pack. That doesn't necessarily make wizards a mediocre class or druids a bad class.

 

[Asisreo]

perhaps the thought process is that damage a battlemaster gets is essential to keep up with the Paladins is the world. In which case desiring both the damage and more social abilities is what the actual Request is. That’s a request I don’t find at all unreasonable.

While it is true that paladins have spells and Battlemasters do not, a paladin using her spellslots as a means to push through a social encounter sacrifices a bit of her combat prowess. Unlike wizards and bards, the paladin has very limited spellslots, too and they do not return on a short rest.

Now, it is still true that they have these options. I have an opinion on separating what someone does as "combat" and "social," since they aren't isolated pillars (as well as the exploration pillar). But paladins do have limited spells whose utility leans into socialization more like Zone of Truth and Geas (which is actually all they have in the PHB in terms of socializing spells).

 

[Chaosmancer]

Customizable and more combat-oriented. The battle master gets mentioned a lot but the complaints stemmed from wanting non-combat abilities.

The battle master doesn't have the royal envoy ability, which is the reason to go bannaret when the goal is more social ability. Or samurai. Or even cavalier.

"I wanted more out of combat options but then every choice I made was for better combat" demonstrates incongruent behavior.

Plus, the versatility in battle master is not seen. Players pick the same maneuvers for the most.

It is still UA, but the Battlemaster got a few things in the Class Variants UA that solve this. Like Studious Eye and Silver Tongue. Which gives a fairly decent bonus comparable to the Royal Envoy ability.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I wasn't going to address every point you made for the sake of brevity so I chose the ones I thought were the most important.

Ok, but that was literally the least-important point, and you even answered the point so unimportant I called it an "aside" and put it in paratheses, so... that's a bit weird.

It wasn't an unpopularity poll, it was a popularity poll. It's the difference with movies being on the bottom of my "favorite movies to-watch list" and movies being in my "least favorite movies to watch" list.

I've addressed this. It is defacto exactly that, because you can only have one subclass.

I've seen the features and they don't seem weak, they just seem like something I'm not interested in as a fighter.

My point was literally that they were something people who played Fighters were unlikely to be interested in. You're literally agreeing with that. They're also weak, because their abilities can only be triggered occasionally, and don't affect you at all in most cases (and may encourage you to do something like use your abilities at a bad time, for you, because it's a good time for others).

This could mean that a wide range of players tried it once and never again (Bad experiences, uninteresting, etc.) Or it could mean that only a few players tried it and many of them continuously play them (fun for those who tried).

No, actually, it could not mean the former. That's impossible. Beyond's way of doing active characters would mean they would show up. So it necessarily means few people have actually selected it. There's no way to tell if they keep playing it or not, so you can't say the latter either.

 

[Undrave]

Customizable and more combat-oriented. The battle master gets mentioned a lot but the complaints stemmed from wanting non-combat abilities.

The battle master doesn't have the royal envoy ability, which is the reason to go bannaret when the goal is more social ability. Or samurai. Or even cavalier.

"I wanted more out of combat options but then every choice I made was for better combat" demonstrates incongruent behavior.

Plus, the versatility in battle master is not seen. Players pick the same maneuvers for the most.

It is still UA, but the Battlemaster got a few things in the Class Variants UA that solve this. Like Studious Eye and Silver Tongue. Which gives a fairly decent bonus comparable to the Royal Envoy ability.

What Chaosmancer said. They're also infinitely more interesting than your Royal Envoy ability... AND it doesn't actually make you weaker in combat to pick those options, you still have the same ammount of dice that recharge on a short rest. all you give up is some flexibility in the maneuvers you gain access to, but the bonus damage remain so it's a fair trade to me. After that, it's just a question of managing your rests properly.

They're also weak, because their abilities can only be triggered occasionally, and don't affect you at all in most cases (and may encourage you to do something like use your abilities at a bad time, for you, because it's a good time for others).

It's also interesting to note that, putting aside the Champion, it's the only Fighter subclass that doesn't expend your ressources. The Battlemaster gets superiority dice, the Eldritch Knight gets spell slots, the Samurai has their auto-Advantage thing, the Arcane Archer has Arcane Shots...

The PDK still has the same pool of ressources as a basic Fighter, only now they have weak situatonal Riders that are actually difficult to pull off effectively. Especialy Bulwark who is dependant on both you and your allies FAILING a random roll to even have any impact... with no guarantee that you'll succeed at the reroll too.