D&D 5E Classes that Suck

[Chaosmancer]

Depends on the dwarf. How many people do you know that speak multiple languages? Then consider that formal schooling is not something that exists in most fantasy worlds.

Well, we are supposed to use the racial statblock for all NPCs, and every dwarf gets Dwarvish and Common, Every elf gets Elvish and Common, Every Gnome gets Gnomish and Common.

And every human gets +1 language.

So, I'd say most people in DnD get two languages.

 

[AliasBot]

Well, we are supposed to use the racial statblock for all NPCs, and every dwarf gets Dwarvish and Common, Every elf gets Elvish and Common, Every Gnome gets Gnomish and Common.

And every human gets +1 language.

So, I'd say most people in DnD get two languages.

Honestly, as long as both racial languages and Common are a thing, Human should be a distinct language from Common anyway. Common as the de facto Human language, which pretty much everyone else conveniently speaks, feels...odd. It paints humans as the default that everyone else bends toward, and takes away one of the few possible points of distinction that could make humans feel distinct from other peoples: as is, there's basically nothing that's unique to humans.

Divorced from being synonymous with a racial language, Common would come across more like a pidgin language, or something along those lines: a simplified conglomeration of a number of different languages that lets everyone convey basic concepts to each other - if not complex, philosophical debate or the like. It wouldn't be strictly necessary to share a non-Common language to be able to converse or negotiate under that paradigm, but it would certainly help grease the wheels a bit.

(This is only tangentially related, at best, to what classes do or don't suck, but humans not having their own language when every other core species does is a long-standing pet peeve of mine.)

 

[doctorbadwolf]

The option isn't just in the DMG, it is on page 175 of the PHB. This is less a rules issue than it is a "how character sheets are set up" issue and a "what the average player can (or will) wrap their head around" issue.

Basically the normal character sheet teaches people to 100% associate each skill with 1 ability and think of the combined bonus as the skill. It's handy for learning a workable version of the system, but fundamentally it isn't the rules as written or the rules as intended. It's the rules as played.

Tool Proficiencies have avoided this on character sheets, with no primary associated ability bias encouraged, no combined bonus written down. Just the pure, satisfying, add the appropriate ability and your proficiency bonus. The result is that tables are often confused about what to do with tool proficiencies.

The default is Charisma Vheck with Proficiency bonus if Proficient in a relevant Charisma Skill. I’m literally arguing the default should change. Nitpicking where the optional rule is doesn’t change what the standard rule is.

 

[Minigiant]

Honestly, as long as both racial languages and Common are a thing, Human should be a distinct language from Common anyway. Common as the de facto Human language, which pretty much everyone else conveniently speaks, feels...odd. It paints humans as the default that everyone else bends toward, and takes away one of the few possible points of distinction that could make humans feel distinct from other peoples: as is, there's basically nothing that's unique to humans.

Divorced from being synonymous with a racial language, Common would come across more like a pidgin language, or something along those lines: a simplified conglomeration of a number of different languages that lets everyone convey basic concepts to each other - if not complex, philosophical debate or the like. It wouldn't be strictly necessary to share a non-Common language to be able to converse or negotiate under that paradigm, but it would certainly help grease the wheels a bit.

(This is only tangentially related, at best, to what classes do or don't suck, but humans not having their own language when every other core species does is a long-standing pet peeve of mine.)

Common and Undercommon should be trade languages. Only spoken by traders, merchants, adventurers, generals, and priests.

I've always been a fan of adding generic versions of Common and Elven. Low Common is the language of the commoners. High or Imperial Common is the language of Human of high class. Uncommon if you will.

Really the Noble/Knight background (a popular pick for fighters) should give you access to the better type of Common. And the fighter and ranger should get one more bonus language each from the Exotic Languages.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

What you're describing sounds basically like 5E's core conceptualization of ability checks. But (at least the way I interpret it) this idea kind of got overridden in practice by lingering 3E/PF sensibilities, and character sheets have been designed accordingly.

I'm not trying to shoot down your idea outright. I'm commenting on the effect of inertia in explaining why this game is played the way it is.

I disagree. 5e is built from the ground up around the Ability Check, and while Any mechanically that isn’t actually meaningfully distinct (as I’ve argued before), it does matter what the default assumptions are. It affects how people play.

If the system was presented as “describe your action and your method. Depending on those factors, any skill or tool might be called for, using any of the 6 Ability Score Modifiers.” Then nerds using Int Persuasion to get in with the Librarian or Int Deception to confuse a guard or fast talk as part of a con, would be seen as normal by the community, and we wouldn’t have people talking about how weird it is that the bard is the best guy to send to talk to the serious minded mercenary captain or the short tempered hermit.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I think it's a big failing of the rules that it's just a small aside instead of a core feature. The skills, for exemple, are all detailed in the section of the book relating to their default ability instead of being explained in their own section.

Yep.
And made it a plain rule, not an optional rule. Opt out, rather than opt in.
Because my main co-DM in my group still wants to run D&D as RAW as he can, and it would be really nice to have my genius inventor character be able to outsmart people by making an Int check, rather than a Cha check.

 

[Minigiant]

On a tangent but not really...

The simplicity of basic combat, the shoving of Action Options into the DMG (pg271), and the simple nature of them also makes classes suck.
Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma can be factors in normal weapons combat. Now I wouldn't have them as default but I would have put them in the PHB in the options chapter with feats and multiclassing. I would have also made them factor in mental abilities. Feints, Holds, and Parry as alternate attacks.
Intelligence for Disarms, Charisma for Feints. Wisdom for Opp attacks from Marks.

But I see what they did. They moved all of that to manuevers and told peopleto use subclasses, feats, and fighting styles to get these manuevers.

So in this system, I would instead have a lot more maneuvers that factor in INT, WIS, and CHA in the attack to givemartial characters incentives to having high mental stats..

This way the Ability+Stat tying would not be as harsh as the default.

 

[Todd Roybark]

Feels like they weren't willing to fully commit to the idea, for fear of pissing of the grognards o something.

True grognards started playing the game before Non Weapon Proficencies or Skills we're even around. The DM picked a number and an ability score and the player started rolling dice...
using "skills" with rotating ability scores isn't going to scare grognards.

What does scare grognards is percentile dice....that is why 5e does not use them...too many 'triggered' old people.

The consequence of failure was dire as a player in AD&D, when the percentile dice are out.

 

[FrozenNorth]

Well, we are supposed to use the racial statblock for all NPCs, and every dwarf gets Dwarvish and Common, Every elf gets Elvish and Common, Every Gnome gets Gnomish and Common.

And every human gets +1 language.

So, I'd say most people in DnD get two languages.

I disagree. Stat blocks are just an average. Dwarves can fight with picks or warhammers instead of battleaxes. They can speak Dwarvish and Gnomish instead of Common.

Even if they can speak Common, why would they speak Common to you. Dwarves are notoriously stubborn and insular.

 

[Undrave]

True grognards started playing the game before Non Weapon Proficencies or Skills we're even around. The DM picked a number and an ability score and the player started rolling dice...
using "skills" with rotating ability scores isn't going to scare grognards.

What does scare grognards is percentile dice....that is why 5e does not use them...too many 'triggered' old people.

The consequence of failure was dire as a player in AD&D, when the percentile dice are out.

Hahaha

You know the Grognards they were trying to placate where the 3.X ones though. It's why we got the Fighter back to "You get FEATS!", the Ranger is a caster by default, and the Sorcerer doesn't have that cool metamorphosis aspect from the play tests and is just a pale imitation of the 3.X one... Heck, they probably brought Performance as a skill just for them too.