D&D 5E (2024) D&D Classes without Subclasses?

[Eyes of Nine]

Another option might be for you to pick a single subclass for each class and just say "All Fighters are Champions, all Barbarians are Berserkers" etc. This would save you a lot of work and your players a lot of analysis paralysis but still simplify the game a bit.

If I recall, this is the SRD explicilty. Only 1 subclass per class.

Not sure I'm looking to simplify, although that's certainly an admirable goal, and for some groups the right choice (I'm thinking of one of my own groups tbh).

But for me, I was thinking about giving my players a bit more flexibility around their builds.

 

[Eyes of Nine]

Class that can take any class feature as feats.

Adventurer by /u/aeyana

Adventurer by /u/aeyana - Created with GM Binder.

www.gmbinder.com

Ok wow, just scanned through the link. Amazing, and something I'd love to run/play someday.

 

[Horwath]

4E found a solution around this flavor problem:

those were the WORST feats in the edition.
you spend a feat to get more or less nothing.
you spend a feat to replace your 5th level daily power with another 5th level daily power or similar.

it was a trap option from when it was introduced.

 

[Clint_L]

My concern would be that classless and skill tree systems tend to produce much, much less variety, not more, as players converge on a few "optimal" builds. I think that's what you would see if you went to a blended subclass system.

 

[Silam]

My concern would be that classless and skill tree systems tend to produce much, much less variety, not more, as players converge on a few "optimal" builds. I think that's what you would see if you went to a blended subclass system.

That’s certainly possible. Though one might argue that this is a sign of imbalance…

Take the 2nd Figther level, for example. I suspect most people care for Action Surge and fewer people care for Tactical Mind (although it’s not bad either, mind you).

Let’s ignore prereqs for now to keep the thought experiment simple (or alternatively, assume that 100% of the 1st level Fighter’s abilities are prereqs to each of the 2nd level Fighter’s ability).

Let’s say each level grants you 10 points to spend, and we have a design constraint that Action Surge (once per short rest) + Tactical Mind = 10 points. How would you allocate the cost of the two abilities?

The "everything is a feat" approach values everything equally, which is equivalent to saying each are worth 5 points. In that context, I think it’s fair to assume many people would pick AS and save their other 5 points for another ability than TM.

But what if AS costs 9 points and TM costs just 1? Would we still get more characters picking AS than TM? Maybe, maybe not…

Another idea would be to include "package deals" that represent the benefits of training in abilities that have synergy with one another. Or put another way, the cost of flexibility. Under that approach, you get 10 points per level, Action Surge costs 9, Tactical Mind costs 3, but you can get AS + TS for 10 points.

Anyway, these are just examples, but I think balance is not insurmountable, though it certainly is difficult…

 

[Marandahir]

those were the WORST feats in the edition.
you spend a feat to get more or less nothing.
you spend a feat to replace your 5th level daily power with another 5th level daily power or similar.

it was a trap option from when it was introduced.

Not arguing with that. Just that it was a work-around. 4E past 2009 or so wasn't particularly well-balanced, and the philosophy on feats from 4E is very different from the philosophy on feats in 5E.

-BUT- 5E has the optional non-class class features as a route to resolve this sort of connundrum, and it follows from how late 4E was trying to cut this same Gordian Knot.

 

[djotaku]

I’m imagining a classless system which is based on points and skill trees.

Each class can be broken down into 2 or 3 skill trees, and one more tree per subclass.

Each level you gain 10 or 12 points (skill points, or ability points, or learning points, something like that, not sure what the best terminology is).

And then you can go to town investing these points into any ability from any tree you meet the prerequisites for. You should be able to replicate a regular class + subclass exactly if you spend the points in a certain way.

For example, maybe there is a "Martial Tree" which contains weapon masteries at the bottom, and Extra Attack higher up, with the prereq of having some weapon masteries and +3 proficiency bonus. This is a tree which many of the regular classes tap into.

There can be an alternative tree which has Martial Arts at the bottom and also provides Extra Attack higher up.

The fighter might have a Second Wind tree and a Action Surge tree, with abilities higher up which give more uses per day or extra effects or alternative effects when triggering SW or AS (just like the regular fighter abilities).

And then some trees could get "tangled" at higher levels. For example, maybe the fighter’s Second Extra Attack feature has prereqs including: Extra Attack from the Martial tree, Action Surge from the AS tree, and char level 11. And that explains why only the fighter gets this, since they’re the only ones to get Action Surge.

Likewise, the EK’s Arcane Charge can have both Action Surge and some level of magic ability as prereqs, representing another "tanged ability" which requires multiple trees.

It would be hard to balance, but could be very interesting…

Take a look at Cosmere TTRPG - they went the skill tree route. I'm GMing that now and it seems like a very interesting way to handle feats

 

[Silam]

Take a look at Cosmere TTRPG - they went the skill tree route. I'm GMing that now and it seems like a very interesting way to handle feats

Nice, I’m intrigued. Hadn’t heard of it yet though I heard very good things about Sanderson’s fiction.

Have you tried the Stormlight Starter Set, and would you recommend it? Or you went straight to the "real books"?