Blog (A5E) Keeping it Classy: Updated Core Classes in Level Up

I think it makes sense to look at things in perspective.

In 2e classes did one thing: the fighter fought, the rogue (thief back then) stabbed and sneaked, and wizards and clerics cast spells. Multiclassing was a way to generate more hybrid combinations, and it was super fun to do. Balancing was not that much of a thing back then, so you could have extremely op characters or extremely weak ones, although the way XP was split between the classes and the fact that you only had a certain set of combinations restricted those issues a bit (plus the separate XP progression for each class)
In later expansions, kits or subclasses were introduced, to increase the variety of concepts one could play.

3/3.5 allowed much more free multiclassing, excepting some alignment issues. As a "brake", there was the rule of the favorite class that gave penalty for wild multiclassing. We all know how it worked. To muddy things much more, there were Prestige Classes, that were OP classes with special requirements, and kind of did with that single class what some multi class combinations allowed. I really disliked all of this, so happily moved to Traiblazer where things made sense, were balanced, and prestige class were both unnecessary and non existent.

I'll skip 4e, just as I skipped it both as a player and a DM (it just gave me the feeling of being a pen and paper MMO, although I'm sure it has some good features, like monster roles)

Now in o5e/A5E we have both archetypes/subclasses AND multiclasses. Everything is pretty much free, with the very low bar requirement of some minimum ability scores. Alignment is no longer a restriction, and same for races/species etc. This allows one one hand to literally make whatever concept you want, but on the other hand the number of possible permutations (including feats and class features) becomes absurdly high. Playtesting all this requires so much time and effort that is probably not entirely possible, or better, is done by the players themselves in the years after release.

One (alleged) problem of some multiclass combinations in 5e is that they do allow quite a bit of cheesing. That is true and probably not entirely avoidable. I don't know how many people exploit those kinds of cheese (surely there's a lot of "builds" on the internet), but probably the worst ones deserve fixing. I agree with the comment made above that fixing Action Surge would have been enough instead of removing it entirely, but I'm also ok with the fighter having something else (now that it's clear that fighters will have some unique and cool features for maneuvers).

The flip side of the coin for me is that the capstone 20th level ability of some classes are not that appealing (that's true even above level 15-16 for some), so multiclassing is a way to get something more interesting.

It's entirely possible that the basic design of some 5e classes is slanted towards giving specific features early on (otherwise how do you make that class interesting or unique?), but from what we can see in a5e this will be less of an issue. Plus, if they actually worked on more interesting capstones, the temptation to multiclass is surely going to be tempered by those high level abilities.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Stalker0

Legend
I can't see how A5e fighters could have been given as much new stuff as they have and stay balanced with O5e fighters without removing Action Surge.
This. The premise of LU was to make classes different but relatively balanced to the original. If you leave action surge in that’s a very narrow range to work with
 


I can't see how A5e fighters could have been given as much new stuff as they have and stay balanced with O5e fighters without removing Action Surge.
I think o5e was quite underpowered wrt most of the other classes. Sure, you get Action Surge, and indomitable at high level, but what else?
The base class in itself was relatively uninteresting, and it became playable only thanks to the subclasses (except for the Champion, which stayed as basic as possible).

This was pretty much officially stated as a design choice: there had to be a beginner class. Choosing spells and features may be too complicated for new players, so the basic fighter and the champion subclass covered this need. A really poor choice IMO (just have simpler classes in a starter package and assume a basic competence for the full product), but it's not something a5e should stick to. So IMO it's good if a5e fighter is better than o5e, provided is more or less in the same ballpark of other a5e classes
 

Stalker0

Legend
The base class in itself was relatively uninteresting, and it became playable only thanks to the subclasses (except for the Champion, which stayed as basic as possible).
They also get second wind and an extra asi at 6th, and of course more attacks at higher levels.

that said, we need to respect that classes do not exist in a vaccuum, that subclasses are an innate part of the design. There is no 3rd level fighter, there is only 3rd level fighter + subclass. We can’t really consider one without the other.
 

Timespike

A5E Designer and third-party publisher
They also get second wind and an extra asi at 6th, and of course more attacks at higher levels.

that said, we need to respect that classes do not exist in a vaccuum, that subclasses are an innate part of the design. There is no 3rd level fighter, there is only 3rd level fighter + subclass. We can’t really consider one without the other.
Second Wind is still there if you take the Adamant Mountain combat school. The maneuver is called Catch Your Breath. The math works a little differently, but it fulfills the same function.
 

They also get second wind and an extra asi at 6th, and of course more attacks at higher levels.
Second wind is cool only at level 1-3, afterwards the amount healed is paltry.
ASI is a very generic thing. Sure you can get a feat if the DM allows it, but it's still generic.
And every martial attack got extra attack at level 5.
that said, we need to respect that classes do not exist in a vaccuum, that subclasses are an innate part of the design. There is no 3rd level fighter, there is only 3rd level fighter + subclass. We can’t really consider one without the other.
True, but if you compare it to any other class, the bare fighter seems the least interesting. Paladins get divine sense and smite, lay on hands, immunity to desease, bonus on saves, aura of courage, spells etc. Same for monks, barbarians, rogues and to a lesser extent rangers. And that is without considering what the subclass gives you.
 

Timespike

A5E Designer and third-party publisher
True, but if you compare it to any other class, the bare fighter seems the least interesting. Paladins get divine sense and smite, lay on hands, immunity to desease, bonus on saves, aura of courage, spells etc. Same for monks, barbarians, rogues and to a lesser extent rangers. And that is without considering what the subclass gives you.
Depends on how you define "interesting," I suppose. As I've mentioned previously (I think to you?) a lot has been added to the fighter, so it's now less "does this class get cool stuff to do?" and more "do you find the concept of a pure combat specialist to be a compelling one?"
 

Depends on how you define "interesting," I suppose. As I've mentioned previously (I think to you?) a lot has been added to the fighter, so it's now less "does this class get cool stuff to do?" and more "do you find the concept of a pure combat specialist to be a compelling one?"
Maybe it was me, not totally sure though.
Interesting in this context for me means "unique", meaning that the class has some specific features that others do not have, and that have a defining and lasting impact on some aspects of the game.
Despite my initial perplexities on the a5e fighter, it is by far a huge improvement to the o5e version.
 

Remove ads

Top