D&D General Path of Feats: a Superior Design than Subclasses

[Tigris]

That said, I struggle to understand why there is such a push in favor of the subclass design, which incentivizes multiclassing.

I dont think that subclass design favors multiclassing per se. Yes level 3 is strong power dip etc. But this would not need to be.


The problem which incentizes multiclassing is again inconsistency. 5e has a really really inconstent power curve.


From level 1-3 the power of a character in 5e increases by a factor 3!

From level 3 to 5 the power doubles.

Then from level 5 to 9 or so (dont have the exact numbers) power doubles again.


When you compare this to other games there (intended) power curve is anlot more consistent.

In 13th age and PF2 (and I think d&d 3.5 theoretically, but would need to check) power doubles exactly every 2 levels.

In D&D 4e power doubles every 4 levels.


Of course a lot of power in 5e also comes from hp scaling more extremly (more than doubles from level 1 to 3), but still there is soo much power in the first 3 levels compared to later levels, which incentizes multiclassing.



On the other hand why subclasses are pushed is another one: Tjey are really really easy to design (in 5e).

Its soo much easier to do homebrew in 5e than in 4e or pf2, because its just a lot less work. You can create different feeling characters with like 4 levels with 1-3 features.


Similarily its sooo much less work to make a subclass for an existing class rather than a new class, especially since you need 3+ subclasses when making a class.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Multiclassing was a afterthought
Feats were afterthoughts
Cantrips were an afterthought
Epic Boons were an afterthought
Subclass balance and futureproofing was aafterthought

5e isnt bad but and I'll say it again... was designed for grognards to pull them back in the fold.

Feat, MCing, Subclasses, Cantrips were all throw in to get the late 2e, 3e and 4e players to play with the grognards.

But by waiting 10 years to update the system, they allowed Sunken Cost to keep them from rejiggering 5.5e heavily.

Either that... or what you think is truly important to have major work done for the D&D game is not what most of the rest of us think is important.

 

[Maxperson]

Multiclassing proves the point.

Poorly multiclassed PCs are TERRIBLE. When everyone else has the Tier Power Spike but you dont, it is very jarring.

No. Multiclassed PCs are merely good, not fantastically great. 5e is too easy for anything to be terrible. Terrible just plain doesn't exist in 5e where PCs are concerned.

Multiclassing usually only is used well if you are "abusing" the strongest bits of 5e or relying on not playing the tiers when you dont get a Spike.

Multiclassing is most often used to..................................have fun. The overwhelming majority of players are casual, and not power gamers who need to eek out every +1 they can to feel like they have a good PC. Casual players just have fun with their PCs and still do very well at the game.

 

[Minigiant]

Either that... or what you think is truly important to have major work done for the D&D game is not what most of the rest of us think is important.

You can do the major important work AND deal with the minor one.

WOTC literally was going to in 2024.

They got voted down PURELY due to backwards compatibility.

It proves that the most "vocal" surveyed fans favored using their old books than getting their changes made.... until they are shown the possibilities again.

Sunken Cost.

 

[Minigiant]

No. Multiclassed PCs are merely good, not fantastically great. 5e is too easy for anything to be terrible. Terrible just plain doesn't exist in 5e where PCs are concerned

Terrible exists.

People just dont run 5e are the speed its designed so they dont hit difficulty.

But a half Monk/Sorcerer is weak. A martial who doesnt get to level 5 for Extra Attack will lack behind and stink compared to a level 8 straight PC.

Mutliclassing sucks 75% of the time on a campaign level.
We however only play the 25% of MC builds that work.

 

[FrogReaver]

Similarily its sooo much less work to make a subclass for an existing class rather than a new class, especially since you need 3+ subclasses when making a class.

IMO. If you wanted a new design direction I’d suggest that some concepts might be best represented by a single subclasses class.

 

[Blue]

That still doesn't put them into a tax category. That simply means that the relatively few power gamers out there will pick them more often than other paths. For the overwhelming majority of players who are casual and don't bother going online to look for threads on the best combos, the thematic content will be more important.

I think we're just going to have to disagree on this one. The premise that most players will go thematic over powerful doesn't seem to hold true to me, for instance I know of only a single martial character in ten years of (2014) 5e that intentionally used a non-magical trident over other options, because other weapons were better. Players in my experience both locally and on discussion boards often look over the options available, like feats, and pick the one that best enhances what they want to do. Your core premise that that is only limited to "relatively few power gamers" has not been my experience, it's wider than that, perhaps even a majority of players.

 

[Tigris]

Either that... or what you think is truly important to have major work done for the D&D game is not what most of the rest of us think is important.

I would more argue that design in general is not important. Popularity matters.


Take as the example monopoly a game which was being designed to be not fun, but because its popular many people play it. (But in circles of people playing many different boardgames its not liked).


For 5e design was never an important part. After 4e did not succeed in going up to 100 million yearly revenue, 5e was made as a side project.

Pretty much every good designer was oulled way from D&D to Magic the gatjering since that brought more money. For some time only a single person was woeking on 5e officially while some MtG designers did help a bit as a side project.

The designers even said in the beginning that they made some thinfs by choice unbalanced, something boardgame designers or video game designers would be lynched for by fans.

And when we look at the design of 5e we can see many things which were broken even to WotCs eyes.


The encounter math in 5.5 was HEAVILY changed. So much that a typical normal encounter on low levels would have often a 2x budget compared to before. In high level its even more extreme.

The first encounter of the starting adventure of 5e had like a 65% chance to kill the party and even the designer said he underestimated the fight a lot (because the encounter math etc. Was not reliable).


The ranger had to be heavily buffed, o e of the only 13 classes, because it was sooo weak.


And when we look at 5.5 classes, sure all classes got some buffs, but monk compared to other got such huuuge power increase also showing the initial one was really lacking.


In the end none of this mattered, becauae D&D was popular and got a lot more popular thanks to critical role and stranger things, which then improved sales.


So in the end I am sure a really badly designed 5.75 made by popular influencers would be more played than a version made by the best game designers, since the popularity matters so much more than the design.


Still it does make sense as fans to discuss how one can improve design, which parts of the design work and which not, even though paying tailor swift to play D&D would have a much bigger effect than to having better design.

 

[Maxperson]

Terrible exists.

People just dont run 5e are the speed its designed so they dont hit difficulty.

But a half Monk/Sorcerer is weak. A martial who doesnt get to level 5 for Extra Attack will lack behind and stink compared to a level 8 straight PC.

Mutliclassing sucks 75% of the time on a campaign level.
We however only play the 25% of MC builds that work.

For power games and optimizers, which are a small minority of players. For casual players and the rest of us who don't care about that sort of thing, terrible does not exist.

 

[Minigiant]

In the end none of this mattered, becauae D&D was popular and got a lot more popular thanks to critical role and stranger things, which then improved sales.


So in the end I am sure a really badly designed 5.75 made by popular influencers would be more played than a version made by the best game designers, since the popularity matters so much more than the design.

Marketing not popularity.

D&D is as popular as WOTC puts money into marketing and ads in it.