D&D (2024) Playing with Subclasses: how flexible is subclass design in the playtest so far?

[James Gasik]

Theoretically, you could get Elven Accuracy on a Champion Rogue for a 38.6% chance to crit. So the crit feature is giving you another 24% chance or so to crit (the base chance to crit with Elven Accuracy is 14.3%).

24% chance to do 35 more damage (at max level) is about a 8.7 DPR increase. It's in a weird position where it certainly isn't game breaking but is enough that it might overshadow other possible subclass choices for Rogues, specifically.

Couldn't be any worse than Elves overshadowing other racial choices then.

 

[Amrûnril]

I still feel some people in the internet focus too much on the negative implications.
Here is also a video that showcases the advantage of shared spell lists.


We will see, that consolidated rules will actually result in a boost of creativity.
If you don't have to worry about too much exceptions, you can go nuts like shared subclasses, easily adding spell schools, create new classes.

I'm still convinced these benefits are mostly illusory. Suppose a Mystic class is released in 2026. Under a class-based spell system, a player who wants to know what spells their Mystic can learn will need to check the list published with the Mystic class, and then the lists of spells in any post-2026 sourcebooks. Under the Arcane/Divine/Primal system, the player will have to check for spells of the appropriate source/school combinations in every sourcebook. The Arcane/Divine/Primal system may clean up the spell lists aesthetically, but in terms of the actual player experience, the complexity is a consequence of having spells and classes in multiple sourcebooks, not of using a class-based system.

 

[cbwjm]

I'm still convinced these benefits are mostly illusory. Suppose a Mystic class is released in 2026. Under a class-based spell system, a player who wants to know what spells their Mystic can learn will need to check the list published with the Mystic class, and then the lists of spells in any post-2026 sourcebooks. Under the Arcane/Divine/Primal system, the player will have to check for spells of the appropriate source/school combinations in every sourcebook. The Arcane/Divine/Primal system may clean up the spell lists aesthetically, but in terms of the actual player experience, the complexity is a consequence of having spells and classes in multiple sourcebooks, not of using a class-based system.

Sounds like you're making it more complicatedthan it really is. With the new system, the player can check every other source book, but in reality they'll only need to check the phb and, I guess, the book the mystic is published in. Besides, it's pretty easy to find consolidated spell lists online.

This new method makes things much easier for home-brew. I created a shaman class loosely based on the WoW shaman and went through every spell checking if it should be on their spell list, and I'd have to do that every time a new book comes out if I want to keep it updated. Now I just say that they can cast primal spells, if a player picks up the class to play they can look through up any primal spell they want and prepare it, much easier.

 

[Amrûnril]

Sounds like you're making it more complicatedthan it really is. With the new system, the player can check every other source book, but in reality they'll only need to check the phb and, I guess, the book the mystic is published in. Besides, it's pretty easy to find consolidated spell lists online.

This new method makes things much easier for home-brew. I created a shaman class loosely based on the WoW shaman and went through every spell checking if it should be on their spell list, and I'd have to do that every time a new book comes out if I want to keep it updated. Now I just say that they can cast primal spells, if a player picks up the class to play they can look through up any primal spell they want and prepare it, much easier.

If you don't want to check additional sourcebooks, using a unique spell list published with the class still seems easier than checking source/school combinations in the PHB. As for homebrew, you're free to use existing spell lists in either system, but the class-based system gives you more lists to choose from.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

If you don't want to check additional sourcebooks, using a unique spell list published with the class still seems easier than checking source/school combinations in the PHB. As for homebrew, you're free to use existing spell lists in either system, but the class-based system gives you more lists to choose from.

You are free to have your opinion. But the advantage is not illusory. Or you have not seen the video, where trentmonk explains the advantage.

It is not about the ease of use. It is about the ease of editing the different books. It is a hurdle that makes WotC think twice about introducing a new spellcasting class, because after a few new classes, the books become cluttered with references.

Actually it would even better if class based extra spells would also not be handpicked, but also standarsized.

Clerics with the fire domain should have access to all arcane (fire) spells, conveniently listed in that class, but if a new arcane spell with the fire descriptor appears it is also added to the list.

LevelUP does it with nongstandard schools. (Except for conveniently listing them anywhere...).

 

[Frozen_Heart]

I'm still convinced these benefits are mostly illusory. Suppose a Mystic class is released in 2026. Under a class-based spell system, a player who wants to know what spells their Mystic can learn will need to check the list published with the Mystic class, and then the lists of spells in any post-2026 sourcebooks. Under the Arcane/Divine/Primal system, the player will have to check for spells of the appropriate source/school combinations in every sourcebook. The Arcane/Divine/Primal system may clean up the spell lists aesthetically, but in terms of the actual player experience, the complexity is a consequence of having spells and classes in multiple sourcebooks, not of using a class-based system.

(ironically mystic may have been a bad example here).

In 5e, maybe it could have been done with spells, as you could cherrypick all the spells which suited a mystic/psion to replicate its abilities. But when limited to arcane/divine/primal lists, none of those suit a mystic/psion at all. Bard being forced into the arcane list and then having to use a class feature to duct tape healing spells on is bad enough. With a mystic it's even worse. So I suspect if that class got added, it would be using entirely class features and no spells.

I do wish they would add a 4th power source (pathfinder has occult). It would also help split the arcane list up as it's extremely bloated currently.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I still feel some people in the internet focus too much on the negative implications.
Here is also a video that showcases the advantage of shared spell lists.

The only advantage is that it is slightly easier to create a new class. There is precisely nothing that shared spell lists give that can't be solved by a bit of elbow grease on behalf of the single person creating the class.

Meanwhile the disadvantages include that all existing classes are made meaningfully less thematic - and that every single player of the class needs to put in more elbow grease.

Transferring the work from the developers to every single player is not a win in any way, shape, or form even if it doesn't also come with significant downsides (as it does).

 

[UngeheuerLich]

The only advantage is that it is slightly easier to create a new class. There is precisely nothing that shared spell lists give that can't be solved by a bit of elbow grease on behalf of the single person creating the class.

Meanwhile the disadvantages include that all existing classes are made meaningfully less thematic - and that every single player of the class needs to put in more elbow grease.

Transferring the work from the developers to every single player is not a win in any way, shape, or form even if it doesn't also come with significant downsides (as it does).

I see it differently. If it is organized well, I could definitely see advantages.

First thing would be organizing spells by lists, then schools, then name, not name first. That way finding spells is way more easy.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I see it differently. If it is organized well, I could definitely see advantages.

First thing would be organizing spells by lists, then schools, then name, not name first. That way finding spells is way more easy.

Organising by name first is just weird. But there is absolutely no reason to not maintain dynamic lists and links on D&D Beyond and in other places. So the designers have all the advantages here anyway.

And you can't organise by lists without duplicating unless you make sure that there are zero spells on more than one list.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Organising by name first is just weird. But there is absolutely no reason to not maintain dynamic lists and links on D&D Beyond and in other places. So the designers have all the advantages here anyway.

And you can't organise by lists without duplicating unless you make sure that there are zero spells on more than one list.

Look at AD&D. No problems listing spells more than once... and then having them at different levels and with slightly different effects...

Maybe organize by level and school then?