log in or register to remove this ad

 

5E [Poll] Are any of the base classes too weak?

Which of the classes are too weak / too underpowered?


  • Total voters
    132

Minigiant

Legend
I suspect the beastmaster is dragging it down. Hunter is perfectly fine.

The class is a mess though. Doesn't feel very much like a ranger.
Not really.
The ranger, especially the hunter ranger, does what it is designed to do. The issue is that many see it as a variant fighter. It's an exploration class who fights with weapons.

Outside of the beastmaster, the only real issue is spells known. The combat spells crowd out the exploration spells.

It's not like the sorcerer whose unique class's feature is always too few to use thought an adventuring day.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I'm not.

Unless rolled with amazing stats, the Monk will have poor AC, HP, and offense. To be effective, it relies on a single trick, "Stunning Strike", which targets the highest save in the game (CON).

The Monk can't take advantage of magical items, and it's Martial Arts damage die upgrades way too slowly.
The Monk needs more ki. Just add their Wis modifier and it may be enough.
 


FrogReaver

As long as i get to be the frog
The Monk needs more ki. Just add their Wis modifier and it may be enough.
Setting aside feats for a moment.

If a monk simply burns all ki in a day on flurry of blows then he will achieve about the same daily average DPR as a battlemaster fighter up through level 10.

Adding more ki allows them to outpace the battlemaster fighter in daily average DPR (pre level 11)
 


Setting aside feats for a moment.

If a monk simply burns all ki in a day on flurry of blows then he will achieve about the same daily average DPR as a battlemaster fighter up through level 10.

Adding more ki allows them to outpace the battlemaster fighter in daily average DPR.
So if they burn their entire resource on pure damage, as a class which is fundamentally more vulnerable than a BM Fighter, and balanced around the idea of more diverse Ki usage, they can equal the BM, and you see this as a problem? Further this only applies up to L10. Is this really intended as a criticism of giving them more Ki? I ask because it seems like an argument in support.
 

FrogReaver

As long as i get to be the frog
So if they burn their entire resource on pure damage, as a class which is fundamentally more vulnerable than a BM Fighter, and balanced around the idea of more diverse Ki usage, they can equal the BM, and you see this as a problem? Further this only applies up to L10. Is this really intended as a criticism of giving them more Ki? I ask because it seems like an argument in support.
A monk has a little less AC and alot more mobility than a fighter. I see that as a fair tradeoff.

The monks resource is more flexible than a fighters which while not adding outright power does tend to make it a more useful resource to have.

The main problem for monks are no monk damage feats and no burst damage.

After level 10 they have enough ki to flurry of blows and stunning strike as desired.
 



A monk has a little less AC and alot more mobility than a fighter. I see that as a fair tradeoff.

The monks resource is more flexible than a fighters which while not adding outright power does tend to make it a more useful resource to have.

The main problem for monks are no monk damage feats and no burst damage.

After level 10 they have enough ki to flurry of blows and stunning strike as desired.
I don't think that tradeoff is remotely as good as you're suggesting. They also have less HP and need both DEX and WIS where a Fighter only needs STR or DEX and can put the next best in CON so tend to be even further behind. And they don't just lose out on feats but also on magic items.
 


Horwath

Adventurer
One could argue that compared to a Paladin most classes are bad ;)

Rangers flaw is really that they don't scale from level 11 on.
problem is 1-10 not 11+ as few people play those levels.

Both classes have 1d10 HD, half-casters and Extra attack.

But Extra features from Paladin are few categories better that Rangers even before level 10.

Lay on hands, Divine smite and Aura of Protection vs. Favored enemy, natural Explorer and primeval awareness?
Not even a contest.
 



Horwath

Adventurer
Sounds like a reasonably good/fine Monk house rule to me. Sorcerer could probably get extra sorcery points by adding their CHA Modifier too.
sorcerer needs sorcery points on short rest recharge.

In 3.5 sorcerers strength over wizard was more spell slots over few spells known.

Now they have the same number of spell slots(more or less), and wizard has arcane recovery and that is only if sorcerer does not use any metamagic or burns tons of low level slots to gain few high level ones.
 

TwoSix

The hero you deserve
Supporter
The sorcerer isn't too weak, it's simply not quite strong enough compared to its comparable classes. Give it sorcery points refreshed on a short rest and it would be fine.

I would have voted for ranger, but that's only assuming you don't use the UA class variants. With those in place, the class is quite good.
 

Minigiant

Legend
problem is 1-10 not 11+ as few people play those levels.

Both classes have 1d10 HD, half-casters and Extra attack.

But Extra features from Paladin are few categories better that Rangers even before level 10.

Lay on hands, Divine smite and Aura of Protection vs. Favored enemy, natural Explorer and primeval awareness?
Not even a contest.
Depends if all you care about is combat.

Ranger class features greatly beat Paladin class features in exploration and social.
 

Horwath

Adventurer
Depends if all you care about is combat.

Ranger class features greatly beat Paladin class features in exploration and social.
ranger is better that paladin in exploration if you count on DM charity.

You have favored terrain. Outside of it, you are no better than a paladin(having same skills OFC)

Same goes for favored enemy.

There is a reason that ranger got most changes over the years in UA.
 
Last edited:

[QUOTE="Ruin Explorer”and they don't just lose out on feats but also on magic items


In what sense? Sure the Monk class can't use magic armor or greatswords, but magical simple weapons, Sunswords, and the rest are good to go.
 
Last edited:

Minigiant

Legend
ranger is better that paladin in exploration if you count on DM charity.

You have favored terrain. Outside of it, you are no better than a paladin(having same skills OFC)

Same goes for favored enemy.

There is a reason that ranger got most changes over the years in UA.
You forgot the skills lists, the language and skill bonuses, and the exploration spells.

The ranger is seen as weak because it is seem by many of as an alternate fighter. Or their group skips most of wilderness exploration.

If you skipp wilderness, monster and enemy interaction, and minimize travel and stealth, the ranger will look terrible compare to a paladin.
 

Mythological Figures & Maleficent Monsters

Advertisement2

Advertisement4

Top