D&D 5E Races and classes

[TwoSix]

Honestly, a lot of the subclasses are really just like picking a different color on your Honda Civic. If you want to really have a new play experience, you need to alter things like action economies and spell lists radically.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I honestly don't see how having more options is a problem.

1. It focuses on the PCs and builds instead of just enjoying the adventure.
2. It leads to too many features for the PCs and analysis-paralysis.
3. Players get new books and want to use features so I now have to review them to see if I want to allow them.
4. Players get disappointed when they want to do/play something that I don't want in the game.
5. WotC focuses on more splat to make money instead of addressing issues in 5E. (Hopefully they are already developing 6E...).
and there are probably more, those are just the main points for me.

 

[BookTenTiger]

1. It focuses on the PCs and builds instead of just enjoying the adventure.
2. It leads to too many features for the PCs and analysis-paralysis.
3. Players get new books and want to use features so I now have to review them to see if I want to allow them.
4. Players get disappointed when they want to do/play something that I don't want in the game.
5. WotC focuses on more splat to make money instead of addressing issues in 5E. (Hopefully they are already developing 6E...).
and there are probably more, those are just the main points for me.

Your argument seems to be "more subrace and subclass options don't serve me as the DM." You worry about having the responsibility of reviewing new material, and disappointing your players.

But when would all this come up? How often are your players bringing in new characters?

Realistically, a campaign starts, and parameters are put in place that create limits. "There are no Firearms... All Dwarves are evil... This is an underwater campaign..."

Players choose options, and adventures begin. Maybe, after a few months, a player switches characters because of a changing storyline or a character death.

I understand you fear having too many options to review, but I just can't see how that situation comes up more than once every 3 - 6 months in any standard campaign. And saying we need a new edition of D&D because of this small, specific issue is... quite hyperbolic.

 

[Undrave]

Elf

• Dark Elf (PHB)
• Eladrin (MToF)
• Eladrin (variant) (DMG)
• High Elf (PHB)
• Mark of Shadow (ERftLW)
• Pallid Elf (EGtW)
• Sea Elf (MToF)
• Shadar-kai (MToF)
• Wood Elf (MToF)

Hm isn't the Wood Elf in the PHB?

Depends I suppose on what matters to you.

For those players that care for very little except game mechanics... subclasses and subraces offer not much difference. Most subclasses have like what, four levels of "stuff"-- two of which don't occur until the teens in level which means many tables will never use them-- and so overall you're only getting a couple new gadgets to play with. (Plus the fact that those gadgets are oftentimes the same mechanics that we already are using-- like gaining Advantage-- just in a new way.)

This. It looks like a LOT of subclasses, but really, it's like 2-3 abilities if you stop at level 10. Maybe 4? It's literally one page of content you have to look at per subclass.

Furthermore, you're not picking from all of those at the same time. You first pick your base class, and for those there's only 11 of them.

Artificer
Barbarian
Bard
Cleric
Fighter
Paladin
Ranger
Rogue
Sorcerer
Warlock
Wizard

And from there you got like... 10 choices max, and that's if you're a Wizard, for subclasses.

Yep, this just shows 5E has WAY too much crap now and with Tasha's has officially entered the splat-book/junk phase.

Bring on 6E now and let's get back to sanity.

You're exaggerating.It only seems too much when placed like this, but if you go for the PHB+1 rule you'll have a manageable level of options. I do think there's a lot of uninteresting chaff in the race department... but those are so low impact nowadays I could be fine playing a V-human forever.

This attitude is so confusing to me. At the end of the day, having "too many options" will only occur if:

* You are playing a campaign that includes Forgotten Realms, Eberron, Theros, Ravnica... If you are playing only in one campaign setting, the options are cut down dramatically.

* You ignore the fact that at the end of the day, you will only have as many races and classes at the table as needed for the number of players at the table. I have 4 players. There may be 100 subraces and subclass options, but I only have to worry about the 4 my players pick.

Not only are there so many other RPGs that cater to a more limited palate, but D&D itself has systems in place to limit the number of races and classes you want at your table. Simply saying "this is a Lord of the Rings style campaign" limits the choices.

Furthermore, 5e has systems that keep new subclasses in check, like bounded accuracy. And the optional origin rules in Tasha make it even easier to have the characters at the same "power level," if that's your preference.

I honestly don't see how having more options is a problem.

It also depends on how many books you buy. Aside from the two 'Everything' books, most books have 1 to 3 subclasses and a couple of races. So if you limit yourself to PHB+1 you're never gonna feel overwhelmed.

Don't look at this list as one giant thing you have to pick from! Each choice you make limits the amount of choices you need to make at the next level:

Pick your +1, you'll end up with like 12 races to pick from.

Pick your race, you'll end up with with like...3 sub races to pick from in most cases

Pick your class, out of 11 options (oooh! two whole digits! So much stuff!)

Pick your subclass (usually at level 3 so this part can wait) out of like 5 options. Wizards have the most but the 8 in the PHB are basically the same damn thing and they rarely get any extra ones.

picking 1 out of 96 and one out of 116 looks frightening, but that's not what you're supposed to do.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Your argument seems to be "more subrace and subclass options don't serve me as the DM." You worry about having the responsibility of reviewing new material, and disappointing your players.

But when would all this come up? How often are your players bringing in new characters?

Realistically, a campaign starts, and parameters are put in place that create limits. "There are no Firearms... All Dwarves are evil... This is an underwater campaign..."

Players choose options, and adventures begin. Maybe, after a few months, a player switches characters because of a changing storyline or a character death.

I understand you fear having too many options to review, but I just can't see how that situation comes up more than once every 3 - 6 months in any standard campaign. And saying we need a new edition of D&D because of this small, specific issue is... quite hyperbolic.

It came up just yesterday. A player is leveling and wants to use something from Tasha's.

And there are other reasons I want a 6E, to me this is just a road sign that it is time for a new edition to be in the works. I am not expecting one for at least a couple more years, though.

It also depends on how many books you buy.

When you consider all the people in the two groups I play in, at least one person will buy each new book, and often two or more...

 

[Undrave]

Honestly, a lot of the subclasses are really just like picking a different color on your Honda Civic. If you want to really have a new play experience, you need to alter things like action economies and spell lists radically.

Especially the 8 Wizard subclasses in the PHB.

Also, a lot of them are "This class gets a dash of this other class" and are basically Multiclassing without Multiclassing.

When you consider all the people in the two groups I play in, at least one person will buy each new book, and often two or more...

The vast majority of 5e books are a majority of DM facing stuff. not sure I see the problem. We had TWO 'Everything Books' in 6 years, 3 years apart. That's hardly bloat. Especially if you compare to 4e...

I think they've added like 20 feats since 2014, tops.

 

[Oofta]

This attitude is so confusing to me. At the end of the day, having "too many options" will only occur if:

* You are playing a campaign that includes Forgotten Realms, Eberron, Theros, Ravnica... If you are playing only in one campaign setting, the options are cut down dramatically.

* You ignore the fact that at the end of the day, you will only have as many races and classes at the table as needed for the number of players at the table. I have 4 players. There may be 100 subraces and subclass options, but I only have to worry about the 4 my players pick.

Not only are there so many other RPGs that cater to a more limited palate, but D&D itself has systems in place to limit the number of races and classes you want at your table. Simply saying "this is a Lord of the Rings style campaign" limits the choices.

Furthermore, 5e has systems that keep new subclasses in check, like bounded accuracy. And the optional origin rules in Tasha make it even easier to have the characters at the same "power level," if that's your preference.

I honestly don't see how having more options is a problem.

But there's a whole other thread on this which basically boils down to many people saying: if a player wants to run something not currently allowed the DM should compromise. By compromise they mean "allow the player to do whatever they want".

Personally I prefer curated campaigns, not everyone does.

 

[Undrave]

3. Players get new books and want to use features so I now have to review them to see if I want to allow them.

Review them in what way? 5e's a solid system, nothing's particularly broken until the very VERY late game, at which point if its not broken it shouldn't even be there.. Just ask the player to sell its fluff to you and go from there.

 

[Charlaquin]

But each sub-race has different attribute bonuses and special powers than the other sub-races?
And each sub-class has different mechanical rules than each of the other sub-classes?

Some, but each subrace and subclass also has more shared mechanical elements with each other subrace or subclass under the same base race or class than it has unique elements. That’s why everything feels so same-y despite the large raw number of options.

So, in essence, D&D has near a hundred different playable races, and over a hundred different classes!

Not really, no. There’s a lot more mechanical weight to a class than to a subclass. A class is an entire structural framework and advancement across 20 levels. A subclass is about 4 features or so, granted at specific levels. The difference between race and subrace is subtler than that though. For example, every elf has in common their dexterity bonus, Darkvision, resistance to charm, immunity to sleep, and trance. Elf subraces give a smaller bonus to another stat, and one or two other features such as an extra cantrip and language for high Elves or a small speed increase and a bonus to stealth in natural terrain for wood elves, or improved darkvision and sunlight sensitivity for Drow.

Or are all the sub-races and sub-classes just a matter of fluff?

It’s not just a matter of fluff. But a Wizard with the School of Evocation subclass doesn’t play that much differently than a Wizard with the School of Illusion subclass.

 

[Oofta]

It came up just yesterday. A player is leveling and wants to use something from Tasha's.

And there are other reasons I want a 6E, to me this is just a road sign that it is time for a new edition to be in the works. I am not expecting one for at least a couple more years, though.


When you consider all the people in the two groups I play in, at least one person will buy each new book, and often two or more...

Except that the direction they're going is ever more flexibility so I'm not sure it would fix the issues you see. Personally I have no problem saying "no" so the fact that now you can play an anthropomorphic turtle doesn't really bother me.

But I get it, bloat happens. Just not sure a new release would fix anything for more than a couple of years.