D&D 5E Rate the 5e player character classes

[Zardnaar]

I also forgot with the warlock scorching ray+hex and the class multiclasses well with a variety of martial classes and the sorcerer class and cantrips scale independent of caster classes.

Scorching Ray+hex
Sorcerers can cast hex a lot more
Action surge+ scorching ray/eldritch blast+hex=lolz
Sorcerer Twin Spell metamagic+eldritch blast+hex


Warlocks can also get 2 attacks per round at level 5 so you are really trying to maximise hex+multiple attacks and some spells like EB and Scorching ray enable multiple attacks even if you give up multiple attacks via class abilities due to multiclassing.

Hypthetical lvl 20 Build

Eldritch Knight 6/Warlock2/Sorcerer12 but unlike most MC builds you won't suck at low levels if you take warlock levels early.

 

[Remathilis]

I refuse to rate any of the classes on flavor: that gets us into a negative feedback-loop if "why is X a class" arguments that are pointless and counter-intuitive. Therefore, consider my vote Strong of the "theme" of every class.

Now, how do the mechanics connect to theme.

Barbarian: Average. I like the unarmored AC element and they try to make for a distinct feel, but everything being tied to rage makes them feel a bit one-trick; a good trick, but one non-the-less.

Bard: Average/Strong. As a caster, they are nearly top tier. Sadly, they lost some of unique elements of bardsong to do it. Still, I'd rather have a strong caster that a walking "bless" spell, so bards get a solid score for me.

Cleric: Strong. The domain system isn't as flexible as I'd hope, but the right domain makes them powerful and domain spells add flexibility few casters can match.

Fighter: Average/Strong. Champions are great at killing things, though I've yet to see how battle-master handles dynamic combats yet. Seems solid, if simple.

Druid: Average/Strong. Wild shape was nerfed-from-orbit, even for moon-druids. Luckily, they retain strong spellcasting (esp. for land druids) so the situation isn't hopeless.

Monk. Average/Weak. Not seem them in action, but monks seem to be the "also ran" again for melee combat. At least unarmed combat doesn't seem as pointless this time.

Paladin. Strong. Nothing not to love. Smites/Spells, healing, good combat skills, and your not even bound to LG or bust behavior anymore.

Ranger. Average. Sadly, nothing stands out for rangers. They've fallen to bard status: a good 5th wheel but you'd probably want something else filling that role first.

Rogue: Strong. Sneak Attack is easy to get, sniping in broken, and lots of abilities to frustrate your DM. More please.

Sorcerer: Weak. So close. Too few spells, metamagic is good-but-wonky, and in desperate need of more sublclasses. This class needed a going over one more time. Hopefully, subclasses can fix this one later.

Warlock: Average/Strong. Depending on your campaign and build, you can get a lot of at-will magic. You won't rival your mages but you can give your rogue a run for his money!

Wizard: Strong. Could he be anything else? Great spells, some refresh abilities, rituals and cantrips, and specialization that doesn't suck.

 

[Zardnaar]

I refuse to rate any of the classes on flavor: that gets us into a negative feedback-loop if "why is X a class" arguments that are pointless and counter-intuitive. Therefore, consider my vote Strong of the "theme" of every class.

Now, how do the mechanics connect to theme.

Barbarian: Average. I like the unarmored AC element and they try to make for a distinct feel, but everything being tied to rage makes them feel a bit one-trick; a good trick, but one non-the-less.

Bard: Average/Strong. As a caster, they are nearly top tier. Sadly, they lost some of unique elements of bardsong to do it. Still, I'd rather have a strong caster that a walking "bless" spell, so bards get a solid score for me.

Cleric: Strong. The domain system isn't as flexible as I'd hope, but the right domain makes them powerful and domain spells add flexibility few casters can match.

Fighter: Average/Strong. Champions are great at killing things, though I've yet to see how battle-master handles dynamic combats yet. Seems solid, if simple.

Druid: Average/Strong. Wild shape was nerfed-from-orbit, even for moon-druids. Luckily, they retain strong spellcasting (esp. for land druids) so the situation isn't hopeless.

Monk. Average/Weak. Not seem them in action, but monks seem to be the "also ran" again for melee combat. At least unarmed combat doesn't seem as pointless this time.

Paladin. Strong. Nothing not to love. Smites/Spells, healing, good combat skills, and your not even bound to LG or bust behavior anymore.

Ranger. Average. Sadly, nothing stands out for rangers. They've fallen to bard status: a good 5th wheel but you'd probably want something else filling that role first.

Rogue: Strong. Sneak Attack is easy to get, sniping in broken, and lots of abilities to frustrate your DM. More please.

Sorcerer: Weak. So close. Too few spells, metamagic is good-but-wonky, and in desperate need of more sublclasses. This class needed a going over one more time. Hopefully, subclasses can fix this one later.

Warlock: Average/Strong. Depending on your campaign and build, you can get a lot of at-will magic. You won't rival your mages but you can give your rogue a run for his money!

Wizard: Strong. Could he be anything else? Great spells, some refresh abilities, rituals and cantrips, and specialization that doesn't suck.

You are wrong, think of the bard as a strictly better Rogue and the class is a lot better. Sleep, and Faerie fire are amazing along with vicious mockery and the bard is almost as good as the Rogue at skills that matter with the exception of the thieves toolkit expertise. The bard can also steal spells off other classes so while the Rogue gets exicted about 3d6 sneak attack the bard picks up haste and fireball. Throw in cutting words and inspiration dice that recharge with short rests even when the bard runs out of spells it is all good and the bard can also heal via cure spells and 1d6 whenever the party spends a hit dice to heal.

At lower levels the Rogue may get in +1d6 sneak attack the bard ends the encounter with a sleep spell. If you have a wizard in the party you just sleep the 1st 4 encounters or use faerie fire on undead which are immune to sleep. You will hit level 2 around about the same time you run out of spells.

 

[Unadvisedgoose]

Druid: Average/Strong. Wild shape was nerfed-from-orbit, even for moon-druids. Luckily, they retain strong spellcasting (esp. for land druids) so the situation isn't hopeless.

I'm curious, what makes you say wild shape is weak? It seems like a fairly strong feature to me. Though I disagree with some who would imply that it is so powerful as to break the game.

 

[Arkon262]

I keep seeing all this praise for how powerful sleep is, but I just don't see it. From my experience in play the HP totals that get rolled are quite low and the monster math being used is balancing monsters not by giving insane AC but rather by bumping HPs. So for Lost Mines we had a Wizard try and use sleep on the encounter with the bugbear, wolf and the two goblins. No problem right, until the wizard rolled and got a total of 17 on the 5d8 roll.

1. It effects creatures, I sure hope none of the party is within 20 feet of the casting point.
2. If you don't sleep the entire group of enemy monsters, they just wake up the sleeping ones.

I personally find wizards really poor when running pre-made adventures unless you are resigned to being a "blaster". Wizards can get a ton of really great utility spells that end up going unused as there is often very few occasions for the utility to shine.

 

[Minigiant]

I can't rate flavor. It is too hard to do.
But I can rate Mechanics.

But I'd have to split it into 3 part.
Base: The base strength and usefulness of the class features with normal optimization independent of DM ruling and campaign style.
Power: The strength of an above average optimized character of the class is or a member in very appropriate campaign.
Build: The number of diverse builds and ways to play in the class.

Barbarian
Base: Strong
Power: Strong
Build: Weak

Bard
Base: Strong
Power: Strong
Build: Strong

Cleric
Base: Strong
Power: Average
Build: Strong

Druid
Base: Strong
Power: Average
Build: Strong

Fighter
Base: Average/Strong
Power: Strong
Build: Strong

Monk
Base: Average
Power: Weak
Build: Average/Strong

Paladin
Base: Average
Power: Strong
Build: Weak

Ranger
Base: Weak
Power: Strong
Build: Weak

Rogue
Base: Strong
Power: Strong
Build: Average

Sorcerer
Base: Average
Power: Average
Build: Weak

Warlock
Base: Average
Power: Strong
Build: Strong

Wizard
Base: Strong
Power: Strong
Build: Very Strong

 

[Zardnaar]

I keep seeing all this praise for how powerful sleep is, but I just don't see it. From my experience in play the HP totals that get rolled are quite low and the monster math being used is balancing monsters not by giving insane AC but rather by bumping HPs. So for Lost Mines we had a Wizard try and use sleep on the encounter with the bugbear, wolf and the two goblins. No problem right, until the wizard rolled and got a total of 17 on the 5d8 roll.

1. It effects creatures, I sure hope none of the party is within 20 feet of the casting point.
2. If you don't sleep the entire group of enemy monsters, they just wake up the sleeping ones.

I personally find wizards really poor when running pre-made adventures unless you are resigned to being a "blaster". Wizards can get a ton of really great utility spells that end up going unused as there is often very few occasions for the utility to shine.

That is just a crap roll. We used sleep on all the goblins in the ambush and nailed everyone apart from the bugbear in a surprise round and he died before he could wake anyone. We had a bard and a wizard though and the crappiest sleep roll was 19 and using a level 2 slot the best was around 45 hit points.

 

[Mistwell]

That is just a crap roll. We used sleep on all the goblins in the ambush and nailed everyone apart from the bugbear in a surprise round and he died before he could wake anyone. We had a bard and a wizard though and the crappiest sleep roll was 19 and using a level 2 slot the best was around 45 hit points.

On the contrary, you rolled extremely good. It's 5d8 for the first level slot. That's 22.5 on average, so your lowest roll was not far below dead average, whereas your crappiest roll should have been around 12.5.

Average for the second level slot is 31.5, so a 45 is high (you had to roll almost an average of 6 on every one of those 7 d8s to get that high, when the average roll is 4.5 per die).

Your rolls definitely defied the odds, on the high side, if those two numbers you gave were the range you rolled.

In addition, the odds say you will have some wasted hit points in that total, sometimes a lot of them, as the next creature in line each time has increasing hit points. So when you get to the end, you have the highest hit points subtracting from the lowest amount left, and if you don't meet or exceed their hit points that's it, the rest is wasted.

Sleep is fine, but it's not the spell you keep making it out to be, in my experience.

 

[Jack7]

I am not a Geek Gamer. When it comes to gaming, and especially role-play games I am far more of a Nerd, and very old school.

So, that being said, I will rate the Character Classes in order (from best to last in my opinion) based upon both if the class is my favorite and on how strong I think it is.

BARD – by far the best version of the class I’ve ever seen in any edition and my favorite class – I really look forward to playing my Bard.


RANGER – one of the best versions of the Ranger I’ve ever seen and my second favorite class - – excellent exploration and hunting capabilities.


ROGUE – the best version of the Rogue I’ve ever seen (overall and including the Thief from AD&D) and my third favorite class.


WIZARD – I really like this Wizard and it was almost a toss-up for my third favorite class.


BARBARIAN – an excellent version of the class and I usually don’t care for them too much – but I would play this Barbarian.


CLERIC – I usually prefer playing Clerics so this class was a little disappointing to me. I thought it too weak and overly and unnecessarily complicated and sort of self-limited.


DRUID – I usually don’t play Druids or care for them, but this class is well done and interesting.


PALADIN – ordinarily a type of favored class for me but I thought that like the Cleric it was unnecessarily complicated and sort of self-limited. Especially when it comes to the undead. However I very much liked all of the Sacred Oaths.


FIGHTER – I’ve never cared much for the straight out Fighter and still don’t but I thought one of the sub-classes, the Battle Master, was excellently designed and would be extremely useful to any party.


MONK – I’m iffy on the Monk. I’ve always liked the concept but never thought it done curtly. I do not desire to play one and will not use the Monk class when I DM but will allow a version of the Byzantine Warrior Monk that will incorporate some of the elements of the 5th Edition Monk.


WARLOCK – I thought this was a very interesting idea and class concept but thought the way it functioned made the Warlock very uncertain and unreliable in play. It’s almost like a cleric limited to the whims of an unpredictable minor god of chaos. Plus you’re constantly in a sort of unpredictable bond-service or reckless blood-debt that you can never really escape. But I thought that with the proper Milieu Modification and changes to who you are beholding to that it would make for a very interesting character class. But only if modified.


SORCERER – I thought this class was weak and limited in concept and design compared to the others. My least favorite class.




Overall though I really liked these versions of the character classes and 5th Edition I really like.

 

[Zardnaar]

On the contrary, you rolled extremely good. It's 5d8 for the first level slot. That's 22.5 on average, so your lowest roll was not far below dead average, whereas your crappiest roll should have been around 12.5.

Average for the second level slot is 31.5, so a 45 is high (you had to roll almost an average of 6 on every one of those 7 d8s to get that high, when the average roll is 4.5 per die).

Your rolls definitely defied the odds, on the high side, if those two numbers you gave were the range you rolled.

In addition, the odds say you will have some wasted hit points in that total, sometimes a lot of them, as the next creature in line each time has increasing hit points. So when you get to the end, you have the highest hit points subtracting from the lowest amount left, and if you don't meet or exceed their hit points that's it, the rest is wasted.

Sleep is fine, but it's not the spell you keep making it out to be, in my experience.

We played LMoP again today and sleep was used. Same players, different PCs with no experience on the LMOP. In Klargs cave the Sorcerer used sleep on Klarg and co and nailed the 2 goblins, and then in the goblin lair she got 3/6 goblins with it. Everyone thought the game was a lot harder without the bard tagging along.