D&D 5E (2024) Reevaluating 5.5 Classes?

[Zardnaar]

So early in 5.5 various youtubers and myself rated the classes. This was filtered through 5.0 lenses.

After playing the game a lot more I'm finding i value things differently than 5.0. New material has also come out.

Broadly speaking here would be some things I value and assumptions.

1.I weight the lower levels more than youtubers. Level 3-7 is the key patt, 10 is capstone, 11+ mostly theory crafting. My last campaign went to 13 that's higher than what most games seem to reach and it took over a year to get there.

2. I'm not rating 5MWD. Kinda obvious what's good in that scenario.

3. I'm assuming encounter and magic items close to the DMG suggestions.

4. I'll assume that you more or less get what is one paper. Some classes are more DM dependent. Eg artificer. I'll make a note to upgrade the class ranking with a somewhat generous DM and very generous DM.

5. Abilities will be more vibes based but key guideline will be impact, frequency, cost and synergy.

6. A lot of classes have 1-2 subclasses that are just better. Often its obvious but the more good subclasses a class has the higher a rating it gets. A powerful class switching on late with mediocre subclasses will get rated lower than an early bloomer with multiple good subclasses. The payoff may never come.

7. I'll mention changes 5.5 has made. Basically monsters hit harder, more HP and more of them RAW. This does change assumptions and criteria imho over what's good.

8. Sone recent youtubers have rated some classes lower as criteria they used dragged the points down. I wont be doing that. Bards for example not the best at damage. But I don't care to much as its not their thing so its irrelevant. Striker vs striker is more relevant. I care more on impact, frequency etc at whatever that class is doing.

9. Multiclassing wont be directly addressed as theres to many potential options, builds etc. I'll mention it however as some "weak" classes do make good foundations for doing whatever.

 

[FrogReaver]

How do subclssses factor into your class rating?

Broadly I’m in favor of 3-7 being the heart and treating level 8-10 features more as capstones.

Im good ignoring 5MWD but 3-4 encounter days play out much differently than 6-8, so I think that needs specified.

I tend to think more,
First option impact,
backup option impact,
Frequency
hp defense,
Save defense,
Other effects brought that don’t compete with first option

I’m not at all sure what your cost and synergy mean.

One thing I thing YouTuber ranking videos get wrong is they rate damage, control, support all separately, which gives preference to versatile casters when what’s actually important is how that stuff aligns with the action economy, aka the impact.

I tend to consider mobility but only when it allows explicit tactical options and that gets factored more into my thoughts on the classes survivability and damage.

Out of combat I’d rate most separately. Maybe exploration abilities can be factored in as they can directly impact the engagements.

 

[Scribe]

I weight the lower levels more than youtubers. Level 3-7 is the key patt, 10 is capstone, 11+ mostly theory crafting. My last campaign went to 13 that's higher than what most games seem to reach and it took over a year to get there.

A tier list for the 3-10 range, with call outs to specific subclasses would be appreciated.

 

[Zardnaar]

How do subclssses factor into your class rating?

Broadly I’m in favor of 3-7 being the heart and treating level 8-10 features more as capstones.

Im good ignoring 5MWD but 3-4 encounter days play out much differently than 6-8, so I think that needs specified.

I tend to think more,
First option impact,
backup option impact,
Frequency
hp defense,
Save defense,
Other effects brought that don’t compete with first option

I’m not at all sure what your cost and synergy mean.

One thing I thing YouTuber ranking videos get wrong is they rate damage, control, support all separately, which gives preference to versatile casters when what’s actually important is how that stuff aligns with the action economy, aka the impact.

I tend to consider mobility but only when it allows explicit tactical options and that gets factored more into my thoughts on the classes survivability and damage.

Out of combat I’d rate most separately. Maybe exploration abilities can be factored in as they can directly impact the engagements.

Synergy is how various abilities work with each other. Eg innate sorcery plus spells with attack rolls.

Cost is things like spell slots, opportunity cost or whatever.

Subclasses. Bards very good for example kind of S tier. But only 2/5 subclasses are reasonably goid do that S becomes an A.

Thise two subclasses are S tier though.

 

[FrogReaver]

Synergy is how various abilities work with each other. Eg innate sorcery plus spells with attack rolls.

Sounds like impact to me?

Cost is things like spell slots, opportunity cost or whatever.

Sounds like frequency to me?

 

[Zardnaar]

Sounds like impact to me?

Sounds like frequency to me?

Impact is something all by itself. Eg fireball. Synergy would be fireball and level 6 fire sorcerer.

Ported. Potentially high impact. Frequency very low.

Cost would ve more opportunity cost and things like action economy. Probably should have been clearer.

Giving a martial a cantrip isnt that great. Costs your action. Letting them cast a cantrip as part of an attack action thats a lot better.

 

[FrogReaver]

A tier list for the 3-10 range, with call outs to specific subclasses would be appreciated.

Would it be better to just do a separate ranking for each subclass if doing that?

 

[Scribe]

Would it be better to just do a separate ranking for each subclass if doing that?

Mostly just worried about some singular exceptions. "Barbarian is X, other than Sub Y".

 

[FrogReaver]

Mostly just worried about some singular exceptions. "Barbarian is X, other than Sub Y".

Got ya. To me the subclass often is the driver for what your most impactful thing to do is. Which is to say all the Barbarian subclasses are going to feel quite different in actual play.

Sticking with your Barbarian example:

• Berserker - will feel like a damage god, but not super tanky. Usually sturdy enough, but nothing special.
• Zealot - playstyle can closely match Beserker, but he can also play alot more tanky while still dishing out very good damage due to his subclass features not requiring reckless attack to activate. The bonus action healing is really strong in this range when coupled with rage damage resistance as well. If taking sentinel he can keep an enemy on himself as good as if not better than World Tree.
• Wildheart - For typical encounters you most likely want to really lean into his mobility. This allows for some nice hit and run tactics and quickly getting on top of priority targets. Also, if fighting high non bps damage enemies, he can instead use bear instead of eagle to really increase survivability. Not often as good as Zealot or Berserker by the numbers but it doesn't take very many turns of the extra movement enabling extra hits or preventing attacks to push him up higher than the numbers suggest in actual play.
• World Tree - Intended as the support Barbarian, however the 10ft distance requirement to grant an ally temp hp really hampers the usefulness. Potentially good in tight dungeons or if you often have multiple melee allies dogpiling a single enemy. But generally my experience suggests that melee allies tend to spread out to engage with enemies on different fronts and that it's tactically best for them to do so to ensure the damage they take gets spread out instead of concentrated (essentially anti-party focus fire tactics).

I would find it difficult to rate the Barbarian as a class when each of their subclasses have such different impact profiles. I could rate each subclass individually and then perhaps average out a class rating. Potential rankings (might be lowered a bit depending on how other classes subclasses look in comparison as I dig in and depending on how much i should rate out of combat abilities).

Berserker A
Zealot A+
Wildheart B- (potential for B)
Worldtree B (potential in the right campaign, ie lots of small dungeons, or party, ie many melee allies for S)

EDIT:
I did decide to lower Wildheart a bit, he doesn't get his quasi flight ability till 14th level, outside the band i'm looking at. His level 6 and 10 features are mostly ribbons at least for combat.

Also slightly increased world tree B- to B for base. He does get some self temp hp. The real icing is if he can get his temp hp to target allies while still optimally contributing in damage, at that point he morphs into one of the best possible barbarians.

 

[Zardnaar]

Got ya. To me the subclass often is the driver for what your most impactful thing to do is. Which is to say all the Barbarian subclasses are going to feel quite different in actual play.

Sticking with your Barbarian example:

• Berserker - will feel like a damage god, but not super tanky. Usually sturdy enough, but nothing special.
• Zealot - playstyle can closely match Beserker, but he can also play alot more tanky while still dishing out very good damage due to his subclass features not requiring reckless attack to activate. The bonus action healing is really strong in this range when coupled with rage damage resistance as well. If taking sentinel he can keep an enemy on himself as good as if not better than World Tree.
• Wildheart - For typical encounters you most likely want to really lean into his mobility. This allows for some nice hit and run tactics and quickly getting on top of priority targets. Also, if fighting high non bps damage enemies, he can instead use bear instead of eagle to really increase survivability. Not often as good as Zealot or Berserker by the numbers but it doesn't take very many turns of the extra movement enabling extra hits or preventing attacks to push him up higher than the numbers suggest in actual play.
• World Tree - Intended as the support Barbarian, however the 10ft distance requirement to grant an ally temp hp really hampers the usefulness. Potentially good in tight dungeons or if you often have multiple melee allies dogpiling a single enemy. But generally my experience suggests that melee allies tend to spread out to engage with enemies on different fronts and that it's tactically best for them to do so to ensure the damage they take gets spread out instead of concentrated (essentially anti-party focus fire tactics).

I would find it difficult to rate the Barbarian as a class when each of their subclasses have such different impact profiles. I could rate each subclass individually and then perhaps average out a class rating. Potential rankings (might be lowered a bit depending on how other classes subclasses look in comparison as I dig in and depending on how much i should rate out of combat abilities).

Berserker A
Zealot A+
Wildheart B+ (potential for A+)
Worldtree B- (potential in the right campaign, ie lots of small dungeons, or party, ie many melee allies for S)

Barbarian subclasses are fairly close to each other on power.
. Problem is really the base class. One trick pony basically, when it peaks and its defenses or lack of.