• Resources are back! Use the menu in the main navbar. If you own a resource, please check it for formatting, icons, etc.

5E Sometimes Less Is More...or am I the only one who thinks so?

I’m with the OP. Setting is the most important consideration for me. More than story, more than cool options, more than whatever character concept a player has been mulling around before they ever heard of this campaign. (I’m of a mind that any player can have a variety of characters they can enjoy playing, and they need to pick one that fits a setting and campaign, unless it’s an inherently shared DMing or shared campaign creation.) If a race doesn’t exist in a setting, the only way you can play it is if it came from another plane/world, and the only way you can do that is if a character coming from another plane/world fits the campaign. Both races and classes in my settings are fluff-integrated. You don’t pick a concept and then choose mechanics in the form of race/class combinations, and then fluff it however. A paladin, warlock, or even a rogue or fighter means something specific in the world. Some of these are broader than others and encompass a wider variety, like fighters that come in many different types. Others may be limited, such as all paladins of a specific subclass being members of the same knightly order, or cleric domains assigned to specific deities representing specific religious orders with unique roles in the world, or some races and cultural collections having a monopoly on some classes or subclasses. Setting first for me.
 

Hussar

Legend
Whereas I'm the complete opposite. Setting is fun and all but, outside of certain specific cases, setting takes a FAR back seat to campaign. Setting IMO is something that always plays second fiddle to every other consideration.
 

Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
Setting is the DM’s job. Rules are the game designer’s job. Sometimes the game designer will do the former for you, and sometimes the DM will make (house)rules, but generally the books give you the mechanics and the DM gives you the story.
 

Ancalagon

Dusty Dragon
That being said, I'm finding that rule light systems can do more. Like Troika you have skill, stamina, luck. You can do tons with those stats.

And you can play a gremlin catcher or a poorly made dwarf.
 

coolAlias

Explorer
I agree with both the OP and Morrus.

With the OP in that I feel there are too many similar choices, but I'm fine with chopping one or two out if they don't fit my game.

With Morrus in that I feel there are not enough options to distinguish one Dwarf Fighter from the next. I appreciate the simplicity of 5e, but I miss the customization of 3e.

I guess the plethora of subclass options is the 5e of choosing feats and level up options to become an Eldritch Knight instead of a Samurai, but I'd prefer if the subclass abilities were more mix-and-match so players could create whatever they wanted.
 

Henry

Autoexreginated
Setting is the DM’s job. Rules are the game designer’s job. Sometimes the game designer will do the former for you, and sometimes the DM will make (house)rules, but generally the books give you the mechanics and the DM gives you the story.
I do feel it when, mechanically speaking, my cleric of Pholtus looks just like my friend Bill’s cleric of Pelor, who looks just like my friend Sue’s cleric of Lathander. Down to same Radiance of the Dawn, Fireballs, and warding flares...
 

DEFCON 1

Legend
Hmm... I believe we've had this argument before (many, many, many times over the last 20 years), and the full argument goes like this...

  • too many unnecessary subclasses, like Samurai or Divine Soul
  • too many unnecessary classes, like Ranger or Sorcerer
  • you don't need more than just four classes-- fighter, rogue, cleric, wizard
  • you don't need more than just three classes-- warrior, skill-using expert, spellcaster
  • you don't need more than just two classes-- weapon-user, spellcaster
  • you don't need more than just one class
  • ladle

Did I miss any? Please feel free to insert.
 

dnd4vr

Adventurer
I am with the OP big time. I find most of the sub-classes trivial and pointless, added fluff, and all-in-all quite a bit of wasted ink in the books. We had to make up our own Path of Devotion for the group paladin because none of those offered appealed to the player. A new player was looking over the wizard sub-classes and was so disappointed. The worst part is some classes seem to have some decent ones, but others are abysmal.
 

Advertisement

Top