D&D 5E Subclass feature vs. feat -- Which is "worth" more?

[Distracted DM]

multiclassing is bad, I agree.

but what is solution?

force even split classes?

6/6 character is almost universally weaker than 12th level character in a single class.

I made a house rule that forces even split, but it gives bonus levels at character levels 5,8,11,14,17 and 20, so you end up at 20th level with HP, HDs and prof bonus of 10/10 split as normal, but have features of 13/13 split.

View attachment 388033

Can you elaborate on this a little bit? What's the "low hp high hp" calling out?

 

[CreamCloud0]

problem with high level maritals is, how magical do you want them to become?

If you want them to stay completely mundane, then only solution to stay somewhat close to casters is to buff their damage, number of attacks, attack riders(mundane), some skills, more expertise, more AC, maybe 2 reactions per round for AoOs,

i disagree, though i agree martials should have greater pure numerical increases than casters maritals can remain nonmagical but be vastly improved with codified actions, that's where the major gulf in capability lies IMO, spells being descrete packages of actions whereas martials just have to rely on attack attack attack! maneuvres, masteries and fighting styles should just be scratching the surface of what martials could do.

now, is it enough that your clumsy 1st level archer that can barely shoot 1 arrow per round becomes Lars Andersen and shoots 15+ arrows per round?

That is impressive, but if that is all he can do, it can get very boring very fast.
but some people really want to roll 15+ attack rolls every round. So, it's fun for them.

on the other hand, we have the Book of nine Swords.

do we want martials to become that amount of magical?

having not seen it for myself was Bo9S actually magical or is it just 'these characters are managing to reliably do anything more impressive than the 'guy at the gym' could', another case of 'taunting reliably is mind control'

also, most campaigns are done by levels 10-13.
we need ALL the goodies for classes(except spells) to be "on line" by that time. At least in some basic form.
Upgrades can be for high levels.

I.E.battlemasters "unlimited" maneuvers with Relentless should be at 10th level latest and not 15th, that is too little, too late.
maybe even 7th level with d4 dice to power them. d6 at 10th level, d8 at 15th level.

this part i agree on, the whole timeline of martial abilities needs to be moved up.

 

[Minigiant]

problem with high level maritals is, how magical do you want them to become?

If you want them to stay completely mundane, then only solution to stay somewhat close to casters is to buff their damage, number of attacks, attack riders(mundane), some skills, more expertise, more AC, maybe 2 reactions per round for AoOs,

Well that has always been the problem.

D&D fans are hard-headed and only want to have one fighter class.

However media has at least five different ways to portray an epic fighter... before you even get to casting magic.

 

[Horwath]

Can you elaborate on this a little bit? What's the "low hp high hp" calling out?

at level 4 you are normal multiclass of 2/2.

at level 5 you get your +3 prof bonus as normal, but class features of both classes. now your have class features of 3/3
Low HP means that at levels 5,11,17 where are "double levels" you get lower HPs of your two classes.
High HP means that at levels 8,14,20 where are "double levels" you get higher HPs of your two classes.

fighter/wizard would get 4+con HP at levels 5,11,17 and 6+con HP at levels 8,14,20.
same for HDs that you have available to spend.

 

[Horwath]

Well that has always been the problem.

D&D fans are hard-headed and only want to have one fighter class.

However media has at least five different ways to portray an epic fighter... before you even get to casting magic.

I mean, one solution is to keep fighter generic an open to customize via feats.

add feat slots similar to warlocks eldritch invocations.
have fighter only have second wind, action surge and extra attack(s) as core class features. no subclasses, or suubclasses broken into feats.
then you have 15-20 feat slots for a fighter and can make it any way you want to.

 

[Minigiant]

i disagree, though i agree martials should have greater pure numerical increases than casters maritals can remain nonmagical but be vastly improved with codified actions, that's where the major gulf in capability lies IMO, spells being descrete packages of actions whereas martials just have to rely on attack attack attack! maneuvres, masteries and fighting styles should just be scratching the surface of what martials could do

It's really not that and more that the community won't coalesce around the idea that their are multiple types of nonspellcasting martials in media but only allowing 1 fighter and 1 barbarian

IMHO there are 5 types typically of tropes and the JOAT:

1. Fragile Speedster high speed, low toughness
2. Glass Cannon high power, low toughness
3. Brick Wall high toughness low offense
4. Mighty Glacier high power low speed
5. One Hit Wonder high power low stamina
6. Jack of all Options

 

[Minigiant]

I mean, one solution is to keep fighter generic an open to customize via feats.

add feat slots similar to warlocks eldritch invocations.
have fighter only have second wind, action surge and extra attack(s) as core class features. no subclasses, or suubclasses broken into feats.
then you have 15-20 feat slots for a fighter and can make it any way you want to.

Doesn't work in class based games

 

[Horwath]

Doesn't work in class based games

worked in 3.5e

 

[Minigiant]

worked in 3.5e

It literally didn't.

3.5e martial feat trees were a mess.

 

[Horwath]

It literally didn't.

3.5e martial feat trees were a mess.

that was the problem of too much spell slots with autoscaling spell levels for spellcasters.

if you played 3.5e/PF1 with only martials(including paladin&ranger, that spellcasting was awful), game went pretty good.
or if you limit full casters to half of max levels with mandatory multiclass.

but, I agree some feats were bad and trap options as a part of a good feat chain.