D&D (2024) Subclasses should start at 1st level

[Charlaquin]

I see the issue where Cleric, Warlock, and Sorcerer PCs have a lot of frontloaded choices which could lead to options paralysis.

I’m not worried about this, especially now that they seem to be offering default options as often as possible for folks who don’t want to make a decision.

But I still think it serves their narratives to have Lv1 Subclasses. The other classes, minus maybe Paladin, don’t really need subclass choice at 1st. But I’d rather it standardised one way or another, and it would be easier to give a ribbon to each subclass at 1st.

I still think if you want a true apprentice before specialising you could have 0th Level classes that reflect Warrior / Expert / Priest / Mage.

Agreed.

 

[Laurefindel]

But I still think it serves their narratives to have Lv1 Subclasses. The other classes, minus maybe Paladin, don’t really need subclass choice at 1st. But I’d rather it standardised one way or another, and it would be easier to give a ribbon to each subclass at 1st.

The problem with other classes is that some of their subclasses would benefit from early narrative input while others don't. Eldritch Knight Fighter and Scout Rogue come to mind, making you go "where did you pick up wizard magic overnight?" or "one day you have no knowledge of nature and the next you compete with the ranger?"

Others like Swashbuckler Rogue or Blades Bard do to a certain degree, and there are more that beg to orient roleplay from level 1.

 

[Charlaquin]

The problem with other classes is that some of their subclasses would benefit from early narrative input while others don't. Eldritch Knight Fighter and Scout Rogue come to mind, making you go "where did you pick up wizard magic overnight?" or "one day you have no knowledge of nature and the next you compete with the ranger?"

Others like Swashbuckler Rogue or Blades Bard do to a certain degree, and there are more that beg to orient roleplay from level 1.

Yep. And I don’t think there’s any subclass that suffers narratively for starting at 1st level. So it seems all-upside to me. The multiclassing problem I think is easily solved by just not giving any 1st level subclass features that you wouldn’t give as 1st level class features.

 

[Laurefindel]

A single level of Cleric for… what, heavy armor? Hexblade for the Hexblade’s Curse? Easy features to just not grant at 1st level.

Hexblade (and it's Cha to attack and damage) is the greater offender but as you said, it'd be easy to postpone it (or in parts) to further level. As it should have been from the get go actually; the whole subclass feels like a fix of the pack of blade warlock with a so-so implementation.

 

[Charlaquin]

Hexblade (and it's Cha to attack and damage) is the greater offender but as you said, it'd be easy to postpone it (or in parts) to further level. As it should have been from the get go actually; the whole subclass feels like a fix of the pack of blade warlock with a so-so implementation.

Yeah, it’s definitely just a clumsy fix to the blade pact boon. Now they have the opportunity to fix the pact boon itself (which comes at 3rd level) and ditch Hexblade as a patron. As for clerics granting heavy armor, just say they only grant medium armor if it’s not your first class, just like every class with heavy armor proficiency does. Boom, problem solved.

 

[Leatherhead]

I never understood the "lower levels are for learning the game" argument.

Given that subclasses can radically change how a character is played by giving the character new roles and mechanics (and often unique mechanics) you can't use levels 1 and 2 to learn how to play your character, because at level 3 you would be playing something totally different.

 

[Xamnam]

In my experience, people who come into 5E with solid mechanical board game / video game knowledge can jump in with a level three character no problem. The folks that I've seen who are brand new to the hobby at large, and don't have those parallel understanding baselines, have more often than not been overwhelmed by the mechanics at play with just a level one character, and the delaying of subclasses features helped them to get a handle on the basic levers of their characters before introducing different ones.

That mechanical perspective is the reason I stand against introducing subclasses at an earlier point. I absolutely agree that narratively delaying it can range from perfectly fine to very confusing, especially in the cases of the Sorcerer and Warlock.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

The problem with other classes is that some of their subclasses would benefit from early narrative input while others don't. Eldritch Knight Fighter and Scout Rogue come to mind, making you go "where did you pick up wizard magic overnight?" or "one day you have no knowledge of nature and the next you compete with the ranger?"

Others like Swashbuckler Rogue or Blades Bard do to a certain degree, and there are more that beg to orient roleplay from level 1.

I did not like the rogue scout subclass because of this.
Especially because you jumped from no proficiency to expertise. It did not even let you chose different skills if you already had them... which is exactly how ot should NOT work.
If you already chose survival and nature, and maybe even had expertise, you should just get two new skills. So you can chose to start with proficiency at least by chosing the outlander background or something like that and already behave lile a ranger. At level 3 you then just get some appropriate abilities.

Maybe some subclasses should just have prerequisites... want to be a scout? Chose appropriate skills... same for multiclassing: want to multiclass to fighter? Get medium armor proficiency first...
took the idea from warhammer fantasy.

Maybe this would need some rebalancing...

 

[Mistwell]

A single level of Cleric for… what, heavy armor? Hexblade for the Hexblade’s Curse? Easy features to just not grant at 1st level.

Cleric comes with a ton of good subclass perks at first level. Too many to list. Off the top of my head Forge get's you a +1 weapon or +1 armor at level 1, Knowledge gets you Expertise in two skills, Life gets you what can be a HUGE bonus to your healing spells, Order grants a reaction attack to your ally who you cast a spell on, Twilight gives 300' darkvision to up to 5 people and bonus to initiative you can give others, War gives a bonus action attack, etc.. There are many others too.

Hexblade is pretty obviously for Charisma to weapon attack and damage.

 

[Maxperson]

I love that they seem to be standardizing subclass progression, but why start them at 3rd level instead of 1st? Even for the 2014 classes that get their subclasses after 1st level I have never actually seen a player wait until then to choose their subclass anyway. They always pick at character creation. Plus, having all subclasses start at 1st level would allow subclass to transform the base class more. Sorcerers could get access to different spell lists depending on subclass. Bards could get different options for their set of always-prepared spells depending on subclass. Rangers could have some subclasses that cast spells and some that don’t. Waiting until 3rd level makes it so that if your subclass is a significant part of the character concept, you have to spend two levels not playing that concept, at least not to its fullest extent.

If they started at 1st, they would be classes and not subclasses. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, but you'd be breaking fighters up and giving us the Champion class, Battle Master class and Eldritch Knight class.