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

[Mistwell]

Just limit what you get from the subclass at 1st level.

You're just repeating what I already replied to? If you do that, then the subclass often no longer functions if you take more levels of it because you will be lacking a core element which increases in power at a later level.
Example: Earliest subclass ability grants +1d6 damage once per proficiency bonus a day. Middle subclass ability changes die to d8. Later subclass ability changes to recharge on short rest. If you limited what you could get at earliest point, none of the rest of the subclass functions. And if you have to tinker with how it functions to make this work, then you have to do that for every subclass in the game and now you have a chapters worth on multiclassing. This is not a workable core system element.

 

[Yaarel]

A way to think about the subclass is, the character actually choose it at "level 0", because of a knack or talent for something specific. The base class then rounds out this personal affinity.

 

[Yaarel]

Not everyone starts their campaigns at 1st level though nor is it required to start a campaign at 1st level so it begs the question of whether it really matters if subclasses are started sooner or later; personally, I think it should really depend on the class on a case-by-case basis if the mechanics of classes are not going to be as homogenous as in 4e.

I am a veteran D&D player.

I have never played a character except starting at level 1.

For me it is an important concept to start my character at the beginning.

This especially makes choosing the subclass character concept at level 1 vital.

 

[Yaarel]

For the Fighter class, a subclass at level 1 can be as simple as an appropriate Fighting Style. An Eldritch Knight needs a Fighting Style at level 1 that includes magical combat, such as Mage Armor and cantrip.

 

[Smackpixi]

So much yes. Let me be the thing I picked out of the gates.

Yes, it’s not more complicated because pretty much everyone has already decided what subclass they’re eventually gonna pick anyway. I’d solve the one level dip multi-class issue by simply denying subclasses to whatever your secondary class is.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I couldn't disagree more. Subclasses should IMO all be third level where possible to enable character growth rather than characters that just increase in power predictably.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I think it should actually be level 2 and have it established that you start the game at level 2.

Then it would be subclass abilities at:

2,6,10,14.

I'd even add 18, but it seems that this will be class capstone ability.

Then feats are 4, 8, 12, 16 (and 19)

Prof bonus goes up at 5,9,13,17.

Now we just need something at 3, 7, 11, 15. Probably class abilities (including spell levels).


Edit: I think, mages and priests should get something extra at level 1 akin to fighting style that immediately makes sure where the get their spells from.
Subclass should be dissociated from that choice.
So a warloch choses fey. Gets their enhanced spell list. But the big thing should be their implement.

So blade eats the hexblade. Tome eats the great old one. Chain eats the fiend. And talisman eats the fey.

 

[DEFCON 1]

For my money, everyone could always just consider things like this-- a PC can choose and has a subclass at Level 1 even if they do not get a game mechanic for it to use until Level 3. You can just roleplay it.

You can be a Drunken Master even if the Monk abilities you are using at levels 1 and 2 are not specific to the Drunken Master and are just part of the standard Monk. It's absolutely fine. Especially when you consider the fact that the game mechanics you do get at Level 3 only look like Drunken Master abilities because of the fluff that those abilities are written down to have and surrounded by.

What are the game mechanics you get at Level 3?

• Proficiency in Performance
• Proficiency in Brewer's Tools
• Use Disengage as a bonus action
• Gain 10 feet in walking speed for a round

If anyone was to look at these abilities in and of themselves and were asked "What class would these subclass abilities apply to, and what do you think the fluff of that subclass would be?" I think few people would have any real idea. They'd certainly try and guess something... but no one would actually be able to ping it first try. Because these game mechanics are all pretty generic all things considered. And as a result, there's no reason why anyone should think "Oh, I HAVE to be able to do these four things at Level 1 in order for my Drunken Master Monk to FEEL like a Drunken Master Monk." Especially considering the fact that a Rogue character with the right Background can pretty much have or duplicate all four of these features at character creation. Are they thus Drunken Masters by default? Of course not! Because the mechanics do not denote what the subclass is... it's how you characterize your PC and roleplay it that gets its subclass across.

Here are another set of Level 3 subclass game mechanics:

• 10' aura that causes 2 fire damage to all enemies within aura
• 10' aura that causes one enemy to take 1d6 lightning on failed saving throw
• 10' aura that gives all allies 2 Temp Hit Points

Do any of these abilities scream out "Oh, these have to be for X class obviously!" I would say no. None of these three features tell us what class they should be, they are again three relatively generic game mechanics that do not in any way give any indication what class they should be for, or the fluff or narrative of the potential subclass concept for that class. Which means it isn't important that these be given out at 1st level because they do not do anything to denote your subclass.

What actually gives a player the indication of what the subclass would be is the fluff that surrounds those game mechanics. It is the fluff that we read that tells us that these three abilities are all for the Storm Herald Barbarian. But the thing is... we can just apply that fluff to our characters at 1st level by how we roleplay them. We can roleplay our barbarian as being a herald to oncoming storms, even if we won't receive an individual game mechanic for it until Level 3. And that's perfectly fine, especially considering that the game mechanic we get gives no real indication of what it's meant to symbolize anyway.

If you are a fey-themed Glamour Bard... you can be a fey-themed glamour bard even if you don't get your first unique game mechanic until level 3. You can be a paladin who has taken an oath of conquest at 1st level even though you won't get a mechanic for it until 3rd. If you feel like an assassin then you can play as an assassin right from the start. It's all about how you see your character and play your character, and not what goofy-ass mechanics you have written down on your character sheet.

Of course, that's just my opinion... I could be wrong.

 

[Eyes of Nine]

We need to galaxy brained on this.

You choose your subclass at first level.

But you don’t choose your class until third level.

I know this was said in somewhat jest - however why is it a PC can change classes but not change sub-classes? There doesn't seem to be a narrative reason why that I can think of

 

[BlackSeed_Vash]

While I would prefer to have the subclasses available sooner than later, what I really want is the level you acquire a subclass and it features to be the same across all the classes (or at least within the class group).

I really wanna see a subclass be tied to a class group instead of an individual class.