D&D 5E Survivor 5e- What Core Class Needs to Go

[The Grassy Gnoll]

Two things-

First, saying "trampy Paladin" is redundant.

Second, "trampoline" is just a euphemism for the Paladin's mom.

See, this is why Paladins have Disadvantage on all Sense of Humour saving throws.

Prepare for a smitin'.

*gets popcorn*

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Jaelommiss]

I'm voting warlock. From my perspective, the warlock class is ideally used as a reward for interactions with powerful NPCs. Maybe a fiend will cut you a deal and grant the Devil's Sight invocation if you do a couple jobs for him (or sign over your tasty soul). Or a fey lord will grant you a spell slot that regenerates after a short rest if you take up his cause.

After completing a mission for a VERY powerful vampire I awarded a warlock level (minus cantrips and hit dice) to a player in one of my games. I made it clear that additional levels could be gained through further service. The resulting interaction was very interesting, and it provided goals other than merely collecting coins and magic items.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Cristian Andreu]

Warlock.

Even though the very idea of playing a Druid gives me skin rashes (bathing IS part of nature, you bird-poop-on-beard weirdo! Stop going through my trash cans!) and I have a general dislike for shaolin-type Monks, those two classes seem to have well-defined roles, even if they could conceptually be covered by Clerics and Fighters.

Warlock, on the other hand, while I have no problem with the flavour, feels too much like something you could simply replace with a Sorcerer or Cleric subclass.

It could be just a matter of time, though. Monks and Druids were introduced long ago enough that they have become a stapple of D&D and have had time for a lot of material to be published about them. Maybe Warlocks are still too new. But as things stand right now, you're taking your creepy pact stuff off this island, mister.

 

[ExploderWizard]

I chose warlock because really it looks like a class placeholder that is just looking for something to do. A sort of wanna-be wizard that doesn't want to suck that bad with weapons. The trappings and descriptions of warlocks make them all come off as emo hipsters. Double tap that class.

 

[hafrogman]

I like the warlock, but I see the arguments that it's not distinct enough from the sorcerer. However, my instinct would be to roll it the other way and create dragon-blood warlocks and chaos warlocks and remove the sorcerer. In 3.X it was an experiment in a different way to Wizard. Now with the changes to spell preparation and slots, I feel like the sorcerer isn't as necessary, and the two sub-classes feel very specific, with no such thing as a "generic" sorcerer.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Unsurprisingly, the Monk and the Ranger are pulling in the votes. Just goes to show you- what was broken in 1e, shall be broken in 5e. So has it been written, so has the poll made it true.

The poll doesn't ask which classes are broken. Not sure how or why you're coming to that conclusion. Especially since they really aren't broken. Not in 1e, and not in 5e. "Not doing exactly what I want how I want it" =/= broken. But specific to this poll, asking which classes people can do away with is a totally different question than which classes people feel is broken. It's like creating poll "Which is your least favorite ice cream" and coming to the conclusion that the ones with the most votes are the most unhealthy.

Also, I voted warlock but I can only choose one, otherwise I would have chosen barbarian as my second. Probably because I played plenty of barbarian PCs in 1e before it was even a class. In 5e terms, it could easily just be a subclass of fighter. IMO anyway.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*