D&D 5E (2024) The 4 Classes I Would Not Play 1-20 In 5.5
- Thread starter Zardnaar
- Start date
Zardnaar
Legend
I don't think its unplayable just power crept out at levels that matter. And it's mote DM/campaign dependent.
A5E berserker is so good it's really not in the same class as any other class, from what I can tell- but I've been disagreed with on that point (some say it's the fighter).
Retros_x
Hero
hm for me fun to play depends on quite different indicators than the ones you state and honestly up until now every class I tried out was fun to play enough for me to not wanting to stop playing them. Maybe I am easy to please, I don't know. But stuff like "The Barbarian still is focused on melee" - yeah thats the appeal? Swing axes screaming while being covered in blood. Or Wizards are now worse than sorceres or warlocks? Not a single time in my campaign I would think "ah it stops being fun because there is another class that could be mathematically better than me". I think "yes, I am a mighty wizard and now I can turn into a cloud!"
Class balance realls has no impact on my campaign enjoyment. I played a single class ranger to level 12 with 2014 rules where he was even weaker than in 24 - and I had a blast. I never felt ineffective or if I could not contribute.
Class balance realls has no impact on my campaign enjoyment. I played a single class ranger to level 12 with 2014 rules where he was even weaker than in 24 - and I had a blast. I never felt ineffective or if I could not contribute.
Bae'zel
Hero
I would only play a Wizard in D&D if I got a promise from the DM that I could regularly find new spells, even if just scrolls or through downtime. Without that guarantee, I’d pick something else for sure.
Rogue? Only if I knew that the campaign had some serious Urban settings to play in. And a Thieves Guild to partner up with.
Rogue? Only if I knew that the campaign had some serious Urban settings to play in. And a Thieves Guild to partner up with.
I would agree with the ranger assessment but not with the others.
Zardnaar
Legend
Yeah that's the bg one. DM and campaign dependent.
I'll supply some scores. Spells etc but it's not an all you can earn buffet.
Probably more than most WotC adventures.
Bae'zel
Hero
At the very least, as a DM, I'd offer downtime activities to let the Wizard study or research sources of spells.
Maybe even weave a "Mage's Guild" or "Occultist Society" into the campaign setting that the Wizard could be part of, granting some guaranteed benefits as long as they do their part (ie, follow adventure hooks or side quests supplied by said Guild).
I appreciate Zardnaar sharing his list, but I think (based only on observation) that he is missing a fundamental point.
The majority (whether it's slight or vast) of players don't choose their class based solely on the concern of "is this is the most powerful class I can play from levels 1-20?"
Put another way, players often have their own idiosyncratic reasons for choosing classes.
Here would be my list for how I choose (and exclude) classes:
1. To start with, I almost always think of a character concept first, and then figure out how I can make the character concept work using the class framework. What class is "close enough" to the idea in my head?
2. For that reason, I usually start with the concept, and then see if I can single-class (either with or without feats) or if I have to multiclass to make the concept work.
3. However, I do have some general rules that I've noticed I tend to follow in terms of picking classes:
A. No bards, obviously.
B. Also, I hate playing spellcasters. The one exception is Warlocks. So in addition to no bards, I'd add no sorcerers and no wizards. I might play a druid or cleric, but probably not.
That's five classes out. Six if you count the artificer, but you shouldn't.
C. From the classes that are left, I have a preference for martials that don't cast spells or have very limited spellcasting. Monks, Rogues, and Fighters.
D. I've never really like any of the Barbarian archetypes presented ... probably a holdover from 1e. So then Ranger and Paladin. And then Barbarian.
And that's it. It's not really about power, it's about preference. If I had to rank the classes, I'd rank them in order:
Monk
Warlock
Fighter/Rogue
Ranger
Paladin
Barbarian
Druid
Cleric
And I don't like playing the other classes. Why? Because I'm me.
The majority (whether it's slight or vast) of players don't choose their class based solely on the concern of "is this is the most powerful class I can play from levels 1-20?"
Put another way, players often have their own idiosyncratic reasons for choosing classes.
Here would be my list for how I choose (and exclude) classes:
1. To start with, I almost always think of a character concept first, and then figure out how I can make the character concept work using the class framework. What class is "close enough" to the idea in my head?
2. For that reason, I usually start with the concept, and then see if I can single-class (either with or without feats) or if I have to multiclass to make the concept work.
3. However, I do have some general rules that I've noticed I tend to follow in terms of picking classes:
A. No bards, obviously.
B. Also, I hate playing spellcasters. The one exception is Warlocks. So in addition to no bards, I'd add no sorcerers and no wizards. I might play a druid or cleric, but probably not.
That's five classes out. Six if you count the artificer, but you shouldn't.
C. From the classes that are left, I have a preference for martials that don't cast spells or have very limited spellcasting. Monks, Rogues, and Fighters.
D. I've never really like any of the Barbarian archetypes presented ... probably a holdover from 1e. So then Ranger and Paladin. And then Barbarian.
And that's it. It's not really about power, it's about preference. If I had to rank the classes, I'd rank them in order:
Monk
Warlock
Fighter/Rogue
Ranger
Paladin
Barbarian
Druid
Cleric
And I don't like playing the other classes. Why? Because I'm me.
Lord_Blacksteel
Adventurer
Every class can have some heavy "DM and Campaign" dependencies as can multiclassing. There may be limits on using spells from other books. There may be limits on particular subclasses. Are we playing a dungeon heavy campaign, one with a lot of cross-country travel/hexcrawling, or a social-heavy single-city campaign?
We don't play the game in a vacuum so analyzing classes purely on white-room math is kind of a pointless exercise.
Similar Threads
