D&D 5E Understanding WOTC's class design guidelines and subclass acquisition

[Paul Farquhar]

One example of a subclass that breaks rule #2 "without gaining abilities that you stop using" is the Battlerager from SCAG. Interpreted RAW, if you wear the spiked armor required to use most of the subclass abilities you cannot use the core class ability "Unarmored Defence".

Now, I believe that most people allow the UAD armor class to be used if it is better than the armor class you would get from the armor you are wearing, but RAW wearing armor deactivates the power.

 

[cbwjm]

Except the barbarian might have been wearing armour anyway. Using unarmoured defence or wearing armour is a choice you make, sometimes it's better to be wearing armour, a barbarian that only has a +2 con modifier benefits from wearing a chain shirt, for instance.

 

[Kurotowa]

All this tells us is WotC ignores it's own rules.

In art, rules are made to be broken. You see it in all the great works. The key is to break them in intentional and calculated ways, rather than clumsy and ignorant ones. That difference is the difference between blazing a new trail and wandering off a cliff.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Except the barbarian might have been wearing armour anyway. Using unarmoured defence or wearing armour is a choice you make, sometimes it's better to be wearing armour, a barbarian that only has a +2 con modifier benefits from wearing a chain shirt, for instance.

True for vanilla barbarian, but for the Battlerager it is not a choice: if they don't wear a very specific type of armour their subclass abilities are deactivated.

In art, rules are made to be broken. You see it in all the great works. The key is to break them in intentional and calculated ways, rather than clumsy and ignorant ones. That difference is the difference between blazing a new trail and wandering off a cliff.

Indeed, and the Battlerager is an example of "clumsy and ignorant" - it's quite easy to fix, but it shouldn't be up to the DM to fix it, it should have been done before it was printed.

The Revived rogue is another example of "clumsy and ignorant", one that can't so easily be fixed.

 

[Li Shenron]

When coming up with his Vigilante (a.k.a Urban Ranger) subclass (Happy Hour 9/11/18), Mike ran into the problem that the Ranger class itself had no features or options supporting an urban environment. This meant that a player wanting the subclass would be stuck with wilderness abilities that did not fit the concept before finally acquiring the subclass. This meant that the player did not get to play the character concept from the beginning and would then be stuck with unwanted features. Therefore, it broke 1 and 2 in my accumulated list. It would would lead to an "awkward transformation". To rectify the issue, he created new options and a variant feature.

Good food for thoughts, but this last one is plain bogus... of course the Ranger has nothing to do with the urban environment! The Ranger is the character living on the range, at the end of civilized lands or more likely beyond. There might actually be some cities at the end of the world, but living in an urban or civlized environment is the opposite of being a Ranger. Might be there every now and then to report information, but not much else, as a Ranger is supposed to be self-sufficient in everything. The Ranger lacking urban-related features is not a problem, is it's identity.

Mike Mearls being surprised at this is like being surprised the Fighter doesn't have any magic-oriented features or the rogue doesn't have anything about religion... And a player feeling "stuck" with the Ranger being wilderness oriented is just as wrong as a player feeling "stuck" with a Fighter's weapon skills or a Wizard's spellcasting :/

 

[Paul Farquhar]

this is like being surprised the Fighter doesn't have any magic-oriented features

Eldritch Knight?

 

[Thurmas]

Good food for thoughts, but this last one is plain bogus... of course the Ranger has nothing to do with the urban environment! The Ranger is the character living on the range, at the end of civilized lands or more likely beyond. There might actually be some cities at the end of the world, but living in an urban or civlized environment is the opposite of being a Ranger. Might be there every now and then to report information, but not much else, as a Ranger is supposed to be self-sufficient in everything.

Urban doesn't have to be civilized. There are plenty of urban environments that require survival and ranger qualities. Post Apocalyptic Mad Max. The old city under the city in Futurama. The slums and abandoned parts of Baldur's Gate. None of these urban areas fall into the realm of any type of wilderness, yet could still easily support and require the skills of a ranger.

 

[MechaTarrasque]

I am pretty sure poachers have the same incentive as city criminals to develop a language to stay ahead of law enforcement, and "everyone has to poach a little off of the king's land" is pretty cliché in fantasy, so I find the complaints about scout rogues and thieves cant to be pretty weak.

 

[MechaTarrasque]

Urban doesn't have to be civilized. There are plenty of urban environments that require survival and ranger qualities. Post Apocalyptic Mad Max. The old city under the city in Futurama. The slums and abandoned parts of Baldur's Gate. None of these urban areas fall into the realm of any type of wilderness, yet could still easily support and require the skills of a ranger.

Maybe it should be the urban blight ranger instead of the urban ranger.

 

[tetrasodium]

Maybe it should be the urban blight ranger instead of the urban ranger.

Sharn, Thronehold, anywhere in Zilargo where The Trust maintains order, any of the SK rules or free cities in darksun, freaking sigil... Just because FR only has little nothing villages & lawless wilderness doesn't mean it's the same in every other setting. Urban adventures don't always mean "blight",plenty of shady & downright awful stuff happens in the light of day by respectable folks following the letter of the law in settings that differ from FR, The tenancy to impose that FR baseline in so much of 5e is a detriment to the system & it's ability to fit anywhere else