It was a joke. I find them quite deadly - deadly-dull. ;P
Seriously, though (somewhat seriously) they are the choice-poor, stereotypical 'simple for beginners' class.
Yeah, I can see that. OTOH a lot of 5E classes really do have a lot of stuff to juggle. Playing a Paladin, I kept forgetting that Channel Divinity even existed.
Each dragon that has a DC 19+ save-for-1/2 breath weapon also has a same-DC fear effect, for example.
Only the gold dragon. The others have a lower fear DC, usually 2 or 3 points lower; more for the white dragon.
I just printed out the monsters-by-CR chart and wrote down all the DCs for CR 15+ monsters since we were discussing it on this thread.
Then there's NPC and monster casters at those levels.
The monster spellcasters do get high DCs ... at
very high levels.
--
The spellcaster vampire (CR 15) is only DC 15. Mummy lord (CR 15 or 16 in lair) is DC 17. The planetar (CR 16) is a scary DC 20, but it's not as likely a foe for most PCs as the other two.
The death knight and androsphinx are both CR 17, DC 18.
The pit fiend (CR 20) is DC 21.
The lich (CR 21 or 22 in lair) is DC 20. The solar (CR 21) is a terrifying DC 25... but again, a less likely foe.
The empyrean (CR 23) is DC 23.
--
If there's a problem here, it's giving overly high DCs to the good creatures. The others seem pretty reasonable, with only the pit fiend borderline (CR 21+ creatures are supposed to be crazy hard).
3 ASI's split among 3 stats is a +1 mod in each stat. Hardly that significant. Of course, your class-relevant score could be DEX or WIS, and you likely /are/ proficient in one of those saves.
Yeah, I was taking that into account. Also, it's not so much the ASI by itself but the combined effects of ASIs and other benefits (racial advantage on certain saves, class features granting proficiency/advantage on certain saves, magic items like ring of evasion, ring of protection, or amulet of health, spells like bless...)
I think part of it comes down to what level means. 5e seems to mostly be built around the idea that (except for hit points and basic combat), leveling means you get better at what you're good at, only. Past editions have made more concessions to the idea that you also get better at ancillary things, especially adventuring-related ones
Yeah, I agree that it is a change. I just think it's a change that works pretty well with 5E's other changes. I certainly see why others would dislike it, but I don't think it's an objectively wrong change - and it doesn't bother me personally.