D&D (2024) What classes have improved the most from 2014 to 2024? (+)

[Blue]

Sorry folks, Ranger being missing was just an oversight. I've added it now.

I was about to vote, but then I noticed the list was incomplete. So I’ll hold off until all 12 classes are represented.

I wanted to select ranger but it's mysteriously not on the list. I don't like the way Hunter's Mark is incorporated but I do think it's a significant improvement over the 2014 version.

Ranger is technically the most improved by FAR if you are comparing to 2014 PHB, but not improved at all if you count Tasha's as the version to compare to.

I do think the Ranger is quite improved and it's odd it was left off.

 

[Mistwell]

Agreed, also by adding Path of the World Tree to give a support / battlefield control option instead of just damage damage damage.

I hate though how Brutal Critical was such an awful ability and they arguably made it even worse. Brutal Strike could be good in certain scenarios but giving up Advantage on your attack means you're generally better off not using it at all. Brutal Critical was rightly ridiculed as being terrible, but at least you automatically got the tiny bonus and weren't actively penalizing yourself by using it

After Treantmonk crunched the numbers, brutal strike came out better than expected. Better than Reckless Attack with some combinations like Charger feat, almost equal even without that but with more control.

 

[Hatmatter]

Yeah I did a double take.

I do think the Ranger is quite improved and it's odd it was left off.

I agree. I think the Ranger is a thoughtful and clever revision. I was trying to digest everyone's criticism of it and I followed a few of the points, but then I listened to Chris's evaluation of the class at Treantmonk's Temple here and he rightly points out how the class is designed to bring out fighting styles (dual weapon and ranged weapon) and qualities (skill expert, tracker, mobile hunter) associated with the ranger, especially through the judicious selection of weapon mastery with a weapon that has the nick quality in conjunction with Hunter's Mark, and it hit me about how well-designed the class is...especially after one sees how few of the Ranger spells actually require concentration (meaning there is little conflict with Hunter's Mark). The class doesn't tell you that you must design a character a particular way, but it offers choices that encourage a design that makes the character feel like...a Ranger.

Anyway, the Ranger is a great redesign...as is the Paladin.

Overall, I like the 2024 revision quite a bit. I just hope there is some effort put into helping players with role-playing in future publications, as I miss the traits, bonds, flaws, etc. that helped facilitate characterization. I did like the (small) effort put into using alignment to address personality. I am glad that alignment is being retained and used.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

From base 2014: ranger and monk and sorcerer by far.
Ranger from tasha's, still a big imorovement. Just not as obviously.

Fighters got way more versatile. All subclasses are great now.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

After Treantmonk crunched the numbers, brutal strike came out better than expected. Better than Reckless Attack with some combinations like Charger feat, almost equal even without that but with more control.

I think it would be fine if you just gave up advantage from reckless strike. It feels bad for the berserker especially if they give up advantage on their attacks and also allow enemies to hit them woth advantage.
Going by treantmonk's analysis, the base barbarian is a bit down in damage in tier 3. Probably allowing them to retain advantage on brutal strikes if they already had it would close the gap.

 

[Mistwell]

I agree. I think the Ranger is a thoughtful and clever revision. I was trying to digest everyone's criticism of it and I followed a few of the points, but then I listened to Chris's evaluation of the class at Treantmonk's Temple here and he rightly points out how the class is designed to bring out fighting style's (dual weapon and ranged weapon) and qualities (skill expert, tracker, mobile hunter) associated with the ranger, especially through the judicious selection of weapon mastery with a weapon that has the nick quality in conjunction with Hunter's Mark, and it hit me about how well-designed the class is...especially after one sees how few of the Ranger spells actually require concentration (meaning there is little conflict with Hunter's Mark). The class doesn't tell you that you must design a character a particular way, but it offers choices that encourage a design that makes the character feel like...a Ranger.

Anyway, the Ranger is a great redesign...as is the Paladin.

Overall, I like the 2024 revision quite a bit. I just hope there is some effort put into helping players with role-playing in future publications, as I miss the traits, bonds, flaws, etc. that helped facilitate characterization. I did like the (small) effort put into using alignment to address personality. I am glad that alignment is being retained and used.

I agree I liked bonds, ideals and flaws. We used them for Inspiration. I guess fewer people used all those things.

 

[Horwath]

I agree I liked bonds, ideals and flaws. We used them for Inspiration. I guess fewer people used all those things.

I liked them as guidelines for creating character concepts and how to roleplay your character. but I never liked the idea of getting inspiration for "good" roleplay.

If you roleplayed some scene very good any advantages should be tied to that, I.E. if you come up with a good story there is an advantage on your Deception/Persuasion/Intimidation check or if you managed to get sneaky there is an advantage to your next attack.

just because you told a good story does not mean you get a reroll on an attack you make 13hrs later that has not connection to that scene whatsoever.

 

[Clint_L]

In addition to the obvious ones Monk, Sorcerer, Fighter, and Warlock - I think people are sleeping on Druid (so much better scaling for moon druid) and Rogue (subclasses are actually useful now, and reliable talent comes online much earlier).

Ranger is technically the most improved by FAR if you are comparing to 2014 PHB, but not improved at all if you count Tasha's as the version to compare to.

Moon druid is so much worse than before. Druids are so much worse than before, IMO. This is the one class where I think WotC took a massive step backwards. They are way more complicated and still don't capture the essence of what druids have become in popular culture, even in their own products.

They should have watched their own movie and made that druid.

The correct answer to the poll is, of course, monk, and then it's an argument about which class is a distant second in terms of improvement.

 

[mellored]

Brutal Strike could be good in certain scenarios but giving up Advantage on your attack means you're generally better off not using it at all.

I think it would be fine if you just gave up advantage from reckless strike. It feels bad for the berserker especially if they give up advantage on their attacks and also allow enemies to hit them woth advantage.

I think your missing the extra d10 damage.

2d6+4+4 = 15 *.84 (advantage) = 12.6 damage.
Vs
2d6+4+4+1d10= 20.5 * .6 = 12.3 (+ Push).

Barely any difference in average damage, for the additional effect.

Also worth noting that you can pick each attack. Make one with advantage (get the beserker bonus damage), then use the second to push. Possibly 3rd attack if you TWF, 4 with dual wielder feat.

What could be really fun is a whip (slow 10) + Slasher (slow 10) + Hamstring (slow 15). And the beserker damage boost still means you're dealing plenty of damage.

 

[mellored]

Moon druid is so much worse than before. Druids are so much worse than before, IMO. This is the one class where I think WotC took a massive step backwards. They are way more complicated and still don't capture the essence of what druids have become in popular culture, even in their own products.

How is it more complicated?

You don't have to wonder when death ward triggers anymore.

You don't get a stupid amount of HP at level 2 and then barely scale, and then for some reason go from a bear to an earth elemental, and then suddenly become invincible.

Lower level forms are more viable at higher levels as things scale more by class level and less by beast level.

And you can trade spell slots for more wild shape.

They should have watched their own movie and made that druid.

You mean being able to transform multiple times in a row without having to go back to human form? You can do that now.

Or do you mean owl bear? Because I see no reason that couldn't be a beast IMO.