D&D 5E What I Don't Like About Subclasses, and Potential Solutions.

Aldarc

Legend
Well, since each moving part is smaller (the games goes to 10th level), there's no real trap option. You can be ultra focused, or be an all-rounder, but in the end it all balances out.
Yeah, Shadow of the Weird Wizard usually presents players with the choice of breadth vs. depth. You can go all in on being a martial warrior or mage specialized in a magical tradition but you can also dabble in other
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Reynard

Legend
Supporter
Another thread got me thinking: 5E subclasses are pretty novel for D&D (even though D&D has used that term before, but referring to specific classes under broader categories). Why are people so set on them? They aren't a sacred cow. They can go.
 

TwoSix

"Diegetics", by L. Ron Gygax
Another thread got me thinking: 5E subclasses are pretty novel for D&D (even though D&D has used that term before, but referring to specific classes under broader categories). Why are people so set on them? They aren't a sacred cow. They can go.
I imagine it's because subclasses are the primary container for a large portion of the mechanical differentiation. If you get rid of them, you've invalidated most pre-existing 5e work and are pretty firmly in "new edition" territory.

Now, I don't know why someone would be attached to them in the context of "Let's brainstorm a 6e". But removing them moves you firmly away from "roughly compatible with 5e". At best, even using the rest of the 5e chassis, you're into an "alternate PHB with all new classes".
 

CreamCloud0

One day, I hope to actually play DnD.
Another thread got me thinking: 5E subclasses are pretty novel for D&D (even though D&D has used that term before, but referring to specific classes under broader categories). Why are people so set on them? They aren't a sacred cow. They can go.
but why do they need to go? they're very useful for providing multiple decently portioned avenues to customise a class without either making them as entirely new classes or designing a half-dozen individual feats that need to be cross-referenced for balance with every other feat
 

Reynard

Legend
Supporter
but why do they need to go? they're very useful for providing multiple decently portioned avenues to customise a class without either making them as entirely new classes or designing a half-dozen individual feats that need to be cross-referenced for balance with every other feat
The first 12 pages of this thread go into why, but the short version (for me) is that they are convoluted and don't actually add much to the game that, say, talent trees wouldn't add (and talent trees would at least provide some choices).
 

Scribe

Legend
Another thread got me thinking: 5E subclasses are pretty novel for D&D (even though D&D has used that term before, but referring to specific classes under broader categories). Why are people so set on them? They aren't a sacred cow. They can go.

For a lot of people 5e is now formative. A decade in a hobby is a very long time, especially when the average age has dropped considerably. In short, its a sacred cow to the demographic of 5e players.
 


Another thread got me thinking: 5E subclasses are pretty novel for D&D (even though D&D has used that term before, but referring to specific classes under broader categories). Why are people so set on them? They aren't a sacred cow. They can go.
They're one more customization element in the character creation process. No one wants to play a cookie cutter class that doesn't offer something that can set their character apart from others of the same class.
 


Reynard

Legend
Supporter
They're one more customization element in the character creation process. No one wants to play a cookie cutter class that doesn't offer something that can set their character apart from others of the same class.
Except all the people playing OSR games and Dragonbane and Shadowdark and ....
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top