log in or register to remove this ad

 

Level Up (A5E) Which Classes Need "The Most Help" in an Advanced 5E

Which class do you think needs the most help in making it for an Advanced 5E?

  • Artificier

    Votes: 3 3.4%
  • Barbarian

    Votes: 5 5.7%
  • Bard

    Votes: 4 4.6%
  • Cleric

    Votes: 2 2.3%
  • Druid

    Votes: 8 9.2%
  • Fighter

    Votes: 29 33.3%
  • Monk

    Votes: 40 46.0%
  • Paladin

    Votes: 2 2.3%
  • Ranger

    Votes: 73 83.9%
  • Rogue

    Votes: 5 5.7%
  • Sorcerer

    Votes: 31 35.6%
  • Warlock

    Votes: 16 18.4%
  • Wizard

    Votes: 3 3.4%

  • Total voters
    87

DND_Reborn

I don't debate opinions.
Given the enormous amount of feedback on the Advanced "High Level Fighter" thread, I was curious as to what classes you feel need the most help in making them crunchy enough for an Advanced 5E?

For myself, obviously, I can see changes to them all, but the purpose of this poll is to try to determine which ones need the MOST help in getting to where you think they should be.

Please note: you are allowed 3 votes.

Thanks you for participating!
 

log in or register to remove this ad

vincegetorix

Jewel of the North
Given the enormous amount of feedback on the Advanced "High Level Fighter" thread, I was curious as to what classes you feel need the most help in making them crunchy enough for an Advanced 5E?

For myself, obviously, I can see changes to them all, but the purpose of this poll is to try to determine which ones need the MOST help in getting to where you think they should be.

Please note: you are allowed 3 votes.

Thanks you for participating!

I did not vote for fighter, because I think that once we are set on a idea of a high level fighter, it will resolves itself: fighters are not lacking in power or mechanically advantages, they are lacking in theme and in-setting reasons.

Instead I voted for:

Ranger: Contrary to the fighter, the Ranger is lacking in mostly everything. The theme isnt well defined: a half-caster? A mundane survivalist? Defends the wild from civilization or defends civilization from the wild? Furthermore, its spells are bad, they do not have damage boosting feature ala Paladin if you do not want to use your spells as spells. They override the entire pillars they are supposed to be good at instead of being really good at it. Its a mess. Oh and also: the weapon techniques from the Hunter should have been modular options for all martial instead.

Monk: Much like the Ranger. They need to spend a semi-restrictive resource just to keep up with the rest of the martial character. Their archetypes arent balanced in the slightest. Their theme is both Cliché and Passé: its belongs to my father's kung-fu movies. There's a definite place for martial artist, but kung-fu panda meet ninja turtles meets kill Bill is not it. Their martial features could be given to all martial as modular options. If you need a full class for ''unarmored/unarmed fighting'', you are doing unarmed fighting wrong, just like you dont need a grappler class.

Druid: not weak per se, but wildshape is over-valued for non-moon druid. Its design space, which occupy a large portion of the druid's progression could be used for something more generally beneficial.
 

I voted for wizard & artificer because it's forced towards bland & uninteresting glass cannon DPR by the overuse of concentration & pretty much nonoption that the force multiplier that used to be a god wizard.

Artificer has the secondary problem as an actual half caster with tricks it's more impacted by the loss if those tricks aren't DPR because it doesn't bring enough force multiplier or save or suck/save or lose to the table where the player can bargain/telegraph intent in order to get cooperation from the party.
 

I did not vote for fighter, because I think that once we are set on a idea of a high level fighter, it will resolves itself: fighters are not lacking in power or mechanically advantages, they are lacking in theme and in-setting reasons.

Instead I voted for:

Ranger: Contrary to the fighter, the Ranger is lacking in mostly everything. The theme isnt well defined: a half-caster? A mundane survivalist? Defends the wild from civilization or defends civilization from the wild? Furthermore, its spells are bad, they do not have damage boosting feature ala Paladin if you do not want to use your spells as spells. They override the entire pillars they are supposed to be good at instead of being really good at it. Its a mess. Oh and also: the weapon techniques from the Hunter should have been modular options for all martial instead.

Monk: Much like the Ranger. They need to spend a semi-restrictive resource just to keep up with the rest of the martial character. Their archetypes arent balanced in the slightest. Their theme is both Cliché and Passé: its belongs to my father's kung-fu movies. There's a definite place for martial artist, but kung-fu panda meet ninja turtles meets kill Bill is not it. Their martial features could be given to all martial as modular options. If you need a full class for ''unarmored/unarmed fighting'', you are doing unarmed fighting wrong, just like you dont need a grappler class.

Druid: not weak per se, but wildshape is over-valued for non-moon druid. Its design space, which occupy a large portion of the druid's progression could be used for something more generally beneficial.
Well, I happen to like Kung Fu Panda, TMNT, and Kill Bill, but I agree that we are doing unarmed fighting wrong. I can't believe there's no fighting style supporting it, and no means to be an effective unarmed combatant that doesn't include the monk's baggage.
 

Druid, monk and ranger. These are the least played at any table that I know. I may have trouble finding players for sorcerers and warlocks, but this is more of a players' preference than a lack of power. The three above, however, are lacking a bit in a few areas.
 

vincegetorix

Jewel of the North
I happen to like Kung Fu Panda, TMNT, and Kill Bill

So do I, so do I, but a full class for it? Nha.

I think unarmed/unarmored combat should be playstyle made available to a group of classes by the way of archetypes:
Fighter's martial artist (ala open hand)
Rogue's way of shadow (3.X Shadowdancers)
Barbarian brawler
Bard battle dancer OR jester (inspired by the drunken monk, perform-as-combat)
Paladin oath of asceticism (3.X Sacred fist)
Wizard Wu-jen tradition (spell-fist + elemental binding)
Ranger Wilder (beast-man, wolf-boy style combat)
Sorcerer giant origin (gish-y sorcerer that grows in size and smash stuff)
Artificer Armorer (from the UA, fight with its improved magical armor)
Druid circle of the oak (gain tree like features and punch stuff with you branches-fists)

I cant seem to find an idea for the Warlock, but I'm pretty sure there's at least one Magical Girl inspiration of a character that made a pact with thing and became able to do magical martial art stuff. :p
 

Eltab

Lord of the Hidden Layer
Ranger, especially making pets effective -and- Favored Terrain / Favored Enemy features that are useful both for exploration and in combat. Possibly a way to Tarzan-like summon / communicate / command random small creatures in the vicinity.

Monk - magic items to help with to-hit and DPR. Can be as simple as Brass Knuckles +1 but should have flavor. Should the 4 Elements spellcaster be a big feature? replaced? expanded?

Druid - from the original thread, a simplified option where you keep your basic stats in wild shape (as in 4e) but gain attack / defense / movement options.
 

ThatGuySteve

Explorer
Fighter - needs something beyond combat feature, combat feature, combat feature. Some of the subclasses handle this by giving the fighter a place in the world, like Samurai and Cavalier, but others are very bland.

Druid - wildshape seems to quickly become useless for non - moon druids. If rather see wildshape become exclusive to the subclass and have some new ones with an animal companion or familiar instead. A dedicated shape-shifting class would be nice too, but not necessarily nature themed, I'd like an unnatural shape-shifter powered by Great Old One magic, all tentacles and slime.

Warlock - let there be some variety in the cantrip you use evert round, don't make all the booster invocations only work on Eldrich Blast.
 

Eltab

Lord of the Hidden Layer
On that last line of thought...
Warlock cantrips that gum up the enemy with conditions, so your friends (or Patron?) can deal with them more easily. Ex: target loses 'Resist non-magical weapons' or Ex: target speed is halved.
 

Warlock needs to stop being a deck of barely related munchkinized abilities devouring the design space of other casters masquerading as a class and be pulled into some form of cohesive class or just get dumped
 

Dausuul

Legend
I picked the warlock and the monk. They are fine if the DM is careful about following the DMG guidelines for short and long rests. But this is an additional and unnecessary burden on the DM. Running a campaign is enough work as it is; the DM should not also be tasked with stage-managing the adventure to ensure that two out of 13 classes get their naps.
 

ScuroNotte

Explorer
Ranger - the class resonates failure

Sorcerer - few metamagic gained and selection times are far apart. Too few spells known. Sorcery points are the main focus/power of the class, much as Monks ki, but the pool is extremely limited and they are needed to regain spell slots, meta magic, and subclass features.
 

Raith5

Adventurer
I like warlocks but i agree that they need some small tweaks to have an extra spell in mid to high levels and push them to consider using a cantrip other than Eldritch blast.

Aside from the ranger the bard is the class that I find hardest to work. I think the spell list is thematically on point but quite weak in terms of actual impact - especially in combat. Some of the abilities like song of rest scale very badly. I think they need some spells/songs which are limited to the bard class. They also need more cantrips which can help in combat.
 

I like warlocks but i agree that they need some small tweaks to have an extra spell in mid to high levels and push them to consider using a cantrip other than Eldritch blast.

Aside from the ranger the bard is the class that I find hardest to work. I think the spell list is thematically on point but quite weak in terms of actual impact - especially in combat. Some of the abilities like song of rest scale very badly. I think they need some spells/songs which are limited to the bard class. They also need more cantrips which can help in combat.

Eldritch blast needs to decide if it's a cantrip that scales by char level with extra dice or a class feature that scales by class level and be balanced accordingly rather than the best of both. Currently it's effectively 1d10+cha force 120ft range with better attack scaling than fighter extra attack on top of a far better damage type and scaling by character level to get additional attack rolls for better odds than every other cantrip after 5th unlike every other class's extra attacks ability.
 


Xeviat

Hero
I voted Ranger, Sorcerer, and Monk, but would have also voted Fighter, Druid, and Warlock if I had a chance.

My thoughts:

Ranger: the ranger needs a more firm identity, and a unique class ability. Skills becoming universal things in 3E robbed the Ranger of their uniqueness. I do want spellcasting to be a ranger's thing, and I've always thought a pet would be a way to make the ranger stand out more unique from Scout Rogues, but many disagree. Giving them a major class ability built around the idea of hunting a target, and possibly taking away their extra attack to help pay for abilities and make them more of a rogue, would be ideal to me.

Sorcerer: The sorcerer needs to feel better. Metamagic could easily be an option for all casters (and just cost higher level spell slots), while sorcerers have the advantage of spending sorcery points. But, their core features should be gaining unique abilities to make them feel like a magical creature: more dragon stuff, more wildmagic stuff, more spoopy stuff.

Monk: I think the Monk needs to be rebuilt as a spellpoint using half-caster, with options for their ki powers. This would allow monks to be built along a spectrum of more grounded to more fantastical. So many of the monks abilities are ways to spend ki, but casters get abilities in addition to their spell slots.

Fighter: the fighter needs identity. They're mechanically strong, but they really need identity. They could also benefit from having more power moved from their Subclasses to the base class, but I understand the desire for a 'simple fighter'.

Warlock: the warlock and the sorcerer share too much identity. I think the warlock needs a stronger tie to hexes and curses to make them feel like they're getting and giving something in their pact.
 

I voted Ranger, Sorcerer, and Monk, but would have also voted Fighter, Druid, and Warlock if I had a chance.

My thoughts:

Ranger: the ranger needs a more firm identity, and a unique class ability. Skills becoming universal things in 3E robbed the Ranger of their uniqueness. I do want spellcasting to be a ranger's thing, and I've always thought a pet would be a way to make the ranger stand out more unique from Scout Rogues, but many disagree. Giving them a major class ability built around the idea of hunting a target, and possibly taking away their extra attack to help pay for abilities and make them more of a rogue, would be ideal to me.

Sorcerer: The sorcerer needs to feel better. Metamagic could easily be an option for all casters (and just cost higher level spell slots), while sorcerers have the advantage of spending sorcery points. But, their core features should be gaining unique abilities to make them feel like a magical creature: more dragon stuff, more wildmagic stuff, more spoopy stuff.

Monk: I think the Monk needs to be rebuilt as a spellpoint using half-caster, with options for their ki powers. This would allow monks to be built along a spectrum of more grounded to more fantastical. So many of the monks abilities are ways to spend ki, but casters get abilities in addition to their spell slots.

Fighter: the fighter needs identity. They're mechanically strong, but they really need identity. They could also benefit from having more power moved from their Subclasses to the base class, but I understand the desire for a 'simple fighter'.

Warlock: the warlock and the sorcerer share too much identity. I think the warlock needs a stronger tie to hexes and curses to make them feel like they're getting and giving something in their pact.

I agree a lot on monk. It's bending over so hard to be a faithful representation of a 70s/80s david carradine/bruce lee kung fu movie character that it has trouble even kinda representing any other magic/mystic ninja samurai whatever & it really doesn't fit very well among the other classes either.
edit: This reminds me of watching a player describe the classes in general terms to a younger player joining an AL game.
20-30something player: Monk is kinda like a bruce lee
10-12ish year old: who?
20-30something player: jackie chan?
10-12ish year old: -vacant state
different player: Lee from Naruto
10-12ish year old: cool which class is like $character from naruto followed by a lot of back & forth not really but sorta kinda maybe some similarity to any if you squint hard enough.
 
Last edited:

vincegetorix

Jewel of the North
Monk: I think the Monk needs to be rebuilt as a spellpoint using half-caster, with options for their ki powers. This would allow monks to be built along a spectrum of more grounded to more fantastical. So many of the monks abilities are ways to spend ki, but casters get abilities in addition to their spell slots.

I wish the theme of the monk was expanded to the general wuxia/anime martial artist/JRPG character and other unarmored but weapon wielding characters. Remove the forced unarmed fighting thing and allow them to use different weapon. I would also ignore the whole: use DEX for weapon. but not all of them: have their armorless feature give them a flat AC bonus when unarmored.
  • Gain +2 or 3 AC when unarmored, can still use shields (to allow for the 300's Spartans or LoZ's Link build). No AC bonus added by Wis.
  • Techniques DC based on their Wis mod.
  • This would make them reliant on 2 stats, like most gish-y character, with Con being an important third stat. You could go with Dex build to boost your AC and use smaller weapon, or go Str and have a lower AC but use bigger weapons.

High str, Medium dex, con, wis could be Link, Cloud, or any sohei with an halberd, or a gladiators.
High dex, Medium str, con, wis could be a duelist or swashbucker, you traditional ninja or two-daggers dancer.

Make them not based of the old trope of mystical ascetic martial artist, but more as characters that use their fighting style as a way of life.
 

Asisreo

Fiendish Attorney
I know that nobody complains about Druids because wow! Druid is so tanky and powerful when moon! but, honestly, why is the Druid's main form usually as an animal? Druids should be less beastboy and more Dryad. I get that they're good mechanically but what their flavor is supposed to be versus what the class portrays feels like 2 completely different things.

There shouldn't even be any debate whether a martial can tank better than a druid. A druid should always get their teeth knocked in even in wildshape during melee.
 

CapnZapp

Legend
I voted Ranger and Sorcerer.

They're the only two PHB classes that desperately need help.

That doesn't mean Level Up should ignore other classes. You asked which classes need help the most. Beastmasters and Wild Mages are the only two subclasses I consider unplayable out of the book.

Sure Berserker Barbarians and Four Elements Monks are mechanically unsound as well, and Land Druids are weaker than Moon Druids, and so on, but not to the extent of the problems of those Ranger and Sorcerer subclasses.
 

Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top