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

6ENow!

The Game Is Over
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.
No, that's totally cool. I am not (hopefully) implying the other classes be ignored.

My intent was to show which classes perhaps are most deserving of a full rewrite. So far obviously Fighter, Monk, Ranger, and Sorcerer are quite high.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

battlebaby

Villager
I wanted less spellcasting classes.
  • Ranger: Non spellcasting.
  • Artificer: Non spellcasting. Mage Hand Press did an awesome job on the Gadgeteer.
  • Paladin: Non spellcasting, but still magical, though. Maybe add a bunch of blessings (similar to warlock invocations).
  • Rogue: combat combos.
  • Monk: martial arts fighting styles, ki combos.
  • Fighter: more crit chance with weapons, more damage with weapons, more reactions, use reactions to power special defenses and offenses, better second wind, fighting styles aa archetypes.
  • Bard: a real jack of all trades, 2/3 spellcaster, with a full spellcaster archetype.
  • Wizard: make arcane recovery a pool so you can use in small amounts thru the day.
  • Better capstones
  • Full spellcasters: A way to cast high level spells by paying a high price (Exhaustion?!)
  • Spellcasters: be able to switch a small number of prepared spells thru the day.
  • Baseline maneuvers for all, fighter has greater benefits.
 

Phoebasss

Explorer
I voted for warlock, monk, and ranger.

Warlock desperately needs pact of the blade to do something. For non-hexblades, and arguably even for hexblades, it's just worse than eldritch blast. And I think maybe the sheer number of invocations helping eldritch blast should be toned back as well, but the main issue is short rests. Warlocks are way too dependent on the short rest that never happens. Just triple their spells per day or something. They have an interesting and unique casting system, but that system doesn't work as is. Half the time you literally get two spells a day.

Monk's Way of the Four elements is damaged beyond repair and Ki needs to work differently. Some things should just be class features and not tied to ki, but as is basically everything monk can do is tied to that one resource.

Ranger has the 5e design problem where if I want to make "cool nature chick who is good at naturey things" the game gives me the power to ... ignore all the effects of nature. So I've been rewarded, but in a way that says instead of interacting with the thing my character concept wants to interact with, I just don't. And it doesn't interact with me. It's a weird decision.
 

Larrin

Entropic Good
Fighter: The class is good, the subclasses are disappointing to me more often than not. Maybe that isn't a good enough reason for me to vote for it, but I've played a couple of fighters that were interesting in spite of their subclasses, not because of it, and that feels like it could be improved.

Monk: Several times I've been playing a monk and asked myself "what am I supposed to be doing". The answer often is "Doing less than others unless you spend chi points every time you can, then you have a 50/50 shot of doing what you want, or doing even less". I've played monks well and been rewarded, but I've played them merely OK and been punished, which is harsher than other classes I feel. Seems like maybe there is some room to make them a little more forgiving and flexible.

Ranger: I'm actually 90% fine with the class as a class (I've seen enough ranger's in play to know their base body will get the job done), but again, the subclasses are a mess. Different from how I see fighters, the ranger really relies on their subclass for a damage mechanism, and each class reinvents the wheel to try and make a competitive damage feature that is unique and flavorful and in the end what you get is a parade of different illustrations of how to make a janky damage mechanic no one really approves of. Seems like there could be some unification or re-tooling of how subclasses contribute to ranger's damage potential.
 

G

Guest 6801328

Guest
I picked Ranger and Druid.

Ranger is just a hot mess.

And Druid is somehow dissatisfying. Maybe deeply so. I think the core problem is that it's built around shapechanging, but only one subclass really does anything with that, which is really just to make it more powerful. Otherwise the only function shapechanging seems to perform is to give the base class so much power that there isn't room for much in the subclasses.
 

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top