D&D 5E Which of these UA subclasses do you HATE?

[jgsugden]

None should be an option for this survey.

 

[Tony Vargas]

..... What was I talking about again?

Last I remember, you were saying:

...I want new stuff. I want new stuff that isn’t just a reassembled half-dragon with five chromatic variations. Or a new ooze that has spooky skeleton bits and a new power. Or a new goblin that has bigger ears.

I want something inspired and relatable not something made up to deal x damage and fill out our need. (for a monster that has the letter J at the beginning of it’s name.) I want something that I can use more than once. I do not need a golem formed from Chapstick tubes or a flying subterranean manta ray that smells like swimming pool liner....

…"flying subterranean manta ray" rings a bell, but I can't quite place it...

 

[Sacrosanct]

Unless it's a psion or warlord—then you have to have several threads just to justify them to people that blindly hate them and that still isn't good enough.

There is only one person I ever saw say they actively hated the warlord. “I don’t see a need” doesn’t mean hate. Maybe if some people wouldn’t take anything that isn’t glowing support as “you’re a h4ter!”, maybe there wouldn’t be so much drama.

Otherwise I’m anxious to see all of these people saying they hate the warlord or psion, as opposed to people just disagreeing with you

 

[Wiseblood]

I don't know about others, but I have two issues with it. One is that the True Name mechanic is messy and rife with subjective calls. The other is that it's another attempt to give metamagic type boosting effects to the Wizard when the class is already strong without it. The last attempt, the Loremaster, was rather overpowered and a lot of us are wary of going down that road again.

I would add that it steps on Bardic toes.

 

[cbwjm]

The revived is the only option I hope never sees the light of day, not because I'm against a character returned from the dead but because I think it is terrible as a subclass, especially one you pick up at 3rd level.

 

[Mecheon]

The Swarmkeeper is the least worst, but it clearly would fit the Druid a lot better. As a matter of fact I think the best thing they could do to the Ranger is quit this nonsense about being a "pet warrior". It's got nothing to do with the original Ranger concept, and it's only done harm to the class.

The pet-ranger is a big thing and probably the idea most people are going to come to these days.. You can point some blame at ol' Dritzz for that, but pet rangers has well overtaken the 'original' Ranger concept. Look outside D&D, every Ranger-orientated thing elsewhere has a pet option, with the big behemoth of such being Warcraft's Hunter class

Anywho, I'm completely fine with the Revived as its "Being The Nameless One, the class", but the Onomancer is a bit of a clunky mess

 

[cbwjm]

My nameless one, the class would be either a fighter or a wizard, never a rogue which is why I don't like this as a class. A unique race would be better in my opinion.

 

[Gladius Legis]

Arcane Tradition: Psionics needs to die in a fire.

Everything else ranges from indifference to approval.

 

[Kurotowa]

My nameless one, the class would be either a fighter or a wizard, never a rogue which is why I don't like this as a class. A unique race would be better in my opinion.

That runs into worse problems from the other direction. Either you need to make a subrace variant for every single eligible race or you end up with "Well I was a halfling but then I died and now I'm all big and generically human looking". By bolting it onto Rogue it's open to everyone and can leverage the class's innate focus on skills and tricks.

 

[Son of the Serpent]

Tbh i also voted all. I actually hate 5e classes in general so i wasnt surprised when i found myself hating all this books subclasses.

5e depresses me sometimes.