June 8th 2013 Playtest: Class Thoughts(now largely outdated)
Jul 25, 2013 11:55:27 GMT -8
Post by rickno7 on Jul 25, 2013 11:55:27 GMT -8
Going through the classes so far is the easiest way for me to get started with discussing the June 8th playtest. I see both things I like and things I think need some work. To talk about the classes I figured you would have to actually read about the classes in the playtest, so this makes for a less generalized thread in the "what do you think so far?" department.
Feel free to reply to some or all of them, discuss just the ones your familiar with or all of them, what you'd like to see or what you'd like to change. But please reply with an informed opinion. Read the playtest. Please no "I don't know how they work in 5th, but if they don't work like 2nd Ed with a Elves book Kit, then its bullshit".
In the order they are presented.
Barbarian
You know, it looks pretty standard to me. I never had a lot of Barbarian usage in my 3.X games, but it does not look too different in feel and even ability. Sure it uses the new advantage/disadvantage thing, but the class abilities rely on sacrificing protection for damage. I would like to see more skills with huge disadvantages to wearing armors of any type. I just feel like Barbarian should be the glass canon of the melee world. Also, I have seen some takes at Conan where he has special anti-faith abilities since he liked to kill priests so damn much. Being able to shrug off cleric spells or perhaps not be fully affected even by the good ones would add some flavor... but perhaps that's more of a setting specific idea.
Cleric
I like that the domain they choose does more than just affect the spells offered, but also alters the way they channel their energy. I would like to see some branching lines of the cleric, much like the Fighter. A cleric that forsakes armor for stronger spells, the "priest". A cleric that focuses on confessions and maybe mind tactics, an "inquisitor". That might be too much, as the domains do offer some customization already.
Druid
Fair warning, I have never been a fan of the druids. I have always thought they were too close to nature domained clerics. At first I read the "circle" initiate thing and thought "great, just more domains of cleric", but then I saw that it is robustly different than Domains. Domains alter the channel divinity and cantrip choices, while Circles affect what you can shape shift into, grants you a number of prepared spells at other levels that don't count toward your total. If shape shifting is the way they want to make Druids more than just nature clerics, I'm all for it. What would I like to see? A sort of combo system maybe? Like shifting from one creature to another during combat opens up other options. Cobra to poison, bear to overwhelm, and if you get both of those: Tiger to maul on the prone and weakened opponent.
Fighter
What can I say, I love the D&D Next Fighter. Its like they spent a lot of time on them and are now balancing what makes a class by what they've done with the fighter. Expertise is a cool kind of Wild Dice that you pick and choose when and where to use, and then you go down a branching set of skill paths that let you use the Expertise(wild) dice in other ways, like a form of currency. I hope every class gets the kinds of options and neat unique mechanics that Fighters get.
Monk
I like what I see. You get to choose a tradition, which I am sure can be expanded upon depending on your setting. I would like to see some more rock, paper, scissors on the abilities though. I want 2 monk masters to oppose each other and use skills specifically set up against other monk skills. All the great kung fu movies have styles that counter styles, and its a great kind of chess match.
Paladin
Things look pretty standard to me. If you liked 3.X paladins, I don't see you hating 5th paladins. Using the Channel Divine energy thing does the same for clerics, solves the problem of almost all of them being Lawful Good. I do wish they would give some Channel Divine skills that specifically work with a unique "yours only" sword. You could make them more powerful, but with the caveat that you MUST use your specific divine blessed blade to do it. But then again I always favored the sword over a special mount.
Ranger
Ranger is my class... and I do not like what they've done so far. They seem woefully boring compared to Fighters and Druids. They are almost in the same boat as Barbarians, meaning their class is not nearly as unique and specialized as some of the others. I like that the Favored Enemy is made more broad... but then they have Dragons as one also. Why not serpents with an emphasis on the monstrous kind? Track also seems almost useless with today's set of skills easily allowing people to roll to see if you find tracks, to roll knowledge to see what creature it was, etc etc. Track needs a new benefit. What I would do is work on the favored enemy aspect. Allow that to dictate if you have a blade wielding ranger or a bow wielding ranger. Broaden the enemy into not only species but tactics. Maybe your favored enemy are those that attack with Stealth. Maybe your favored enemy are those that are winged and/or can fly.
Rogue
Ok, the Rogue's Schemes look like what I want to see done with the Ranger. Their choices are broad and many, and it focuses on a play style, not just a race type. I know rogues are passionate about their class so I won't say much about it here, I'm not a rogue player generally so I'll let someone else speak for them.
Wizard
Yawn. I think the most innovative thing to happen to wizards in the past 30 years was the introduction of Sorcerers. I know many spells in D&D are sacred, but I think maybe they should stay where they belong: in Greyhawk. Let's throw the book out and re-evaluate the spells in D&D. Give us something new, something exciting. You can keep the traditional ones too, but magic in D&D needs some new life in it. Also Wizard Schools are cool, maybe they'll give us some more by the time this all goes to print, but have you seen some of the cool stuff they do with wizards lately? Those staff mages in Hellfrost are AWESOME, the staff is like an extension of the wizard's soul, its like the one ring where they are more poweful for having it, but if they lose it, they lose a bit of themselves too. I'm not saying copy that, but be more exciting with the choices beyond just "evocation school".
Choices are great and all, but now I'm starting to see a pattern. While the fighter gets something neat and unique to play with; Clerics, Druids, Monks, Paladins, Rogues and Wizards just seem to choose their domain and gain or lose abilities based on that.
Also, to elaborate on my rogue vs ranger thoughts:
Rogues choose their Scheme based on how THEY deal with NPC's.
I think Rangers should choose their Favored Enemy based on how NPC's deal with PC's.
This is not out of the blue, the "Brute Hunter" option already talks about taking on humanoids that attack in large numbers. Take that and run with it.
As it sits right now, I think I want to play a fighter very very badly.
Feel free to reply to some or all of them, discuss just the ones your familiar with or all of them, what you'd like to see or what you'd like to change. But please reply with an informed opinion. Read the playtest. Please no "I don't know how they work in 5th, but if they don't work like 2nd Ed with a Elves book Kit, then its bullshit".
In the order they are presented.
Barbarian
You know, it looks pretty standard to me. I never had a lot of Barbarian usage in my 3.X games, but it does not look too different in feel and even ability. Sure it uses the new advantage/disadvantage thing, but the class abilities rely on sacrificing protection for damage. I would like to see more skills with huge disadvantages to wearing armors of any type. I just feel like Barbarian should be the glass canon of the melee world. Also, I have seen some takes at Conan where he has special anti-faith abilities since he liked to kill priests so damn much. Being able to shrug off cleric spells or perhaps not be fully affected even by the good ones would add some flavor... but perhaps that's more of a setting specific idea.
Cleric
I like that the domain they choose does more than just affect the spells offered, but also alters the way they channel their energy. I would like to see some branching lines of the cleric, much like the Fighter. A cleric that forsakes armor for stronger spells, the "priest". A cleric that focuses on confessions and maybe mind tactics, an "inquisitor". That might be too much, as the domains do offer some customization already.
Druid
Fair warning, I have never been a fan of the druids. I have always thought they were too close to nature domained clerics. At first I read the "circle" initiate thing and thought "great, just more domains of cleric", but then I saw that it is robustly different than Domains. Domains alter the channel divinity and cantrip choices, while Circles affect what you can shape shift into, grants you a number of prepared spells at other levels that don't count toward your total. If shape shifting is the way they want to make Druids more than just nature clerics, I'm all for it. What would I like to see? A sort of combo system maybe? Like shifting from one creature to another during combat opens up other options. Cobra to poison, bear to overwhelm, and if you get both of those: Tiger to maul on the prone and weakened opponent.
Fighter
What can I say, I love the D&D Next Fighter. Its like they spent a lot of time on them and are now balancing what makes a class by what they've done with the fighter. Expertise is a cool kind of Wild Dice that you pick and choose when and where to use, and then you go down a branching set of skill paths that let you use the Expertise(wild) dice in other ways, like a form of currency. I hope every class gets the kinds of options and neat unique mechanics that Fighters get.
Monk
I like what I see. You get to choose a tradition, which I am sure can be expanded upon depending on your setting. I would like to see some more rock, paper, scissors on the abilities though. I want 2 monk masters to oppose each other and use skills specifically set up against other monk skills. All the great kung fu movies have styles that counter styles, and its a great kind of chess match.
Paladin
Things look pretty standard to me. If you liked 3.X paladins, I don't see you hating 5th paladins. Using the Channel Divine energy thing does the same for clerics, solves the problem of almost all of them being Lawful Good. I do wish they would give some Channel Divine skills that specifically work with a unique "yours only" sword. You could make them more powerful, but with the caveat that you MUST use your specific divine blessed blade to do it. But then again I always favored the sword over a special mount.
Ranger
Ranger is my class... and I do not like what they've done so far. They seem woefully boring compared to Fighters and Druids. They are almost in the same boat as Barbarians, meaning their class is not nearly as unique and specialized as some of the others. I like that the Favored Enemy is made more broad... but then they have Dragons as one also. Why not serpents with an emphasis on the monstrous kind? Track also seems almost useless with today's set of skills easily allowing people to roll to see if you find tracks, to roll knowledge to see what creature it was, etc etc. Track needs a new benefit. What I would do is work on the favored enemy aspect. Allow that to dictate if you have a blade wielding ranger or a bow wielding ranger. Broaden the enemy into not only species but tactics. Maybe your favored enemy are those that attack with Stealth. Maybe your favored enemy are those that are winged and/or can fly.
Rogue
Ok, the Rogue's Schemes look like what I want to see done with the Ranger. Their choices are broad and many, and it focuses on a play style, not just a race type. I know rogues are passionate about their class so I won't say much about it here, I'm not a rogue player generally so I'll let someone else speak for them.
Wizard
Yawn. I think the most innovative thing to happen to wizards in the past 30 years was the introduction of Sorcerers. I know many spells in D&D are sacred, but I think maybe they should stay where they belong: in Greyhawk. Let's throw the book out and re-evaluate the spells in D&D. Give us something new, something exciting. You can keep the traditional ones too, but magic in D&D needs some new life in it. Also Wizard Schools are cool, maybe they'll give us some more by the time this all goes to print, but have you seen some of the cool stuff they do with wizards lately? Those staff mages in Hellfrost are AWESOME, the staff is like an extension of the wizard's soul, its like the one ring where they are more poweful for having it, but if they lose it, they lose a bit of themselves too. I'm not saying copy that, but be more exciting with the choices beyond just "evocation school".
Choices are great and all, but now I'm starting to see a pattern. While the fighter gets something neat and unique to play with; Clerics, Druids, Monks, Paladins, Rogues and Wizards just seem to choose their domain and gain or lose abilities based on that.
Also, to elaborate on my rogue vs ranger thoughts:
Rogues choose their Scheme based on how THEY deal with NPC's.
I think Rangers should choose their Favored Enemy based on how NPC's deal with PC's.
This is not out of the blue, the "Brute Hunter" option already talks about taking on humanoids that attack in large numbers. Take that and run with it.
As it sits right now, I think I want to play a fighter very very badly.