Do Subclasses Really Add Depth in 5th Edition?

A few months ago, someone mentioned to me that they thought D&D 5e characters didn't have enough customization options. Well, they said something like that anyway, and it got me thinking about the subject. It's something I hadn't really considered until recently, but the more I think about it, the more I kind of agree.

When I first played 5th edition, when I was 12 or 13, I'd already skimmed the AD&D books that my dad had countless times as a kid, and been in one or two 4th Edition games that a friend had run. But 5e was my first time properly reading an RPG ruleset and seriously learning the rules. So when I read the subclass rules, I assumed they were a good customization system. Every class had between 2 and 8 options for how they could specialize. 1st Edition AD&D never had that. I think 4e had something similar, but not until higher levels. So having each class so many options to choose from, seems like it significantly expands your options for what kind of a character you want to play.

As a side note, when I first played 5e, I didn't like backgrounds because I thought they were too limited, but later I changed my mind on that. So it's kind of funny that I've now come completely full circle. 

When it comes down to it, regardless of what class you play, you basically get two choices for your class's ability set. You choose your class, you choose your subclass, and that's it. Some classes and subclasses get more choices than that, but for most, that's it.

And for most players, that's enough. Realistically, you can never play every official subclass, so you're not likely to run out of options for what to play. But your character's class is their most defining feature. Mechanically, it's much more important than their race or background, and there's a lot of overlap between classes with spells. So it seems like if there's one thing you should have two or three choices in, it should be your class. 

While thinking about this, I read more thoroughly through D&D 3.5, which admittedly I've never played. Although 3.5 doesn't have subclasses, except for clerics, who get domains, it seems to me to handle class customization at least as well if not better than 5e. In 3.5, feats aren't considered an optional rule (not that I've heard of any 5e DM who doesn't allow them), and characters got a lot more of them. Feats in 3.5 aren't class specific, at least not the ones I've seen, but some certainly effected certain classes much more. Additionally, outside of the PHB, 3.5 had Prestige Classes. Prestige Classes are basically separate classes you can multiclass into, some of which modify specific existing classes, sort of like subclasses, and some of which work with any class. But the thing about Prestige Classes is that characters aren't required to just take one. And they can take as many or as few levels in them as they'd like. 

There are a few other systems I could compare 5e's subclasses to, but 3.5 is the closest comparison.  I think probably the reason that (at least in my experience) multiclassing is so popular in 5e is the individuality in each single class. Not that I'm against multiclassing, I just think there should be more options for each class.

So to sum it up, yes, of course subclasses add more customization, but actually that much. Subclasses are just set lists of powers you choose from, that ultimately don't give you that much choice at all
One way to change this I suppose, would be to just let PCs choose which subclass feature to take every time they would ordinarily get one. That probably wouldn't balance well in 5e, but it's an idea. Anyway, that's my half-formed opinion about that. Subclasses aren't that great; there are probably ways to handle them better.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Codex of Ideas

On the Biology of Dwarves

The Mystical Blade - A 5e Homebrew Class