5th edition class/archetype design philosophy

[DualShadow]

I wanted to ask the people around here if they ever had any problems homebrewing in this edition.

With how the classe/archetype are made the options can be limited. Have that cool bard archetype concept in mind and come up with five abilities that represent it well? Well too bad the bard got three archetype features.

Perhaps it is the fact that the classe you wanna make an archtype for selects it at level three instead of one. A class that you need to dumb down to an archetype because it would make a certain class redundant?


What are your thoughts on custom creation in this edition?

[JNAProductions]

I just went hole-hog and designed prestige classes, so I never found myself too limited.

However, my views are not shared anywhere near universally.

[GiantOctopodes]

We made a complete custom class for a party member, a Rune Priest, using totally unique mechanics from the ground up with a completely new set of abilities meant to compete directly with the wealth of options provided by magic. We found it easy to do (got it done in the course of an evening) and have had 0 balance issues whatsoever as a result. My best recommendations are as follows:

1) Don't break bounded accuracy. Don't dole out a bunch of static modifiers to hit, and keep the AC values which result from their class features in line with those provided by others in the book (13+single ability or 10+two abilities).

2) Follow the general format of one "strong" save (con, dex, or wis, with wis being the weakest of those) and one "weak" save (str, int, and cha, with str being by far the strongest of those), and generally speaking follow the constraints given by other classes- no more than 4 skills, major boosts in power at 5th and 11th level, 5 ASIs unless there is no spellcasting (or equivalent, in this case), and balance improvements to the class between the "exploration", "interaction", and "combat" pillars- don't stuff them full of all combat boosts or no combat boosts.

3) Keep spells or similar abilities in line. For each spell level, you want no more than 2d6 damage (average 7), and you want substantially less if you have compelling rider effects that go along with it. They have exceptions allowing more damage (substantially more in many cases), be wary of using those as "the rule" vs "the exception". Watch out for allowing spells to persist, *always* require concentration for non-instantaneous duration, and make sure damage is scaled back appropriately. Always allow a save or require an attack roll, never both unless you want it to be underpowered. When making new ones, look for the lowest level representative spell which provides a similar benefit, and make sure your new ability is balanced appropriately, you never want to make something that is *strictly better* than the existing options.

Follow those suggestions, and you will wind up with an underpowered class by design. Let the class *be* underpowered for the first few sessions, and see what pillars they fall behind in (combat, exploration, or interaction), then add in things (or make them come earlier in level progression) as appropriate. Avoid excessive knee jerk reactions, though, since it's *way* easier to give someone a shiny new toy than to take it away. Generally speaking, even if they *are* a little underpowered, given the choice to play exactly what they want, people tend to be pretty satisfied.

So overall, I really like custom class creation in 5e. Thanks to the way it's set up, it's *really* easy to add new stuff without having to worry about it being overpowered, which means it's easy to say "yes" to character concepts and ideas and find a way to make them happen without having to worry about other players feeling resentful or anything like that.

[b4ndito]

I've been trying to make the Black Blood Cultist into a barbarian archetype and I cannot get it right.

[Thisguy_]

Black Blood Cultist? You mean... like Crona, or something else?

[Submortimer]

All in all, I find homebrewing for 5e to be extremely simple for at least a few of the classes. Warlock patrons, Fighter Martial Archetypes, and Paladin oaths in particular seem quite easy to flesh out; on the other hand, I've yet to try and make a new Ranger archetype or Druid circle, and have no idea where I'd start with either of those.

[eastmabl]

Black Blood Cultist? You mean... like Crona, or something else?

I think that he's referencing the 3.5 prestige class found in Champions of Ruin, which is a FR source book. Basically, it's a prestige class that lets you grapple really, really well.

Looking at the class itself, I can see why it might not lend itself well to a subclass - it has a lot going on under the hood. I can imagine that the simplification of grapple in 5e makes a grappling subclass harder to create.

[PoeticDwarf]

one "strong" save (con, dex, or wis, with wis being the weakest of those) and one "weak" save (str, int, and cha, with str being by far the strongest of those

Sorry, but I don't think dex is better than wis, and that dex can come close to con.

If you fail a common wis save, you have a very nasty effect.
Dex save gives damage, if you don't fail it still halve, but next to that nothing.

I don't have to say something about con, do I?
But my point is most people prefer wis above dex.

[GiantOctopodes]

Sorry, but I don't think dex is better than wis, and that dex can come close to con.

If you fail a common wis save, you have a very nasty effect.
Dex save gives damage, if you don't fail it still halve, but next to that nothing.

I don't have to say something about con, do I?
But my point is most people prefer wis above dex.

Well, it's impossible to know what "most" people prefer. That being said, you do have a valid point in that Dex just lets you avoid damage (the worst rider effects are prone and restrained, with the very worst rider being Ottiluke's resilient sphere putting you wholly out of the combat, albeit with immunity to damage while that occurs) while Wis generally avoids extreme unpleasantness (domination and other spells that affect the agency of your character, with you not only potentially out of the fight, but actively attacking and damaging your party members). So I can certainly understand your point.

The reason why I had Dex higher than Wis is because Dex has more spells that target it (43 vs 22 by my count, but I could be off), and because effects that make you immune to being charmed or frightened (Devotion Paladin, Monk, or Barbarian features, some spells) generally mean you won't be making Wis saves at all, while effects that provide Evasion (Monk or Rogue feature) have their full effect only on a successful save. However, there is certainly merit to ranking Wis above Dex, or at least equal to it, as long as you don't have a Devotion Paladin in the party.

And in terms of Con, not at all! There's a reason why I listed it first :smallbiggrin:

[Ivellius]

All in all, I find homebrewing for 5e to be extremely simple for at least a few of the classes. Warlock patrons, Fighter Martial Archetypes, and Paladin oaths in particular seem quite easy to flesh out; on the other hand, I've yet to try and make a new Ranger archetype or Druid circle, and have no idea where I'd start with either of those.

Having done some homebrewing for every class in the game, I'd agree that Paladin oaths and Warlock patrons are pretty easy to do. I felt Druids were pretty easy and Rangers reasonably so (though certainly having fewer archetype choices means it's harder to extrapolate). Clerics and Sorcerers felt easy, though Wizards seemed difficult to do new things without overlapping existing specializations.

I don't think I'd actually agree when it comes to Fighters, though, given how different the three archetypes are. Rogues are a similar issue. I had trouble thinking of what to actually do for those.

All told, I really like class variants as a built-in feature for the base game. It provides a lot of opportunities for expansion and homebrewing. It was one of my favorite things about how the World of Warcraft tabletop (3.5 setting) approached the game and led to me making tons of stuff for a game line basically no one played.