D&D (2024) PHB 2024 Is Hilariously Broken. Most OP of All Time?

[Mort]

It's not just the broken stuff just general overall power. 5E fighter is way better than 3.5 one. So is the rogue, bard, monk. Paladin, cleric etc. And 2024 powercrept most of it.

Though they are far from equal, the 5e classes are in much better parity with each other than the 3e/3.5 classes. The 2024 classes, from what I've seen so far, are in even better parity with each other. IMO this is great.

As for the whole "broken" angle. Broken, to me, means badly enough designed (either strong, weak, or just incomprehensible) as to be unplayable or otherwise unenjoyable. Recognizing things can never be "perfect," I'm not seeing a huge amount of that in 2024.

 

[Zardnaar]

Though they are far from equal, the 5e classes are in much better parity with each other than the 3e/3.5 classes. The 2024 classes, from what I've seen so far, are in even better parity with each other. IMO this is great.

As for the whole "broken" angle. Broken, to me, means badly enough designed (either strong, weak, or just incomprehensible) as to be unplayable or otherwise unenjoyable. Recognizing things can never be "perfect," I'm not seeing a huge amount of that in 2024.

2024 is really good comparing the classes to each other.

I'm not seeing any D tier and very few Cs.

My biggest negative of 2024 isn't even it's fault. I've had 10 years of 5E already so it's more of the same. Generally it's better at least for me it's complexity might be a turn off for others. Turn off for some of my players as well. One specifically said he likes the champion for it's simplicity. He's currently running a 2014 monk but he's seeing a BM fighter in action piloted by a new player. She's been asking the wife for advice though. Organically discovered reach weapons but wife may have mentioned polearm master.

2024 has more short rest abilities as well. I've independently come to that conclusion as well.

 

[Ashrym]

Am I remembering something wrong or didn't the 2024 rules say that once you cast a spell that uses a spell slot you can't cast another spell that uses a spell slot that turn, which means only way to get two spells in a turn is either a leveled spell and a cantrip or have an ability or feat that let's you cast a normally leveled spell without using a spell slot somehow, the latter of which is very limited because there's no ability or feat that just says "you may cast any spell you know without expending a spell slot x times per (short or) long rest"

This becomes a distinction between rounds and turns where off turn reactions become important in the round.

 

[Ashrym]

3x players didn't know how to play a bard. A 3x bard gets a suggestion with a DC equal to their perform check. They get access to all the good control spells in an edition where the playerbase (and the DM) had no idea what control was nor a defense against it.

By level 3, a 3x bard can just turn off any encounter with beings with minds using fascinate and walk past.

There was a lot more to 3.5e bards than ppl think, but this is a bit more like the DDO approach.

Fascinate in the PHB was limited to 1 target plus 1 target per 3 levels.

The Fascinate DC was a Perform check. The Suggestion DC was 10 + 1/2 level + CHA modifier.

 

[Zardnaar]

There was a lot more to 3.5e bards than ppl think, but this is a bit more like the DDO approach.

Fascinate in the PHB was limited to 1 target plus 1 target per 3 levels.

The Fascinate DC was a Perform check. The Suggestion DC was 10 + 1/2 level + CHA modifier.

Ironically one of the more powerful builds I saw was a bard. She was granting +8 to hit and damage to everyone. Level 6-8. Party of archers.

Could have been +16 but missed some things.

 

[Ashrym]

Ironically one of the more powerful builds I saw was a bard. She was granting +8 to hit and damage to everyone. Level 6-8. Party of archers.

Could have been +16 but missed some things.

That's part of why 5e bards aren't more powerful than 3.5 bards.

5e bards have less skills relative other classes.

5e bards have less bardic inspiration. 5e is based on CHA bonus use single targets while 3.5 was based on bard level use multiple targets.

Fascinate DC was so high most targets saved 5% of the time.

5e bards have less spells known and less spell slots. 3.5 bards were limited more in spell levels but suitable spells for bards were releveled in order to give them to bards anyway and the bard song abilities were a big supplement to spells.

I had a diplomancer build consistently hitting epic rules DC's at 13th level.

The only thing that has potential to get out of hand in 5e is wizard spell shenanigans through magical secrets, which would be a wizard thing bards coincidentally have proximity to.

 

[Zardnaar]

That's part of why 5e bards aren't more powerful than 3.5 bards.

5e bards have less skills relative other classes.

5e bards have less bardic inspiration. 5e is based on CHA bonus use single targets while 3.5 was based on bard level use multiple targets.

Fascinate DC was so high most targets saved 5% of the time.

5e bards have less spells known and less spell slots. 3.5 bards were limited more in spell levels but suitable spells for bards were releveled in order to give them to bards anyway and the bard song abilities were a big supplement to spells.

I had a diplomancer build consistently hitting epic rules DC's at 13th level.

The only thing that has potential to get out of hand in 5e is wizard spell shenanigans through magical secrets, which would be a wizard thing bards coincidentally have proximity to.

It wasn't just the phb.

 

[FrozenNorth]

My case was more a reductio ad absurdum rather than something I believe ought to be pictured in play. Shoving might not cover it exactly, because the creature has to wind up 5' further away from you (or fall prone). In my thought experiment, they move across squares that are adjacent to you... which fails to be a shove.

Which makes me wonder if one could argue that there ought to be a way to force move a creature from one square adjacent to you to another square adjacent to you, and if neither shove nor drag are it, what is?

In 4th edition, it was slide. PF2 opted for reposition.

 

[Redwizard007]

3.0 is the most broken edition of all time but it required a lot of non core stuff to do it. 3.5 PHB mostly theoretically higher level stuff and the Druid. 4E had that kill Orcus thing with a Ranger but was mostly theoretical.

So far a few of us have found the following things that seem OP. Even worse they're very self contained and are available fairly early on.

1. Warcaster feat. Reaction casting to buff allies.

2. Grappler feat
Lots of potential builds mostly abusing spike growth and spirit guardians. Basic idea drag opponents through spike growth edge or run around with a cleric and have multiple characters do it.

3. Conjure Minor Elemental. Not 100% sure it's fine at 7 but from 9+ there's some crazy numbers.

4. Some sort of Monk weapon mastery abuse with daggers and unarmed strikes. Still work in progress. Looks like more damage than the -5/+10 feats without the -5 part.

5. Some sort of turn yourself into a Kraken build. Work in progress.

6. Level 10 cleric abuse with spells like hallow.

And this is at levels people actually play (4-10ish)

This whole argument is ridiculous. The 2024 PH is a combination of the old PH and options cherry picked from other books. Of course it is going to be more OP than other PHBs.

More/better spells, martials that are actually good at dealing damage, Monks as a viable class for the second time in all of D&D's history, a handful of OP spells (which is par for the course, really,) and some examples that freak people out because they haven't fully understood the new rules.

It's perfectly acceptable to not like something, but this just looks like you have an axe to grind.

 

[Zardnaar]

This whole argument is ridiculous. The 2024 PH is a combination of the old PH and options cherry picked from other books. Of course it is going to be more OP than other PHBs.

More/better spells, martials that are actually good at dealing damage, Monks as a viable class for the second time in all of D&D's history, a handful of OP spells (which is par for the course, really,) and some examples that freak people out because they haven't fully understood the new rules.

It's perfectly acceptable to not like something, but this just looks like you have an axe to grind.

Never said I didn't like it. It's up there on the power levels.

3.0 had haste and 3.5 had natural spell. Haste was the bigger offender imho.