D&D 5E Losing Interest in Character/ Class?

What I'm hearing from the OP seems straightforward: He doesn't like the 6th level features of either the hexblade or the shadow sorcerer. Guess what? Neither do I. I don't care for pets, typically, and both of these features give the subclass a pet relatively late in the character's progression. It lacks elegance. One solution would be to simply homebrew new features for both subclasses.

For the hexblade, one approach could be to give the benefits of having a specter--but without actually having a specter. For example: "When you slay a humanoid, you gain temporary hit points equal to 5d8+Cha modifier. While these temporary hit points remain, you gain an extra attack that does weapon damage plus 3d6 necrotic damage. This ability refreshes on a long rest." Seems like an awesome 6th level ability to me!

For the shadow sorcerer, you could do something similar--simply reflavor the hound of ill omen as a shroud of magical darkness that does damage every round to a single target and gives that target disadvantage on saving throws to resist your spells. Alternately, give the shadow sorcerer additional cool shadow-themed spells that aren't counted against their spells known--like shadow of moil, maddening darkness, shadow blade, etc. I like either option--or both!

dnd4vr said:

I know others love the options and choosing subclasses, etc. I find it interesting that much of the new UA is about trying options for super-versatility. Don't like a prior choice? Change it when you reach the next level, etc.

Oddly, if we removed feats and MCing, I don't think I would be any happier because then I would be forced into features that might not fit at all. I've looked at removing a lot of things and just making it more like 1E/2E, but without such features I do worry about balance issues.

Click to expand...

My campaign runs without Feats, MCing and use Slow natural healing. Striving for the 2e feel. I supplemented the character power level with a few meaningful items along the way. At level 7 they now each have one unique Major item and one standard Minor Item. That was the way I did it in the 90s. It works well with 5e.

About the OP, how often do you play? Sometimes it's just player fatigue. You might need to fast a bit. Play another roleplaying game for a few games.

I got bored with my Sheppard Druid at around level 6 so when he died I didn't let the other revive him.

After a while I did the sneaking around as an animal thing, talking to animal for info, sent 8 wolves after a bad guy, used my Spirit to grant Temp HP, used Plant Growth in its 8 hours mode to thank a friendly farmer, used it to entangle enemies (me and Warlock ended up attack three slave traders wagons on our own, pretty fun times)... I just felt like I did most of the stuff I would want to do as a Druid and, despite making an effort in the backstory of my character, the DM never really integrated it into the quest we were on properly.

I've accepted that it is how I play and there's nothin' wrong with that.

Again, thanks for all of the comments.

@TwoSix - I've thought about a two or three class type of game, but it comes down to if I can too much, I might as well play something else or make up my own game.

@jmartkdr2 - The character is only 6th in the OP. In our main game my character is 12th and I am having a blast playing her and where she is going. I enjoy the 6th level character as well, I just don't see either sorcerer or warlock classes appealing going much further at all.

@Arilyn - I never had a problem creating any character in 1E or 2E, I suppose because much of the classes were so basic I didn't have to worry about anything else. Now, if you played those editions strictly RAW then many non-humans couldn't be certainly classes, but I never met a group that kept those restrictions myself.

@Blue - In the next game I am running I already told everyone there is no MCing. I am allowing feats, but that doesn't seem to be as much an issue. That is why I have the other thread about helping with the new character. I am still working on it.

@Charlaquin - I think that could be part of it. I think it is also the basic classes appeal to me more. I usually play straight Fighters, Cleric, Rogues, or Wizards-- so playing a Sorlock seems to specific in many ways.

@THEMNGMNT - Yeah, in this particular case that is certainly an issue. I like your ideas but unfortunately for this side game the DM is new and we are running pretty strict RAW so I don't think he'd go for it. I can ask though. We are at 6th level currently, I can't see it actually reaching much past 12th at all.

@atanakar - I DMed for a while, then our main DM took over for nearly a year, and now another player is running our side game. I think in about 3-4 months I'll start running my new game--probably early summer. I enjoy playing quite a bit--this is the first group I've been in where I don't DM 90% or more of the time, so I am enjoying it.

I am not convinced... 5e is designed to provide both a reasonable amount and variety of choices for those want them (not as many as 3e obviously, but the amount you get in the course of 20 levels is not that much less, it's rather the variety of 3e which is unmatched thanks to the sheer amount of books), but at the same time it goes easy on those who don't want them.

How can someone be bored with a 5e character and not be bored with a 1e/2e character of the same class or concept, I don't understand, because you can play a 5e character as if it was a 1e/2e character if you want. Choose Human or ask your DM if you can be another race but still use human stats; don't multiclass or combine easy classes only; pick the lowest-complexity archetype available; take ASI instead of feats; make iconic choices for spells; pick passive abilities when possible... and then forget about "next level" and focus on the adventure.

I am curious to know how you would have pulled off your Sorcerer/Warlock character concept in 1e/2e. Would you have looked for specific Sorcerer and Warlock "build" options in accessory books? That's not different from what you're doing in 5e. Or would you have tried to manage with core stuff to represent the character? If you think this is more fun, you can actually do the same in 5e.

But the bottom line is obviously, if you are not having fun with your PC, just make a new one.

Li Shenron said:

I am not convinced... 5e is designed to provide both a reasonable amount and variety of choices for those want them (not as many as 3e obviously, but the amount you get in the course of 20 levels is not that much less, it's rather the variety of 3e which is unmatched thanks to the sheer amount of books), but at the same time it goes easy on those who don't want them.

Click to expand...

Well, my point isn't to convince you. I wrote what I wrote because that is what I think and feel. Others like the OP and some understand my issue. If you don't that is fine--a lot of people love 5E for the choices.

dnd4vr said:

So, I have a Sorlock (Sorcerer 3/ Warlock 3) in our CoS game and after reaching level 6, I feel like I am disappointed where the two classes go from here--I just have no interest in them.

Click to expand...

The issue is more that the paths both warlock and sorcerer follow don't for those sublcasses don't fit the character concept. The lower levels they were perfect, but with the features at 6th levels, they don't. As others have suggested, normally homebrewing features might work but in this case the DM is following RAW with very few exceptions.

Li Shenron said:

How can someone be bored with a 5e character and not be bored with a 1e/2e character of the same class or concept, I don't understand, because you can play a 5e character as if it was a 1e/2e character if you want. Choose Human or ask your DM if you can be another race but still use human stats; don't multiclass or combine easy classes only; pick the lowest-complexity archetype available; take ASI instead of feats; make iconic choices for spells; pick passive abilities when possible... and then forget about "next level" and focus on the adventure.

Click to expand...

First, I am not "bored." I like the character, I just don't like the class progressions for sorcerer or warlock with the subclass features offered. They don't fit the persona of the character at all (summoning a Hound of Ill Omen or forcing a defeated enemy to become a Specter to serve me). This puts me in a difficult spot. I can continue in either class, gaining other abilities, but then the other features won't be used and become wasted.

Playing a sub-par character in 5E doesn't seem really fun, either.

Li Shenron said:

I am curious to know how you would have pulled off your Sorcerer/Warlock character concept in 1e/2e. Would you have looked for specific Sorcerer and Warlock "build" options in accessory books? That's not different from what you're doing in 5e. Or would you have tried to manage with core stuff to represent the character? If you think this is more fun, you can actually do the same in 5e.

Click to expand...

Easy, I would have made him a Magic-User. I would not have used accessories. I never used them in 1E or 2E back then either. That is my point. I don't have to worry about anything and can focus more about the character development. I find it odd when people complain how they couldn't make the character they wanted back then when I was able to make every character concept I wanted come to life. I get if you play strict RAW some class/race combinations aren't allow--but I never knew any group who rigidly enforced those at all.

Li Shenron said:

But the bottom line is obviously, if you are not having fun with your PC, just make a new one.

Click to expand...

So, your bottom line is completely off. I never said I don't have fun with the character or enjoy playing him. Our session yesterday was great, actually. The problem is that with subclasses you are pigeon-holing your character and while some features might work perfectly, others don't.

IMO a lot of people are not happy with choices as their characters progress and again I point the UA and all the versatility options now offered for playtesting. Don't like your Fighting Style anymore? Change it. Don't think that cantrips is useful now? Change it. Found out that BM Maneuver is not what you thought? Change it.

Obviously you don't relate to the issue I am experiencing, so that is awesome and I hope you continue to have fun with your characters.

dnd4vr said:

So, your bottom line is completely off. I never said I don't have fun with the character or enjoy playing him. Our session yesterday was great, actually. The problem is that with subclasses you are pigeon-holing your character and while some features might work perfectly, others don't.

Click to expand...

That's pretty much the case with any class system.

FrogReaver said:

That's pretty much the case with any class system.

Click to expand...

I think one of the issues in 5e that can make it boring is, counterintuitively, how fast you level up. If you run any of the published campaigns, you level up every 2-3 sessions. You barely have time to learn what your latest set of bells & whistles does before you get a new feature. Consequently, you can't really spend a lot of time invested in any particular place, and any attempt to make the party do so feels like you're just delaying the next level unnecessarily (WTF? I don't get XP for this!).

By reintroducing AD&D's leveling schedule, I found that sprawling dungeon complexes work much better, since the party doesn't level up and out of them after six rooms, and the time spent at a given level is long enough that we stay much more focused on the adventure rather than thinking about what feat or spell to take next. Yes, it means we're only at 9th level after 2 years, but we've had far more fun with this than any published campaign.

fearsomepirate said:

I think one of the issues in 5e that can make it boring is, counterintuitively, how fast you level up....

Click to expand...

My experience too, so I've slowed my games down. Let's people enjoy the ride a bit, get more familiar with the character, and look forward more to how Baron So-and-So is going to respond to their attempt to go behind his back and get his wife's financial support than what class feature they're going to get next.

As to the OP, ran AD&D for years and there was a simplicity to the classes wherein you had to rely more on your player ingenuity rather than character abilities (because you had very few!)

Guessing the OP is longing for less of a rigid class system and more freedom to plug-and-play class features, and I'm always a fan of do whatever makes your game run better.