What Makes Good D&D Content?

Official or homebrew, new or old, there’s always the question: What makes good D&D content? Subclasses? Items? Spells? Encounter tables? There’s a lot to take in, and with the recent release of Bigby Presents: Glory of the Giants, I feel it’s pertinent to cover what makes content worthwhile to invest in.

Most content typically involves some description to set a backdrop on what the content is meant to embody, a few words on what the content can do, and then the longest portion is usually the rules or the longer explanation that goes into detail on the nitty-gritty. I like to categorize good D&D content with three parameters:

1. Fluff. What does the content evoke? What idea are the rules and description trying to convey? Is that idea interesting?
2. Crunch. Can this new thing be used at a table without breaking any rules of the game, official or unspoken?
3. Twist. Is this new thing different enough from official content to fill a gap, or bring something new to the table that players would enjoy?

With these in mind, I’m going to do a few comparisons of what I consider to be good and not-so-good 5e content. Just because it appears here does not mean that it fails in every regard, some pieces of content are incredibly good at one thing but fail at another. I’ll be doing a lot of referencing to Kibbletasty’s Oath of Silence Paladin and Pointy Hat’s Path of Spirits Barbarian, both fantastic creators in their own right. Over the course of this article, I plan to compare two pieces of official content and two pieces of homebrew, giving a rating to each because giving an out of ten rating is fun.

Fluff

Slang for lore or colorful descriptions, Fluff is the first of our three categories. Without fluff, it’s hard to evoke an idea or feeling from the reader. These are the brief paragraphs that describe how a Druid might deal with trespassers from another grove, or how a Rogue might find himself requesting to parley amongst friends turned enemies just to save his own skin. The fun thing about fluff is how it inspires you, the player, to picture the class or monster in your head and play around with it. Let’s compare two official subclasses for Artificer, the Armorer and the Alchemist.

The Armorer artificer establishes the possibilities of the class not through its brief description that yes, they enhance their armor, but its mechanics speak to something important. For example, the armor makes it so that while wearing it, it acts as a prosthetic or replacement. This can heighten an average character with a cool backstory on how they lost an arm, eye, leg, or something else, and became iron man. In addition, switching between armor modes to better fit a certain playstyle or representation of the character is fantastic, and I wish more classes had built-in modularity like this!

Alchemist, in turn, can fulfill some of the fantasy of being a potion brewer who helps allies and hurts enemies. They make a potion once a long rest, which is fine, but that potion is randomly rolled on a table for whatever reason. Where are the potions you throw at your enemies? Why is the free potion random? Why would making magic items be a core identity of a potion-making, spell-crafting alchemist? These questions don’t jive with the flavor of the alchemist as a whole, and I feel they actively detract from what the alchemist should be able to do. I mean, what alchemist isn’t mixing something up to dish out to their foes? It feels like a missed opportunity.

Twist

Something I’ve operated on for years is the concept of twist. Some people call it zest, or spice, but it’s the idea of taking a basic idea (Orc Barbarian, whose barely-held-back rage sends them into an unstoppable path of destruction) and twisting it to be a little different than normal (Elf Barbarian, whose rage sends them into a focused battle-trance of devastating and precise swings). It’s what keeps things fresh, helps along new ideas, and even helps generate new ideas for campaigns and characters alike.

Twist is something I feel you as a player should look out for, as this shows up in both rules and lore. For example, the Bladesinger Wizard is an incredible display of twist, as it’s a wizard who can participate effectively in melee combat. Most wizards shrivel when an enemy gets within grabbing distance of them, but the Bladesinger turns this stereotype on its head by actively entering melee combat, similar to the Circle of Spores Druid who uses their wildshape feature to do things other than turn into animals, a fantastic design choice.

You might have gathered that twist is very subjective, and yes, it is. It isn’t explicitly necessary to make a good class, monster, or item since certain ideas that just feel right have been in the community consciousness for a while. (Looking at you, theoretical strength-based rogue subclass!) However, twisting for the sake of twisting an idea isn’t always necessary and sometimes spoils the fun. Assassin and thief rogue are the typical tropes of rogue for a good reason and are executed quite well. As a whole, twist represents an interesting design space and the capability for something unique to come about. I don’t want to compare something like Eldritch Knight and Battle Master because both are excellent, fit Fighter, and bring something unique to the table in their own way.

I would say though, a class with a bad twist is Cleric since they have so many subclasses, many of them are bound to overlap in purpose. Arcana and Knowledge both fit the “loremaster” vibe, while Tempest and War both fit the battle-cleric role. Do they do these things differently from each other? Yes. But let me remind you that the Unearthed Arcane Zeal cleric stays in the playtesting zone because it’s almost functionally identical to Tempest in most regards. Or Death and Blood. I couldn’t go on, Cleric is a very functional and incredibly fun class, but at least half of its classes are somewhat derivative of each other, and the various subclasses printed for Planeshift: Amonkhet alone, while very cool, are enough to make me wonder if there’s some domains that can be done concerning other planes?

Crunch

Another slang term, this time for mechanics or rules that appear in-game. Crunch is the part of the subclass you interact with per session through its abilities, extra spells, or playstyle it encourages you towards. I find the crunch to be the most integral part of most D&D content for me both as the player and the DM, since this is the stuff everyone at the table will be using to play the game. A lot of recent material has to contend with older material, and there’s an argument that some of the most recent additions to the game (Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything is a great example) are more powerful than things printed in the PHB. Personally, I think that is a good thing that the players are given better tools, and in the case of Tasha’s Cauldron, it was the intent. Ranger used to be one of the arguably worst classes in the game due to rules that were too situational. Now, they excel at their intended job of singling out targets and battlefield control.

Generally, what makes for good crunch are rules that feel impactful and cornercase a specific mechanic, or invent a new mechanic that opens up new possibilities. Battle Master Fighter is a perfect example of this since the maneuvers add so much without rewriting how the game functions. Maneuvers are attack actions that inflict effects in the game already or grant small buffs to allies by granting them movement or knocking down enemies. Honestly, much of the player’s handbook’s core subclasses are fantastic options that are solid in more ways than one, since the PHB has to set the standard for what is and what isn’t, and out of the 39(!) subclasses in the PHB, I would say that only 3 of them just didn’t work out (Champion Fighter, Beserker Barbarian, and Way of the Four Elements Monk). Most of these classes in the core rulebook allow for interesting ways to play the class you selected in the way you want, most of the time. I mean, Bear Totem Barb just throws themselves into combat like a bowling ball through pins, I feel that’s what 90% of barbarian players want to do with their dude when combat starts.

Rating

Wizards has been somewhat hit or miss in the crunch department, but the community for 5e is incredibly vibrant and usually in tune with its own desires. Creativity can come from anywhere, so I want to reference two unique pieces of homebrew content and how they fulfill each of the three criteria I’ve laid out: the Oath of Silence Paladin from KibblesTasty, and the Path of Spirits Barbarian from Pointy Hat. I’ll be giving them a score on each of the three categories out of 5 depending on how well they fit, and give a final rating at the end.

Oath of Silence

Oath of Silence does something with Paladin that normally isn’t seen: stealth, and dealing with casters in a way beyond dealing damage to them. On the fluff scale, the Oath of Silence pally has specific optional rules to make it so your character has no reason to open their mouth, yet still remain functional as a player. Their tenets fit with the ideology you might expect; being a port in a storm, actions speak louder than words, etc., and their rules reflect their silence by selectively making certain things quiet: footsteps, the clanking of armor, or words. 5/5 on fluff, fantastic work. Twist also scores a high as there’s no concept or idea like a paladin who exclusively works in silence that I’ve personally seen before. It’s so unique, that I have no choice but to give it a 5/5 on that alone.

The crunch here is fantastic, as the rules for this paladin make it so that you no longer have disadvantage on stealth checks, you can help allies repeat saving throws, and you can also silence casters so they have an issue using verbal spell components, which something I feel isn’t brought up enough in the game. Plus, they grant resistance against thunder damage! Is it useful? Not really. Is it flavorful? Most certainly. This subclass is cool as hell. A paladin that fits a unique support role that no other subclass can offer is the most special thing to me. I love this subclass, and I think the crunch deserves a 5/5, giving it a 15-point score. I wish more D&D content like this existed. Kibblestasty is one of those creators that I deeply adore due to his finger on the pulse of the community and knowing exactly what long-time players want. You can check out his content here.

On the other hand, the Path of Spirits Barbarian represents a barbarian who invokes ghostly spirits during their rage to aid them in battle. Interestingly, over the course of leveling up, you can call upon multiple of these spirits who all have different effects on you, and eventually your allies. Fundamentally, the idea is really cool.

Path of Spirits

Usually with Barbarians, they do one thing and they do it really well: get in your face and deal big damage while taking little in return. They’ve got resistance to the most common types of damage in the game, they deal more damage while they have resistance, they can just decide to turn on advantage whenever they feel like it, and will always have the highest health in the party. For some DMs, this is a problem that they don’t really know how to solve, which is fine. The solution is to deal with them by dealing damage that isn’t bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing, and using spell effects that slow them down, put them to sleep, paralyze them, knock them over, or overall make it so that they have trouble doing the thing they want to do. Path of Spirits, while thematically interesting, as being possessed by a primal spirit of… protection? Sure. Being possessed by the ghost of Christmas past is neat and all, I don’t really find it to be the most charming concept. There are a number of different types of spirits that one can be possessed by, fury, vengeance, but sacrifice and ecstasy take a little more work to really fit a typical barbarian, especially when you, y’know, pop a rage to get their benefits.

For the most part, I’ll give the twist a 4/5. The idea of getting possessed by spirits is pretty neat, but a few other classes already work with the idea of spirits to begin with (Totem Spirits for one), but this one wants to work with normal ghosts and the like, and I dig it. In terms of fluff… Eh? I’ll give it a 3/5. Fluff goes hand in hand with crunch if it’s done well, and I have a lot to say about the crunch. Being a barbarian and invoking the spirit of ecstasy because you love combat is really cool. Going into a rage and invoking the spirit of protection doesn’t really fit the narrative most barbarians are going with, it just feels off.

In terms of rules… Man, where do I begin? This class goes out of its way at 3rd level to ensure that most ways you can deal with a barbarian are ineffective against them. Take spirit of resolve and poof! Most ways of dealing with a barbarian beyond killing them cease to exist. Spirit of protection grants barbarian half an evasion, which is a level 7 feature for classes who have it, in addition to barbarian essentially having advantage on dexterity saving throws. Why does barbarian need this? Why does barbarian get the ability to hand out these buffs later on? Does the barbarian need two of these features at the same time? Why does barbarian get spellcasting? Seriously. Why does barbarian get the ability to cast spells? It’s out of combat spells like Gentle Repose and Speak with Dead, but later on, they essentially get Detect Thoughts and Blindness/Deafness that’s just better than the actual spell since you get to make the target move in a direction of your choosing.

1/5 on crunch. It’s too good and does a whole bunch of things at once while being the best at all of those things. Other members of the party exist so they can cover each other’s bases. Don’t take that from your friends at the table, and don’t be the star of the show all the time. It’s mean. Overall that leaves them at an 8/15 score, which isn’t the worst! Cool concept, execution could be tuned to be less powerful for certain.

Conclusion

That’s everything I have to say on the subject. Good and bad content for 5e is a relatively subjective topic, but I feel the three categories I’ve outlined are generally what people look out for when they look at new content. It’s the thing that differentiates how people react to the release of something like Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything, a highly anticipated and lauded release, to Spelljammer, which was highly anticipated and now lives on in infamy for its lack of content, minuscule player choice, and its laissez-faire approach to important concepts like ship combat or the astral sea.

Overall though, I’d like to say that to both of the creators I featured here, I am incredibly glad and grateful that the community has people like Kibblestasty and Pointy Hat in it to contribute their thoughts and ideas to 5e. Without people like them, 5e just wouldn’t be as interesting.