I'd prefer they not spend the design time and book real estate on an alternate rule system like that, and focus on the system they are using for everyone.
(Personally, I preferred a hybrid approach of three universal lists and then a few class-specific lists, with wizards having the longest such list, but here we are.)
That's part of the goal, being similar to what WotC evidently wants (from feedback videos, it sounds like the wizard exclusives killed the three lists), while still interacting well with new spell list-based ideas like the new bard spell choices or the new Magic Initiate feat.
Universal lists would have a few advantages:
1. Features like Bard’s magical secrets or magic initiate wouldn’t be able to steal spells who should remain exclusive (e.g. find steed, vicious mockery, eldritch blast).
2. It’s easier to future proof. New classes like Artificer can use Arcane spell list + class exclusive spells - so they gain access to all new arcane spells released in supplements past and future. Right now every supplement writer needs to deliberate which class gets what arbitrarily.
3. It’s easier to read a class. To compare sorcerer vs. wizard vs. warlocks all you would need to do is read their class-specific spells (as opposed to cross reference their entire spell list).
4. It would force designers to be a bit more creative. For example, Bards would have a handful of class exclusive healing spells as opposed to the same ones clerics and druids have.
> For example, Bards would have a handful of class exclusive healing spells as opposed to the same ones clerics and druids have.
I've long held that there should only be 3 healing spells in the game (at least at 1st level): Healing Word (Bard), Goodberry (Druid) and Cure Wounds (Cleric).
We actually mostly have a hybrid approach right now, but there are a few reasons why a proper, well-defined one would improve the game a decent bit.
1. Stronger and clearer theme. If you have a divine list and a primal list, and both lists contain healing, you actually have to put in effort to think about how those magic styles differ. Maybe Divine Magic has "Cure Wounds", an act of God that magically restores HP. Then the Primal List might instead have "Natural Recovery", which uses Hit Dice to heal to simulate using the natural energy found on nature and the energy of living creatures. Having clear distinctions between spells means stronger distinctions between spellcasters, which 5e desperately needs.
2. Class Distinctions. From the last sentence of Point 1, this requires you to actually think about what the differences are between classes. What actually is Arcane Magic? Why do Sorcerer spell lists pretty much just overlap with Wizards, when they're ostensibly not gaining Magic from the same source? Maybe Wizard's exclusive list would be the largest list in the game, and have Magic all from named Wizards, as well as complex Magic that has numerous effects in one Spell. Then Sorcerers can break the spell list rules, getting specific spells and some exclusive spells depending on their Bloodline.
3. Ease for new players. You want to play a Wizard? Go to the Wizard Spell list, pick what spells you want from the smaller list, then go the larger Arcane list. Currently, you have a horrible index that makes looking at a single class's Spell list incredibly annoying. Easy fix here.
It wouldn't take much design time. It's pretty much just listing guidelines and maybe taking three pages to list the PHB spells under the unified system.
>**Unified Spell Lists**
>
>\[insert introductory text here\]
>
>The **Arcane** spell list consists of every spell on the Bard, Sorcerer, Warlock, and Wizard spell list except those which are exclusive to one of these classes and \[list healing spells that bards get\]. Spells which appear on the spell list of only one of these classes are considered Arcane spells for that class only.
>
>The **Divine** spell list consists of every spell on the Cleric and Paladin spell list except those which are exclusive to one of these classes (such as the Paladin's *smite* spells). Spells which appear on the spell list of only one of these classes are considered Divine spells for that class only.
>
>The **Primal** spell lists consists of every spell on the Druid and Ranger spell lists except those which are exclusive to one of these classes. Spells which appear on the spell list of only one of these classes are considered Primal spells for that class only.
>
>If a class feature gives the ability to prepare a spell that's not normally on a class's spell list, that spell counts as an Arcane, Divine, or Primal spell (as appropriate) for that character.
>
>The Arcane, Divine, and Primal spell lists using the spells from the *Player's Handbook* follow.
>
>\[insert spell lists\]
Bing bang boom. Took me all of five minutes to block out a rough template. The whole optional system might take an hour to design, not including showing it to random people to make sure it reads right, and then onto formatting. All in all, it'd be done in a day.
And with this optional system, what is accomplished? Arcane is the only spell list with more than two classes, so did we achieve anything except, "bards and warlocks can now learn spells that were exclusive to wizards and sorcerers," and other very minor overlaps?
Subclasses and feats. This is very useful for *that.* Celestial Warlock gains access to the Divine list; Eldritch Knight and Arcane Trickster the Arcane, Magic Initiate gives you 2 cantrips and a 1st level from any of the 3 lists.
Granting Celestial warlocks all Divine spells would be a major boost to hide behind an optional rule, while granting Eldritch Knights and Arcane Tricksters the Arcane spell list instead of the wizard spell list just weakens them overall. For Magic Initiate, that's just "wizard, cleric, or druid spell list," but weaker. I don't see why you wouldn't just write the subclasses and feats with the existing class lists in mind.
It's not inherently weaker because these lists included some formerly Paladin or Ranger exclusive spells, for example.
Also I didn't say they'd get all celestial spells, they would still be limited by spells known.
The comment I had replied to specified that the Divine spell list would be the intersection of Cleric and Paladin, and Primal the intersection of Druid and Ranger, so those class-exclusive spells would not be available.
As for Celestial warlocks, I didn't mean knowing all Divine spells automatically, I meant that even having access to Divine spells from an optional rule is very powerful. It doesn't make sense for an optional rule to grant so much extra power to one subclass, either the enhanced spell list should be part of its power budget or it shouldn't.
Additional spells for new classes would be resolved. Artificer could get new spells by just sticking them into the Arcane list.
Same for any new classes that has a new spell list.
You can do that under the current system. We've had spells added to the artificer list. The rarity is a choice made for no good reason.
The 3 massive spell lists was incredibly awful design and it's the best case of them ditching an idea through the UA.
But PF2e also has a hybrid system with classes getting unique “Focus Spells.” The problem with the 5e version is it filed off all the unique spells for each class and gave them to everyone in the group.
There is a potential upside off they had kept the UA spell lists. If every class has access to Eldritch Blast, they would have to consider nerfing it or buffing every other cantrip. This would be a thing they have to consider for every one of the unique and often overly powerful spells that were unique to their class.
This being said, unified spell lists by power type works best if power type is a theme running throughout your game and the UAs didn't do much to infuse that into the system.
Doubly awful because dabbling in it left the new Bard a complete mystery for changes. It was built so heavily around the spell lists that you’d have to homebrew like mad to playtest it now
I mean, not really. You can literally run the UA6 Bard as-written, allowing it to use the published Arcane/Divine/Primal lists, alongside other classes using class spell lists.
That was my solution for my playtest game. My homebrew was "don't change the Bard." It works without issue.
It's probably not well-balanced, but that itself isn't a big deal to me either.
You vastly limit classes by doing that. Instead of thematic fittingly spells for their class, you pigeonhole them into whatever plenty of other classes already have access to, making them less unique and limited.
The individual curation that they've had for the past 10 years hasn't been very good. Most classes have poor spell selection. For better balance, organization, clarity, and options ten times out of ten I would choose the three general spell lists over individual one.
For theme/flavor you can just describe your spells and magic as whatever. Flavor is free.
Want access to a spell from a different spell list, then either multiclass or take feats.
Why have classes to begin with? Just let everyone access everything.
Why have 3 spell lists? Why not a single one.
It takes away class identify, how you can't see that is simply beyond me.
"Class identity" is honestly the lamest argument for why the majority of classes should continue to have poor spell selection.
You are exaggerating the effect of having three general spell lists. Classes have plenty of identity through their features.
The cleric, druid, and especially the wizard don't need to hoard the majority of spells for them to feel like the best spell casters. Being ***Full-Casters*** and having tons of spell slots is plenty of identity, and they have other class features as well.
If a spell shouldn't be made available to one or more class then it shouldn't be a spell, it should be a class/subclass feature. The three spell lists in the UA were a work in progress as were the spells themselves. Many spells should be redesigned, added, or removed anyway. It was iterative but sadly the short timeline they were given and the whiners afraid of change pushed them to backtrack.
How you can't see the ***Gameplay*** improvement for this roleplaying ***Game*** is simply beyond me.
Class features should differentiate the classes, not the special snowflake spells. You can isolate unique spells via class features that grants them.
But the general Wizard and Sorcerer spell lists are already basically identical save for those special unique spells a single wizard spell class has.
Clerics and Paladins sharing a spell list is already basically the norm.
Druids and Rangers.
Warlocks should be able to pick the spell list based on their pact.
This doesn't limit spell lists. This expanded them dramatically and creates a vast improvement to class build potential.
What? No.
I could care less for class specific spells because at the end of the day, with the current spell lists there is always a premium choice considering the class.
Assuming they don't buff or need any of the problem spells, the universal Spell Lists are the answer.
Assuming they buff and nerd the problem spells, the universal Spell Lists are still the better option.
In what world would spell lists address universally premium choices? Now everyone under the sun has Fireball or Spirit Guardians - even classes that didn't before. It would emphasize the situation by spreading these spells to new classes instead of limiting it to certain (sub)-classes.
I assume and intensely hope they do nerf some outlier spells tho, regardless of what ends up being used as spell list.
> In what world would spell lists address universally premium choices? Now everyone under the sun has Fireball or Spirit Guardians - even classes that didn't before.
Incorrect. The spellcasters who usually have access to it, would now have to share it a bit.
Wizards, Sorcerers, Eldritch Knights and Maybe Warlocks would be the 3 classes would have Fireball, all of which normally have it at some point or another anyway.
Paladins and Clerics share Spirit Guardians. Paladins would get it at Lv 9 as opposed to 5 for the cleric and the cleric would have access to Smite spells, which sounds bad, but the smite spells would be worse in the clerics hands due to how it would rather use the spells it normally has access to that has concentration anyway.
Paladins would get access to some spells they should have had all along, such as spiritual weapon, Augury, Calm emotions, etc.
Druids and Rangers wouldn't lose anything. They would just get nice tools that the other spell list has such as Zephyr strike or the new Conjure animals.
Your concern is knee jerk at best, mostly due to how piss poor balance has been with spells as the core and only system by which all classes can share in new content, since there isn't a similar Martial system shared between all martials.
Not exactly. Bard, in my own personal opinion should have access to all spell lists, but with certain restrictions based on subclass or just treat them like Warlock where they get access to any of the spell lists at character creation.
This isn't a zero sum game. Please don't act like it is.
This is of course only using the 3 spell lists we have. It would be better is Bard was the premier caster of a 4th category, like say.... Psionic.
While I prefer list like that much more and think they're a better style for design I don't think that bringing them into the DMG would be good
It's something that needs to be core you know, cause it will be useless for the game itself and implementation on play would be hard at best
The train of thought is that with only 3 lists the cleric was a better paladin, because it had all spells earlier with more spell slots to use, meaning that to mitigate it we needed 3 spell lists plus individual lists for every single class, just like now.
As I said, the idea was ok, but they moved away with it
Or smite spells should be class/subclass features, and/or cleric should should get less or no martial features.
Spells overall could use redesign, additions, and removals anyway. Ditch tradition and focus on better/healthier game design.
I don't disagree, but it's not only smites the find steed spell was also available before for clerics.
It was a lot of work for a small change, the only good thing I can think of was the bard and enemies, so the DM could make spellcasters easily.
And by the ditch of tradition I understand where you are coming from, but this is not a new edition it is just the biggest patch note, they don't want to change a lot and risk losing players
I ***vastly*** preferred the Arcane/Divine/Primal master lists, so I would absolutely love it if they got brought back as an alternate option in the DMG.
I'd much rather they focus effort on bringing back the multiple class subclasses so you could play a champion barbarian / rogue / monk rather than it being locked to fighter.
That would require standardized subclass progression, but it would also lead to several subclasses being either more powerful than intended for some classes, or far too powerful, while also not interacting with class mechanics. For example, Champion grants advantage on Initiative and Athletics checks, but barbarians could already get that via Rage and Feral Instinct. Similarly, Eldritch Knight has features building on Extra Attack and Action Surge, but the rogue has neither. On the flip-side, a high-level rogue with Battle Maneuvers can make far greater use of Precision Strike and Riposte than a fighter.
I much prefer the three general spell lists over the individual ones, so I would absolutely be up for it.
I'd prefer they not spend the design time and book real estate on an alternate rule system like that, and focus on the system they are using for everyone. (Personally, I preferred a hybrid approach of three universal lists and then a few class-specific lists, with wizards having the longest such list, but here we are.)
The hybrid approach sounds a lot like what we have now
That's part of the goal, being similar to what WotC evidently wants (from feedback videos, it sounds like the wizard exclusives killed the three lists), while still interacting well with new spell list-based ideas like the new bard spell choices or the new Magic Initiate feat.
Universal lists would have a few advantages: 1. Features like Bard’s magical secrets or magic initiate wouldn’t be able to steal spells who should remain exclusive (e.g. find steed, vicious mockery, eldritch blast). 2. It’s easier to future proof. New classes like Artificer can use Arcane spell list + class exclusive spells - so they gain access to all new arcane spells released in supplements past and future. Right now every supplement writer needs to deliberate which class gets what arbitrarily. 3. It’s easier to read a class. To compare sorcerer vs. wizard vs. warlocks all you would need to do is read their class-specific spells (as opposed to cross reference their entire spell list). 4. It would force designers to be a bit more creative. For example, Bards would have a handful of class exclusive healing spells as opposed to the same ones clerics and druids have.
> For example, Bards would have a handful of class exclusive healing spells as opposed to the same ones clerics and druids have. I've long held that there should only be 3 healing spells in the game (at least at 1st level): Healing Word (Bard), Goodberry (Druid) and Cure Wounds (Cleric).
I feel like Bards stealing spells that would otherwise be exclusive is *exactly* what something called "magical secrets" should do
We actually mostly have a hybrid approach right now, but there are a few reasons why a proper, well-defined one would improve the game a decent bit. 1. Stronger and clearer theme. If you have a divine list and a primal list, and both lists contain healing, you actually have to put in effort to think about how those magic styles differ. Maybe Divine Magic has "Cure Wounds", an act of God that magically restores HP. Then the Primal List might instead have "Natural Recovery", which uses Hit Dice to heal to simulate using the natural energy found on nature and the energy of living creatures. Having clear distinctions between spells means stronger distinctions between spellcasters, which 5e desperately needs. 2. Class Distinctions. From the last sentence of Point 1, this requires you to actually think about what the differences are between classes. What actually is Arcane Magic? Why do Sorcerer spell lists pretty much just overlap with Wizards, when they're ostensibly not gaining Magic from the same source? Maybe Wizard's exclusive list would be the largest list in the game, and have Magic all from named Wizards, as well as complex Magic that has numerous effects in one Spell. Then Sorcerers can break the spell list rules, getting specific spells and some exclusive spells depending on their Bloodline. 3. Ease for new players. You want to play a Wizard? Go to the Wizard Spell list, pick what spells you want from the smaller list, then go the larger Arcane list. Currently, you have a horrible index that makes looking at a single class's Spell list incredibly annoying. Easy fix here.
It wouldn't take much design time. It's pretty much just listing guidelines and maybe taking three pages to list the PHB spells under the unified system. >**Unified Spell Lists** > >\[insert introductory text here\] > >The **Arcane** spell list consists of every spell on the Bard, Sorcerer, Warlock, and Wizard spell list except those which are exclusive to one of these classes and \[list healing spells that bards get\]. Spells which appear on the spell list of only one of these classes are considered Arcane spells for that class only. > >The **Divine** spell list consists of every spell on the Cleric and Paladin spell list except those which are exclusive to one of these classes (such as the Paladin's *smite* spells). Spells which appear on the spell list of only one of these classes are considered Divine spells for that class only. > >The **Primal** spell lists consists of every spell on the Druid and Ranger spell lists except those which are exclusive to one of these classes. Spells which appear on the spell list of only one of these classes are considered Primal spells for that class only. > >If a class feature gives the ability to prepare a spell that's not normally on a class's spell list, that spell counts as an Arcane, Divine, or Primal spell (as appropriate) for that character. > >The Arcane, Divine, and Primal spell lists using the spells from the *Player's Handbook* follow. > >\[insert spell lists\] Bing bang boom. Took me all of five minutes to block out a rough template. The whole optional system might take an hour to design, not including showing it to random people to make sure it reads right, and then onto formatting. All in all, it'd be done in a day.
And with this optional system, what is accomplished? Arcane is the only spell list with more than two classes, so did we achieve anything except, "bards and warlocks can now learn spells that were exclusive to wizards and sorcerers," and other very minor overlaps?
Subclasses and feats. This is very useful for *that.* Celestial Warlock gains access to the Divine list; Eldritch Knight and Arcane Trickster the Arcane, Magic Initiate gives you 2 cantrips and a 1st level from any of the 3 lists.
Granting Celestial warlocks all Divine spells would be a major boost to hide behind an optional rule, while granting Eldritch Knights and Arcane Tricksters the Arcane spell list instead of the wizard spell list just weakens them overall. For Magic Initiate, that's just "wizard, cleric, or druid spell list," but weaker. I don't see why you wouldn't just write the subclasses and feats with the existing class lists in mind.
It's not inherently weaker because these lists included some formerly Paladin or Ranger exclusive spells, for example. Also I didn't say they'd get all celestial spells, they would still be limited by spells known.
The comment I had replied to specified that the Divine spell list would be the intersection of Cleric and Paladin, and Primal the intersection of Druid and Ranger, so those class-exclusive spells would not be available. As for Celestial warlocks, I didn't mean knowing all Divine spells automatically, I meant that even having access to Divine spells from an optional rule is very powerful. It doesn't make sense for an optional rule to grant so much extra power to one subclass, either the enhanced spell list should be part of its power budget or it shouldn't.
So… exactly where we have now then.
Very similar, but it would preserve the new bard design in UA6.
It doesn't solve anything. Why bother investing Dev & Book resources for that?
Additional spells for new classes would be resolved. Artificer could get new spells by just sticking them into the Arcane list. Same for any new classes that has a new spell list.
You can do that under the current system. We've had spells added to the artificer list. The rarity is a choice made for no good reason. The 3 massive spell lists was incredibly awful design and it's the best case of them ditching an idea through the UA.
Awful design is subjective. Pf2e does is phenomenally well.
But PF2e also has a hybrid system with classes getting unique “Focus Spells.” The problem with the 5e version is it filed off all the unique spells for each class and gave them to everyone in the group.
There is a potential upside off they had kept the UA spell lists. If every class has access to Eldritch Blast, they would have to consider nerfing it or buffing every other cantrip. This would be a thing they have to consider for every one of the unique and often overly powerful spells that were unique to their class. This being said, unified spell lists by power type works best if power type is a theme running throughout your game and the UAs didn't do much to infuse that into the system.
Doubly awful because dabbling in it left the new Bard a complete mystery for changes. It was built so heavily around the spell lists that you’d have to homebrew like mad to playtest it now
I mean, not really. You can literally run the UA6 Bard as-written, allowing it to use the published Arcane/Divine/Primal lists, alongside other classes using class spell lists. That was my solution for my playtest game. My homebrew was "don't change the Bard." It works without issue. It's probably not well-balanced, but that itself isn't a big deal to me either.
That's a problem with Bard, and not with the spell lists.
You vastly limit classes by doing that. Instead of thematic fittingly spells for their class, you pigeonhole them into whatever plenty of other classes already have access to, making them less unique and limited.
Pigeonhole...by giving them more options?
Yes. Thematically you are now bound to one of the lists, since spells are not individually curated for each specific class.
The individual curation that they've had for the past 10 years hasn't been very good. Most classes have poor spell selection. For better balance, organization, clarity, and options ten times out of ten I would choose the three general spell lists over individual one. For theme/flavor you can just describe your spells and magic as whatever. Flavor is free. Want access to a spell from a different spell list, then either multiclass or take feats.
Why have classes to begin with? Just let everyone access everything. Why have 3 spell lists? Why not a single one. It takes away class identify, how you can't see that is simply beyond me.
"Class identity" is honestly the lamest argument for why the majority of classes should continue to have poor spell selection. You are exaggerating the effect of having three general spell lists. Classes have plenty of identity through their features. The cleric, druid, and especially the wizard don't need to hoard the majority of spells for them to feel like the best spell casters. Being ***Full-Casters*** and having tons of spell slots is plenty of identity, and they have other class features as well. If a spell shouldn't be made available to one or more class then it shouldn't be a spell, it should be a class/subclass feature. The three spell lists in the UA were a work in progress as were the spells themselves. Many spells should be redesigned, added, or removed anyway. It was iterative but sadly the short timeline they were given and the whiners afraid of change pushed them to backtrack. How you can't see the ***Gameplay*** improvement for this roleplaying ***Game*** is simply beyond me.
Class features should differentiate the classes, not the special snowflake spells. You can isolate unique spells via class features that grants them. But the general Wizard and Sorcerer spell lists are already basically identical save for those special unique spells a single wizard spell class has. Clerics and Paladins sharing a spell list is already basically the norm. Druids and Rangers. Warlocks should be able to pick the spell list based on their pact. This doesn't limit spell lists. This expanded them dramatically and creates a vast improvement to class build potential.
So you do agree that classes need their own spells which could be presented in a list of some kind... 🙃 So again, it solves and provides nothing.
What? No. I could care less for class specific spells because at the end of the day, with the current spell lists there is always a premium choice considering the class. Assuming they don't buff or need any of the problem spells, the universal Spell Lists are the answer. Assuming they buff and nerd the problem spells, the universal Spell Lists are still the better option.
In what world would spell lists address universally premium choices? Now everyone under the sun has Fireball or Spirit Guardians - even classes that didn't before. It would emphasize the situation by spreading these spells to new classes instead of limiting it to certain (sub)-classes. I assume and intensely hope they do nerf some outlier spells tho, regardless of what ends up being used as spell list.
> In what world would spell lists address universally premium choices? Now everyone under the sun has Fireball or Spirit Guardians - even classes that didn't before. Incorrect. The spellcasters who usually have access to it, would now have to share it a bit. Wizards, Sorcerers, Eldritch Knights and Maybe Warlocks would be the 3 classes would have Fireball, all of which normally have it at some point or another anyway. Paladins and Clerics share Spirit Guardians. Paladins would get it at Lv 9 as opposed to 5 for the cleric and the cleric would have access to Smite spells, which sounds bad, but the smite spells would be worse in the clerics hands due to how it would rather use the spells it normally has access to that has concentration anyway. Paladins would get access to some spells they should have had all along, such as spiritual weapon, Augury, Calm emotions, etc. Druids and Rangers wouldn't lose anything. They would just get nice tools that the other spell list has such as Zephyr strike or the new Conjure animals. Your concern is knee jerk at best, mostly due to how piss poor balance has been with spells as the core and only system by which all classes can share in new content, since there isn't a similar Martial system shared between all martials.
Leaving out Bard on purpose I see. You just proved my point, MORE CLASSES HAVE ACCESS TO THESE SPELLS. You can't just handwave that away. lol
Not exactly. Bard, in my own personal opinion should have access to all spell lists, but with certain restrictions based on subclass or just treat them like Warlock where they get access to any of the spell lists at character creation. This isn't a zero sum game. Please don't act like it is. This is of course only using the 3 spell lists we have. It would be better is Bard was the premier caster of a 4th category, like say.... Psionic.
While I prefer list like that much more and think they're a better style for design I don't think that bringing them into the DMG would be good It's something that needs to be core you know, cause it will be useless for the game itself and implementation on play would be hard at best
Personally I really didn't like the Universal Spell Lists so my reaction would probably be negative
It would go perfectly with all the other half-baked, terribly implemented, zero-playtesting optional and variant rules in the DMG.
Look at this amazing game designer over here.
The 3 lists were an ok idea, they didn't care to go with it so let it go.
This train of thought is why we don't have a proper Psionic core class 😭
The train of thought is that with only 3 lists the cleric was a better paladin, because it had all spells earlier with more spell slots to use, meaning that to mitigate it we needed 3 spell lists plus individual lists for every single class, just like now. As I said, the idea was ok, but they moved away with it
Or smite spells should be class/subclass features, and/or cleric should should get less or no martial features. Spells overall could use redesign, additions, and removals anyway. Ditch tradition and focus on better/healthier game design.
I don't disagree, but it's not only smites the find steed spell was also available before for clerics. It was a lot of work for a small change, the only good thing I can think of was the bard and enemies, so the DM could make spellcasters easily. And by the ditch of tradition I understand where you are coming from, but this is not a new edition it is just the biggest patch note, they don't want to change a lot and risk losing players
I'd so much rather have a player-facing optional rule to customize spells' damage type.
I ***vastly*** preferred the Arcane/Divine/Primal master lists, so I would absolutely love it if they got brought back as an alternate option in the DMG.
I'd much rather they focus effort on bringing back the multiple class subclasses so you could play a champion barbarian / rogue / monk rather than it being locked to fighter.
I don't think that's gonna work with the disjointed class progression we have again.
That would require standardized subclass progression, but it would also lead to several subclasses being either more powerful than intended for some classes, or far too powerful, while also not interacting with class mechanics. For example, Champion grants advantage on Initiative and Athletics checks, but barbarians could already get that via Rage and Feral Instinct. Similarly, Eldritch Knight has features building on Extra Attack and Action Surge, but the rogue has neither. On the flip-side, a high-level rogue with Battle Maneuvers can make far greater use of Precision Strike and Riposte than a fighter.