It Ain't D&D Without...

[Remathilis]

Ok, lets say you were making some new version of D&D (D&D Wahoo! Edition) and it was your job to pick the "essential" first batch of classes to go in the edition. Based on previous editions and the general "assumptions" of the game, which classes would get the 1st PHB treatment and which would end up in supplemental material down the road?

Interested to see what gets picked.

Ah Dangit, the Poll was supposed to be Multiple Choice! Mods?

 

[amerigoV]

If it does not have Kender Paragons as core, it ain't D&D.

 

[DaveMage]

I'd use the same as appeared in the 3.x PHB.

I would not add any others.

I'd make the rest of the features from alternate classes available as feats so that players could better customize their PCs.

 

[blargney the second]

You missed warlord. I think they're here to stay. (and they're good house guests!)

 

[Remathilis]

You missed warlord. I think they're here to stay. (and they're good house guests!)

Yes, the Warlord/Marshal was an oversight, not a slight.

 

[M.L. Martin]

Hmm...

The 'core four'--fighter, mage, cleric, rogue--are essential, of course. I'd quite happily see a D&D without the cleric, but that chance was missed twenty years ago; at this point, there's just too much legacy.

Ranger and paladin follow close behind. The paladin is arguably a prestige class/paragon path/fighter-cleric template, but is an archetype I want in the game, and the ranger is nearly as core as the basic four. I might, however, give the paladin some of the cleric's 'warrior-priest' element and shift the cleric more towards a White Mage/4E invoker archetype.

Maybe my MERP and 2E influences are showing, but I'd like the bard in there. 'Magical music' would be only one of its potential paths, although with the 'people person' and 'jack of all trades' elements.

From 4E, I'd take the warlord (possibly renamed 'captain' or something that sounds less elite), for the 'non-magical healing' option it provides and because it fills another valuable fantasy archetype--the heroic 'leader of men'. Perhaps blend elements of the cavalier with it for a broader 'noble warrior' archetype.

Druid, monk and barbarian belong to the expansion material. Those classes have always had a flavor of the exotic, and thus should be left a bit more out of the core.

Warlock? Most decidedly not in the core. Any D&D I'm in charge of is going to have a bright shiny Epic/High Fantasy feel to it, and while there's room for the 'evil-curious' hero, it belongs in an expansion, not as a core class.

The sorcerer and illusionist both belong in a magic expansion book, along with the other specialist mages. The swordmage or something like it, however, merits core status to fill the 'warrior mage' niche.

So, we wind up with:
Fighter
Ranger
Paladin (possibly with a bit more magical oomph than previously--probably something that looks a lot like the 4E paladin, really)
'Captain'/Warlord
Mage
Swordmage/'Warrior Mage'
Cleric
Rogue
Bard

 

[Plane Sailing]

Ah Dangit, the Poll was supposed to be Multiple Choice! Mods?

Can't do that, apparently!

Do you want to restart a new thread, making the poll multi choice?

 

[I'm A Banana]

Less "classes" more "adventure roles."

Fighter. Mage. Thief. Cleric.

Fighter = Damage-Dealer. Fighters kill things with pointy swords.
Mage = Obstacle-Clearer. Mages blow up walls and teleport you around.
Thief = Challenge-Weakener. Thieves disable traps and spy on enemies.
Cleric = Failure-Recoverer. Clerics heal you and replenish supplies.

This does not describe the only thing they can do. This describes their focus, what they do the best.

Fighters can still clear obstacles (beat down the door!) and weaken challenges (intimidate the enemy!) and recover from failures (first aid!), but they are the best at dealing damage, so that is what you want them to do.

Theives can still deal damage (sneak attack!) and clear obstacles (I heard about this riddle on the streets as a kid!) and recover from failure (We had to run away, but I grabbed that potion hanging from his belt), but they are the best at weakening challenges, so that is what you want them to do.

There are many, many, many ways to do the same thing, so whatever else we have page space for is basically there for at least one variation on each role, so we've got some kickers.

Sorcerer = Damage-dealer. Sorcerers blow up things with magic fire and lightning.
Druid = Obstacle-Clearer. Druids can fly over cliffs as birds and break down barriers as rhinoceroses.
Bard = Challenge-Weakener. They've heard the stories, and they're insulting the bad guys.
Warlord (Tactician) = Failure-Recoverer. They know how to secure a supply line and to keep people going past their prime (maybe less "I yell at you and you heal," maybe more "I make it so you don't collapse at 0 anymore").

Two options for each major adventuring role, and feats so that, in absence of one or the other, even cross-role characters can effectively (if reaching) fill the niches left open by others.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Monk is an oriental class.

 

[Dice4Hire]

I would go with the 3.5 PHB, sans paladin (prestige) and Monk (never did fit) or the 4E PHB as written plus bard and sorcerer.