D&D 5E Which classes have the least identity?

[mellored]

Hypothetically, if D&D had to reduce the number of classes, and they where going to remove the ones that has the least identity, which ones would go?

Presume the options to play the character would still be in the game somewhere, just not as a class.
I.e. Fighter gets moved under Ranger, Wizard is a Sorcerer option, ect...

 

[CleverNickName]

I predict lots of people confusing "niche" with "identity" in the next few threads...

My vote was going to be for Sorcerer but it's not on the list. Which makes sense, considering how little of an identity it has.

 

[TwoSix]

Sorcerer...so little identity it didn't even make the list.

 

[CreamCloud0]

wizard and barbarian IMO

 

[Oofta]

Sorcerer...so little identity it didn't even make the list.

My thought exactly, I opened up the thread specifically to say "sorcerer" since it's just a second rate wizard with different bells and whistles.

 

[Mephista]

I'm going to be a troll and say....

Psion, Warlord and Spellblade.

Jokes aside, each one on that list is an iconic fantasy archetype. The only question is wizard / sorcerer, which are two sides of the same concept, so you need at least one of them.

 

[CreamCloud0]

My thought exactly, I opened up the thread specifically to say "sorcerer" since it's just a second rate wizard with different bells and whistles.

at least it has bells and whistles, that's more than the wizard can say it has with just a flavourless list of spells

 

[Yaarel]

The survey only allows three choices.

Different classes have different problems.

• Fighter needs to split into two classes: heavy infantry "knight" versus mobile light infantry "skirmisher".

• Monk absorbs all of the "Dex Fighter".

• Wizard needs to split up into thematic classes.

• Cleric works as part of the Wizard spinoffs.

• Sorcerer is almost strictly redundant.

• Ranger is little more than a Fighter (skirmisher) Druid multiclass, and probably the "wilderness" works better as four-level prestige class, that any class can take.

• Druid has a split personality, with multiple identities frankensteined awkwardly together.

 

[CleverNickName]

at least it has bells and whistles, that's more than the wizard can say it has with just a flavourless list of spells

I disagree. There's a ton of difference between an Abjurer and a Necromancer, both in mechanics and theme.

Compared to the wizard, sorcerers have less of both.

 

[Remathilis]

As stated before, I think identity is defined by two factors: mechanical niche and story niche. Mechanics in that the class is bringing some elements that the other classes so not, story is the idea or archetype is strong enough to support itself and multiple variants (subclasses).

Some classes have a strong mechanical niche, but not as strong a story niche. Some have a strong story, but not mechanics. Some lucky ones have both. A few forgotten ones had neither.

What I think people want is to try to squash strong mechanics and stories into one, which ends up doing more harm than good. Further, the definition of strong differs so widely that everyone uses a different measuring stick. I hate the mechanics of warlock, but the flavor just oozes out of every pore.

That said, I voted fighter. The i swing a sword guy is so lame in a world with leaping monks, raging barbarians and smiting paladins.