Do you have any class? The class discussion thread (Paladins and Warlocks and Clerics, OH MY!!

[mortwatcher]

For me, class is a package of abilities and spells that is reasonably balanced versus the other packages of abilities and spells.

The class choice also sometimes help me fit the character into the given setting or come up with a backstory concept, if I don't have much of one or it's a one-shot.

So I'm firmly in the second camp.

 

[TwoSix]

Second camp for me. In my game, they're metagame character building tools, and have no place inside the narrative of the game. None of the NPCs in my game ever present themselves as being members of a "class".

That being said, they are a very useful metagame shorthand, and I reference things as "being like class X" all the time. I prefer the presentation where the classes themselves have a good amount of built in story, because it's more fun to reskin existing concepts then it is to add flavor to generic abilities. I think I just enjoy transgressing against the game's implied flavor, just because I can.

 

[Yardiff]

There are a couple of problems with the class system in D&D.

1. As was mentioned, some classes come with a LOT more built in lore than others. Which leads to 2:

2. People are still stuck in earlier edition mindsets regarding classes that don't actually necessarily apply to 5e.

Paladin is a perfect example. I've seen numerous references to Steve Rogers (aka Captain America) as the go to archetype for paladins. But, while that would certainly be true in earlier editions, it's not true anymore. There are, what, seven different kinds of official paladins now and each of them is very, very different.

And there's a reason for this. Too much lore in a class means that the class is locked into a single archetype. Everyone who plays that class has to play within a very narrow set of parameters defined by that class. 5e, with it's Archetypes, breaks out of that. If I want to play a First Nations inspired paladin with a spear dressed in doeskin leathers, talking about the spirits of the land and how we should respect our elders, I can. That's an Oath of Ancients paladin, right there.

But, people haven't really embraced this yet. You see it all the time, like @lowkey13 says, Hard Class or Soft Class. Does a warlock's patron interfere on a regular basis or it is largely hands off? Well, there isn't really an answer to that. It's going to depend on the kind of warlock (how hands on is a Great Old Ones patron really?) and the individual group.

So, while I do think lore is indispensable from classes, I think the bigger issue is that people are unwilling to accept different interpretations of lore and insist that their singular view of a class is the only possible interpretation.

Easy way to fix the paladin issue is rename the class to something like divine warrior and have the 'paladin' as Oath of Devotion. That way you can still make your savage warrior and those who see paladin as a specific thing would probably be fine.

 

[Tony Vargas]

It's a really interesting concept that is found pretty much only in 5e. It might have some ancestry in Prestige Classes in 3e, but, not really. 5e has build in the notion that before 3rd level (most of the time) you're not really anything. You don't really get into your "class" as such until you get your archetype.

In a way, it's pretty old-fashioned. For one thing, generally, they're called sub-classes (only martial classes have archetypes, ever other class gets some unique label - domain, tradition, oath, circle, whatever), and sub-classes go way back in concept, they were just mechanically like complete classes. In 2e, there were groups & classes, which, along with kits, came /very/ close to the organization of 5e with class, sub-class, & background. Heck, 5e sub-classes could be seen as /simplifications/ of 3e/4e builds and 3e PrCs or 4e Themes/PP/EDs (oh, yeah, and Essentials sub-classes).

 

[BookBarbarian]

Easy way to fix the paladin issue is rename the class to something like divine warrior and have the 'paladin' as Oath of Devotion. That way you can still make your savage warrior and those who see paladin as a specific thing would probably be fine.

If their power now derives specifically from their Oath, divinity may not apply to all these "divine warriors".

Perhaps "Oathsworn"?

 

[Shardstone]

Hey, guess what? I can play that straight out of the PHB in 1e.

And? You're ignoring the argument to make a completely sep one.

 

[abirdcall]

I think if class doesn't mean anything to you narratively then you are playing the wrong game.

I am very glad that 5e was designed narrative first. I think it shows. It is the strength of a class based system.

If you just want a list of abilities then a point based system would make more sense for you.

This is one reason why I don't use the multiclassing rules. I think it defeats the purpose and turns the game into a 'mush' of theme.

 

[Tony Vargas]

If I want to play a First Nations inspired paladin with a spear dressed in doeskin leathers, talking about the spirits of the land and how we should respect our elders, I can. That's an Oath of Ancients paladin, right there.

Well... you're making things a bit hard on yourself going DEX instead of STR, but only a bit (it works seamlessly enough, the pally's combat styles don't complement it much). And Oath of the Ancients sounded a bit more fey than animist... then, though, there are barbarian options that could come pretty close.

Hey, guess what? I can play that straight out of the PHB in 1e.

You'll have it a lot harder, though. You'll never find a holy avenger spear, you'll be lucky to find a +3 someday, and watchout for the cursed backbiter. Your AC will probably be on par with the MU. You might have a hard sell to the DM on the whole 'spirits of the land' thing, because that sounds pretty nature-boy Druid-y, and that implied TN back in the day.

 

[Yardiff]

If their power now derives specifically from their Oath, divinity may not apply to all these "divine warriors".

Perhaps "Oathsworn"?

Well being that there are several class features called 'divine' such as Divine Health, Channel Divinity, etc. Divine Warrior fits.

 

[BookBarbarian]

Well being that there are several class features called 'divine' such as Divine Health, Channel Divinity, etc. Divine Warrior fits.

Well you can tell how often I play Paladins