D&D 5E Really concerned about class design

[Eric V]

Yes and every single one of your reasons is basically "I disagree it's needed as a class so it shouldn't be a class." That's not an argument - it doesn't really give me anything to rationally respond to, so I've given up on you.

As for class bloat - I already stated that's a mostly irrational concern because the core of 5e was designed to avoid this (to the extent it's even a problem) through the subclass system, ensuring that most concepts will be developed as subclasses, which I don't have a problem with. Getting the occasional new class doesn't automatically mean we have "a problem with class bloat". That's a silly, asinine argument.

Dude, you write "Some new classes would be good."

Others respond "Tons of new classes lead to bloat, confusion, and identity issues." (emphasis mine)

So....people obviously aren't reading what you are actually writing, and are just hand-wringing over nothing. 5e in no way is as vulnerable to these "dangers" the way previous editions were...but people seem to think it is. And that is colouring how they are reading your posts...if they are even reading them.

That's an insurmountable wall for you to climb, and it's why it's discouraging that all possibly official ideas have to go through a filter like that (to say nothing of the people who vote "I just hate psionics").

 

[Einlanzer0]

Dude, you write "Some new classes would be good."

Others respond "Tons of new classes lead to bloat, confusion, and identity issues." (emphasis mine)

So....people obviously aren't reading what you are actually writing, and are just hand-wringing over nothing. 5e in no way is as vulnerable to these "dangers" the way previous editions were...but people seem to think it is. And that is colouring how they are reading your posts...if they are even reading them.

That's an insurmountable wall for you to climb, and it's why it's discouraging that all possibly official ideas have to go through a filter like that (to say nothing of the people who vote "I just hate psionics").

Indeed. This is the problem with using popularity contests for all of your decision making. There's a heavy status quo bias among the population at large regardless of how irrational the idea behind the status quo is.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Just because we could create a class is not a justification for making one. In fact, there are several reasons for not creating more classes than are needed.

But that argument hasn’t been made, so this response isn’t relevant.

The argument that anything that can be a subclass shouldn’t be a class has been made.

 

[Umbran]

Indeed. This is the problem with using popularity contests for all of your decision making. There's a heavy status quo bias among the population at large regardless of how irrational the idea behind the status quo is.

Dude, one point to consider here:

You are talking about a luxury entertainment. There are only two things that matter - the business concerns of those who create the content, and whether people like the content. That's it. At root, there are no other issues to discuss.

We do not have a whole lot of information about the business concerns involved. We don't have access to the relevant data. All we have to go on are how good sales seem to be - from any measure and report we have, sales are very good. Any argument for doing something other than what they are doing now has to stand up to that success, and be very, very clear that the proposed thing would clearly be more successful. That's not easy to do, because, as already mentioned, we lack actual data.

That leaves us with whether people like the current content, and I cannot stress this enough, this an opinion about what you like. And the Bard tells us there is no accounting for taste - meaning no bookkeeping or mathematics. It is not a simple, rational thing.

This goes for both sides of the argument. Which is why the argument CANNOT resolve. It is not, fundamentally, a rational argument. It is a RATIONALIZATION argument.

 

[ccs]

No, I'm not - because plenty of people agree with me. I'm not going to change every single person's mind. That doesn't mean I'm wrong OR that I'm under any obligation to change my communication style. In fact, I've had several people stop arguing with me - likely because they slowly began to realize I was right, or, at the very least, that they could no longer put forth logical arguments demonstrating otherwise.

Or it could be that they've decided it's just not worth the effort.

 

[Mistwell]

No, I'm not - because plenty of people agree with me. I'm not going to change every single person's mind. That doesn't mean I'm wrong OR that I'm under any obligation to change my communication style. In fact, I've had several people stop arguing with me - likely because they slowly began to realize I was right, or, at the very least, that they could no longer put forth logical arguments demonstrating otherwise.

Nice try, but it amounts to little more than the same condescension you're accusing me of, which of course is always humorous to see.

Did you really just posit "If people stop arguing with me it must mean I am right?"

Wow. Stunning logic dude. No self questioning at all apparently. OK then, I will stop arguing with you. You figure out if I am trying to subtly signal one of A) I think you're right, or B) I have no logical arguments remaining or C) I have realized you're so incredibly stubborn and uninterested in a conversation that further conversation would be futile and frustratingly like beating my head against a wall.

 

[Einlanzer0]

Did you really just posit "If people stop arguing with me it must mean I am right?"

Wow. Stunning logic dude. No self questioning at all apparently. OK then, I will stop arguing with you. You figure out if I am trying to subtly signal one of A) I think you're right, or B) I have no logical arguments remaining or C) I have realized you're so incredibly stubborn and uninterested in a conversation that further conversation would be futile and frustratingly like beating my head against a wall.

You're frustrated because you are emotionally invested in the idea that I'm somehow wrong when you have no good arguments to demonstrate how without resorting to strawmen, so you just continue trying to condescend and attack my personality instead.

Everyone on your side of this debate is doing one of these two things - arguing using strawmen because they are intentionally or unintentionally misunderstanding/misrepresenting my argument, or throwing the discussion off course by criticizing my message/tone because they don't have any actual good arguments. You are choosing to do the latter, while most of the rest are doing the former. I call it out and it just reinforces your notion that I'm "the bad guy" in this discussion. Not rational.

It's a very common trapping of human psychology. Maybe you should self-question a bit.

 

[Oofta]

You're frustrated because you are emotionally invested in the idea that I'm somehow wrong when you have no good arguments to demonstrate how without resorting to strawmen, so you just continue trying to condescend and attack my personality instead.

Everyone on your side of this debate is doing one of these two things - arguing using strawmen because they are intentionally or unintentionally misunderstanding/misrepresenting my argument, or throwing the discussion off course by criticizing my message/tone because they don't have any actual good arguments. You are choosing to do the latter, while most of the rest are doing the former. I call it out and it just reinforces your notion that I'm "the bad guy" in this discussion. Not rational.

It's a very common trapping of human psychology. Maybe you should self-question a bit.

Or maybe, just maybe, you should accept that other people disagree with you for valid reasons. You're entitled to your opinion, but you dismissing all opposing views as fake arguments doesn't help your case.

 

[Warpiglet]

One last time. Tons of classes just trying to fill every possible need simply leads to bloat, confusion, issues with multi-classing and niche builds that are broken. It was a major mistake of previous editions. A lot of the weight carried by new classes was removed by rules simplification and backgrounds so they aren't as necessary.

With 5E they're limiting to classes that make sense and fill in major gaps. We're not going to have the dozens of classes. We might get a psion. I think the odds of getting anything like your brawler is slim and none and Slim just left town. I think that's a good thing.

The days of war-mime, cake-baker, priestly acrobat prestige class and multiclassing options in 3e was such a turnoff.

In fact these and kits in 2e tried to fill it all in. Coming from AD&D in the 80s, I always worked at flavor and explanations that fit an image and felt too much coverage almost pigeonholed and restricted.

I find multiclassing and feats to be fairly robust if you can self adhere enough to concept.

This means taking only things that really fit the concept in terms of spell, subclass and fear selection. ANd sometimes it reduces options.

How many witches of legend eldritch blast. Not many I would think.

I worked on a witch with warlock class. They fit pretty well. Poison spray, hexes, with knowledge of poison and rituals fit too. How would you add some ability to tell fortunes? Would a splash of wizard or cleric help?

I don't at all mean disrespect for those who want more. I just disagree that much more in terms of classes is in fact needed for coverage.

I don't want others to define what I can myself make with roleplaying and system mastery.

I played a swashbuckler before it "existed." I built a knight of wee jas Without splat book treatment.

There is endless variety with a lot of the tools that are present. When we have (what I do see as bloat) individuality and uniqueness is actually reduced. Some variety is necessary of course but there is a point of diminishing returns. I think the slow trickle has prevented many outright busted combos. Single classes characters often match or surpass the power of multi classes ones.

Add too much without enough care and we are back to the most problematic parts of 3e. I'd prefer not do that.

 

[generic]

Just because we could create a class is not a justification for making one. In fact, there are several reasons for not creating more classes than are needed.

I'm laughing so hard that tears are rolling out of my mouth-tentacles. This is the same weak argument you've used throughout the thread.

Give me a single reason why we shouldn't have a Psion that isn't "it's unnecessary".

I'll be waiting.