D&D 5E Should 5e have more classes (Poll and Discussion)?

[FrogReaver]

Umm, what? How is cutting a class not an overhaul? 'What would you change if you were not allowed to change anything?' doesn't seem like a sensible question to me.

You could assume it's a reasonable question and answer it as it was intended. Or you could assume my question is dumb and mock me for it.

I see you've chosen the later.

 

[TwoSix]

Umm, what? How is cutting a class not an overhaul? 'What would you change if you were not allowed to change anything?' doesn't seem like a sensible question to me.

"Assuming a constraint that you are not allowed to redesign or merge any of the extant 5e official classes, are there one or more of the 13 official classes that you would see removed from future products to better the quality of the game line?"

 

[imeannoharm]

I would remove the warlock. I think selling one's soul to the devil should be something that happens in-game not during character creation.

But perhaps a teeny tiny guideline on making warlocks beforehand.

 

[Minigiant]

Instead of vicious mockery, the dancing bard can take the cantrip distasteful strip tease. The artist bard can learn incomprehensible postmodernist garbage. The poet bard can take emo middle-school lymeric.


There once was a girl with a knife
who didn't cherish her life.
When the bully walked in,
she flayed her own skin
to immortalize all of her strife.

DM: The orc warlord growls and puts his hand to his axe by his hip. Roll initiative.

Player: I am concentrating on toprock to give myself +20 to init and I krump at him.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Player: I am concentrating on toprock to give myself +20 to init and I krump at him.

You know, I'm really glad I have no clue what you are talking about.

 

[FrogReaver]

Nope. Just the warlocks. I like the idea of the warlock's powers coming at a great cost, which is not a path the class goes down. Nor is there a good way to blackmailing the warlock, threatening to revoke his powers or punishing him for his insolence, without railroading the player down a particular course of action.

What if I liked the idea of the wizard having to actually go to wizard school to get his power and insisted it be roleplayed out in game. Is that really any different?

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

What if I liked the idea of the wizard having to actually go to wizard school to get his power and insisted it be roleplayed out in game. Is that really any different?

Your game, your rules. RPGs rock don't they?

 

[Crimson Longinus]

"Assuming a constraint that you are not allowed to redesign or merge any of the extant 5e official classes, are there one or more of the 13 official classes that you would see removed from future products to better the quality of the game line?"

Well that is an understandable wording and it definitely makes this trickier. The thing is that one of the biggest negative effects of having too many classes is that the existing classes become too narrow mechanically and thematically, but if we are not allowed to give the stuff of the removed classes to the remaining classes then it really doesn't solve it.

But then again, I don't think such limitation is sensible as the game is not static, new stuff gets introduced all the time. Tasha's Cauldron will include new features for existing classes and a lot of new subclasses. So keeping that in mind, I would still kill either sorcerer or warlock, so that in the future products the designers could use the freed design space to improve the remaining class.

 

[Minigiant]

You know, I'm really glad I have no clue what you are talking about.

That's why we need more American styled RPGs to introduce the Dancer class Breakdancer subclass.

 

[DND_Reborn]

That's why we need more American styled RPGs to introduce the Dancer class Breakdancer subclass.

I AM American. The difference is, I am from upstate, not the city.