D&D General What kind of class design do you prefer?

[Minigiant]

Fundamentally.

Since D&D used 6 attributes, I would prefer if there was at least one class pre ability score.

Ideally I'd go 3 classes per ability score just for variety's sake.

 

[Krachek]

Same. 3e had more classes than 5e and tons of prestige classes and tons of feats. I could build just about any concept I could imagine, which I also very much miss in 5e. 5e is a lot more balanced, but I would give up some of that balance to get the ability to make my character concepts and not be pigeon holed into 5e's much more narrow band of concepts.

So what are the character concepts you miss the most?

 

[payn]

I respect this position, but if you don't have the option to take them then they aren't really options, which is kind of my whole point.

5E is not completely free from this either. There are multiclass limits which require a 13 in a stat (or two) and then there are stat prerequisites for a few (not many) 5E feats. I think those should go away too. I should not need a 13 dex to multiclass to Rogue, especially when I can start a 1st level Rogue with an 8 Dex (or even lower if I roll), I should not need a 13 in intelligence or wisdom take a ritual caster feat.

I do think some pre-reqs are not reasonable, particularly in 3E/PF. I do like having them though, especially for prestige class. A "prestige" class is something a character should spend considerable time working towards. It's not a common thing and there are not a million of them walking around like fighters because its prestigious.

I think options should have tier of ease on down.
Skills
Feats
Archetype
Class
Multi-class
Prestige Class

I know a lot of prereqs in 3E/PF era were there to make you jump through some thematic hoops for prestige. For classes and multi-classing alignment was used to stop some stacking abilities, which I did not appreciate (despite loving alignment in my D&D games). I would not recommend any designer to follow this. As a GM, I often will work with players to change up and/or eliminate some of the obstacles that can be quite numerous.

Im not terribly familiar with 5E yet. I have only run a sorc from 1-20. What are the balancing factors on the stat limiters for MC?

 

[Maxperson]

That is not just a lot. That is insanely lot.


Dear Athe, please no!

Ultimately when we are at dozens of classes and hundreds of feats we have already passed the point where a class based system is obviously not working and it would be far more sensible to just use classless system.

I'm not suggesting that 5e hit 3e levels. But there is plenty of room above what we have that is still well below 3e.

 

[Maxperson]

So what are the character concepts you miss the most?

I don't have a list of favorites that I can just pop out. My mind doesn't work that way. When I go to make a PC, I come up with several ideas for characters. In 3e I only ever hit one idea(can't remember what it was) that I could not create. With 5e I usually have to discard multiple ideas.

 

[TwoSix]

Personally, I like systems which provide a lot of simple, thematic options that can be mixed and matched. Shadow of the Demon Lord is my favorite class system, and I also like Warhammer's careers as a thematically minded pseudo-class system.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I don't particularly care for the phrasing of the question.

That is, calling the latter option "narrow" isn't really what I like, but I do prefer a non-restrictive number of classes. I think 4e was a bit too much, since a few of its classes could've just been variations of other classes (Seeker and Runepriest primarily), but somewhere on the order of 20 classes is good by me. For example, everything in the 5e PHB, plus:

• Warlord
• Warden
• Shaman
• Avenger
• Swordmage
• Artificer (already added to 5e, I know, just being thorough)
• Assassin...maybe (I can see the argument for folding it into Rogue)
• Something psionic, independent of other classes
• Monster...maybe (you could make subclasses for various famous monsters: Vampire, Werewolf, Mindflayer, Beholder, Android, etc. It'd be fun!)

That's 6 classes over 5e's current lineup of 13 (counting Artificer), if you exclude my two "maybe" things. That's only 19. So ditch Assassin, keep Monster as a "for fun" option (e.g. not entirely serious...but something that can work even in a serious game if you want it to), and I'd call that a pretty ample set. It would be hard to add whole new classes to that lineup without stepping on toes, which is why you'd focus on subclasses from there on out. Explore possibilities, let things breathe, really dig into questions of what the baseline chassis can support, etc.

Obviously each one should bring distinctive mechanics to make it worthwhile to play that class instead of kinda-similar things. E.g. Avenger is not a Paladin (they don't wear plate) nor are they Rogues (they use huge two-handed weapons and are powered by divine magic), but they have certain similarities to each. That means offering both thematic and mechanical difference is important.

 

[Ancalagon]

PF improved it, but it is still not as open as 5E IMO. The big problem is not the garbage feats, although those do exist, but that good feats are not available or that good feats are bad choices because the opportunity cost of not optimizing and "falling behind" is so high.

Also even in PF prestige classes have a bunch of stupid prerequisites, and while they are not "garbage feats" they are prerequisites and you are either locked out of that prestige class because you did not take the prerequisites or you are locked out of building the character you want because you have to take the prerequisites when you have feat options.

For example if I am playing a wizard and I decide at 12th level that I want to be an Arcane Archer because that is cool and we got a magic bow and I just want to do it. If I have not planned for it already, it is going to be AT LEAST 20th level Wizard before I have all the feats I need in place. To make matters worse I am a wizard and I get regular bonus feats, but for some stupid reason I can't use them to get any of the feats that are actually needed for an Arcane Archer. The vast majority of prestige classes will be similar or worse. If I want to be an assasin and I am not evil, I need to figure out how to change my freaking alignment.

Those kinds of restrictions are just stupid and it is a HUGE limitation on the actual choices you have for your character at any time after 1st level.

I don't know PF2 well, but in PF1 the vast myriad of choices is an illusion. Optimal designs are SO MUCH BETTER than casual one, so it ends up that a good 90, 95% of possible build are basically garbage.

If in 5e you decide to play a casual fighter, shield and board and spend your ASI on boosting strength and con... you aren't going to be remarkable, but you will be reasonably effective. A casual build character in PF1 is a mere shadow of what an optimized character can do.

 

[payn]

I don't know PF2 well, but in PF1 the vast myriad of choices is an illusion. Optimal designs are SO MUCH BETTER than casual one, so it ends up that a good 90, 95% of possible build are basically garbage.

If in 5e you decide to play a casual fighter, shield and board and spend your ASI on boosting strength and con... you aren't going to be remarkable, but you will be reasonably effective. A casual build character in PF1 is a mere shadow of what an optimized character can do.

Right, there is a gulf between optimized and causal options thats staggering in PF1. In 5E I like the steps they took, but it almost seems like its too tight. Almost right, but not quite right for this goldilocks. However, Im able to live with it if casual tables run better and life for GMs is more relaxing.

PF2 took a more 4E route in that options are siloed, and multiclassing is more like taking a single feat from another class than being anything like that other class. Its strange, because they really locked in the effectiveness as long as you play along with the design. If you dont distribute your stats correctly, and/or follow class paths strictly, you get punished severely with ineffective characters.

 

[Lanefan]

Classes: 63ish
Prestige Classes: 965ish
Feats: Even more than prestige classes(not counting them).

Added together: a complete mess.

Core 3e wasn't too bad to start with, though as a player I never really saw feats as being anything other than a nuisance both at level-up and during play. But once the splats started piling up it all got out of hand in a hurry.

The key, for me, is to realize (or accept) that not every little aspect of one's character needs to be reflected in the mechanics; and that expanding the mechanics to try and reflect every little thing just ends up with an over-complicated and bloated system.