D&D General Class or Subclass importance

[jgsugden]

Why unnecessarily provide artificial restrictions? Why not evaluate the situation as it comes and make a case by case decision?

There is no reason to plan this out. Build organically and see what works on a case by case scenario.

 

[jmartkdr2]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again each time this subject comes up:

What I'd like to see in the next edition of the game, if they write one, are just four classes (Warrior, Mage, Priest, and Sneak) with a hundred subclasses spread out among them (Assassin, Paladin, Eldritch Knight, Monk, etc.) So using the naming conventions of the original post, what I want is just four Parents and their hundred spoiled Grandchildren.

May I ask why? What's the upside to making a paladin a kind of fighter?

 

[Neonchameleon]

The only time I found "parent" class remotely relevant was in 4e - and that using the roles (so defender rather than warrior) to provide a vision and benchmarks so the class design didn't end up with more junk classes that were good at nothing like the 3.X monk. I see a good case for that being useful but it's far from necessary.

 

[CleverNickName]

May I ask why? What's the upside to making a paladin a kind of fighter?

More versatility, and more streamlined design.

Say, for example, the Parent class determines what kind of caster the character is. No caster = Warrior, Half-caster = Priest, and Full-caster = Mage. (The parent class would have to determine so much more than the spellcasting format. It should also determine the number of skills, the types of weapons and armor proficiencies, the save throws, all that stuff. I'm only gonna focus on the spellcasting for this example.)

The Paladin subclass will give you the usual suite of abilities that we've come to expect from paladins over the years (auras, smiting evil, turning the undead, laying of hands, etc.) that augment and enhance the "parent" choice. And with this system, the Paladin can be a full-caster, a half-caster, or not a caster at all...whatever the player chooses.

If you want a full-caster paladin, use the Paladin subclass on a Mage chassis: you get all of the spellcasting you'd expect, with some extra auras and smiting abilities to infuse your spells with. Smite with your quarterstaff, or smite with an Eldritch Blast, its all good!

Or maybe you want a Half-caster paladin? Put the Paladin subclass on a Priest chassis. Now you've got a battlefield medic, tanking and buffing his friends with auras, healing the wounded, etc.

Maybe you want a No-caster paladin? Paladin subclass, Warrior chassis. Perfect for low magic/no magic campaigns, a charismatic and influential leader who inspires his fellow warriors to greatness, protecting them with auras and delivering terrifying blows from his longsword.

Again, the Parent class will determine so much more than just the level of spellcasting ability; this is just scratching the surface. But just looking at the spellcasting only (half/full/none), you can see how there would be so much more versatility.

 

[jmartkdr2]

More versatility, and more streamlined design.

Say, for example, the Parent class determines what kind of caster the character is. No caster = Warrior, Half-caster = Priest, and Full-caster = Mage. (The parent class would have to determine so much more than the spellcasting format. It should also determine the number of skills, the types of weapons and armor proficiencies, the save throws, all that stuff. I'm only gonna focus on the spellcasting for this example.)

The Paladin subclass will give you the usual suite of abilities that we've come to expect from paladins over the years (auras, smiting evil, turning the undead, laying of hands, etc.) that augment and enhance the "parent" choice. And with this system, the Paladin can be a full-caster, a half-caster, or not a caster at all...whatever the player chooses.

If you want a full-caster paladin, use the Paladin subclass on a Mage chassis: you get all of the spellcasting you'd expect, with some extra auras and smiting abilities to infuse your spells with. Smite with your quarterstaff, or smite with an Eldritch Blast, its all good!

Or maybe you want a Half-caster paladin? Put the Paladin subclass on a Priest chassis. Now you've got a battlefield medic, tanking and buffing his friends with auras, healing the wounded, etc.

Maybe you want a No-caster paladin? Paladin subclass, Warrior chassis. Perfect for low magic/no magic campaigns, a charismatic and influential leader who inspires his fellow warriors to greatness, protecting them with auras and delivering terrifying blows from his longsword.

Again, the Parent class will determine so much more than just the level of spellcasting ability; this is just scratching the surface. But just looking at the spellcasting only (half/full/none), you can see how there would be so much more versatility.

Just to understand: you're suggesting a setup where the Paladin subclass is available to all the parent classes? That's definitely an interesting concept (though I suspect it would be trickier to balance than other setups.)

 

[CleverNickName]

Just to understand: you're suggesting a setup where the Paladin subclass is available to all the parent classes? That's definitely an interesting concept (though I suspect it would be trickier to balance than other setups.)

Yep, that's what I'm suggesting. The way that the subclass options are restricted to a single class never sat right with me. Why can't Warlocks be Arcane Tricksters? Why can't Rangers also be Champions? It feels like such a silly and arbitrary restriction.

It would be tricky to balance that idea in 5E, but I'm hoping that the next generation of the game makes them a little more modular.

 

[Minigiant]

Yep, that's what I'm suggesting. The way that the subclass options are restricted to a single class never sat right with me. Why can't Warlocks be Arcane Tricksters? Why can't Rangers also be Champions? It feels like such a silly and arbitrary restriction.

It would be tricky to balance that idea in 5E, but I'm hoping that the next generation of the game makes them a little more modular.

Outside of a powers based game system like 4e, I fear a system would be very very hard to balance, full of traps, and things that don't work..

But I think you could possibly make it work by creating multiple versions of the same grandchild classes with same or similar features in select parents..

Like the Warrior-Paladin-Crusader, Warrior-Fighter-Cavalier, Rogue-Avenger-Pursuer, and Priest-Cleric-Templar might all have Smites and Auras.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Absolutely prefer the vast majority of focus to be on the class. Classes are what are distinct things. Subclasses should be small flourishes or focuses, not the meat and potatoes of the class. "Grandchild" classes should not exist, or should only "exist" as an emergent property not actually intended by the designers (e.g. the "Lazy" Warlord in 4e).

Further, classes should be providing meaningfully distinct mechanics, so that you can point to something particular and say that's what makes you that class and not something else. Hence Swordmage is a distinct class from "Fighter" or "Wizard" because "a blend of swordplay and magic" is quite easy to give its own distinct mechanics from either "specialized in weapons" and "specialized in spellcasting."

 

[Neonchameleon]

Absolutely prefer the vast majority of focus to be on the class. Classes are what are distinct things. Subclasses should be small flourishes or focuses, not the meat and potatoes of the class. "Grandchild" classes should not exist, or should only "exist" as an emergent property not actually intended by the designers (e.g. the "Lazy" Warlord in 4e).

I think a lot depends on both the class and how big you allow small flourishes and focuses to be. To use 4e examples I'm more than happy with e.g. the Brawler Fighter as a de facto subclass despite the fact that its powers don't overlap that much with a PHB sword & board fighter - and I'm also more than happy with the warlock's patron having a strong influence over the powers. In both cases of course the brawler is meaningfully a fighter for a whole lot of reasons, and the warlock a warlock.