D&D 5E Challenge: Invent a PHB Class List with 6 Classes

[squibbles]

A while back there was a thread called "What Would Your Perfect 50th PHB Class List Be?"

It had an interesting exchange in it:

[...] Class reorganization tends towards two extremes: a large collection of micro-classes (very specific classes that hold to a single concept, often split off of current classes) or very broad overclasses that can absorb multiple current classes into them, differentiated by openly flexible class features. There is a group of people who prefer the system as is (plus or minus a few classes) but most pipe-dreaming ends up on either end of the scale. [...]

why does no one go with five or six then?

Lots of people stop at different points. [...] My point is that any attempt to pair down class lists based on anything other than personal like/dislike of a class ends up with a clear path towards a customizable classless system. Once you try to combine classes into mega classes that have multiple choice points and can replicate dozens of archetypes you're on your way. The broader the mega-class, the closer you are. [...]

To the challenge then!

Can you come up with a list of 6 mega-classes that elegantly contain the essentials of every existing PHB class? (bonus points for including artificers too)

How would you collapse classes? What are the essential parts of each class? What do you do with the existing subclasses that are very thematically strong (beast master ranger) versus thematically thin (hunter ranger)?

Be as opinionated about the PHB classes as you like (read bard-hating), but make sure to get all of them in. And remember, the challenge is to get down to 6 classes not to the "core four"--that's what makes it a challenge.

Also, apologies to @Remathilis and @Mind of tempest for quoting you both out of context, I hope you don't mind.

 

[Scribe]

Initial off the top list?

Fighter
Wizard
Rogue
Druid
Cleric
Artificer

Not that I would want that, but that's how I would do 5 + Artificer.

 

[overgeeked]

You only need three. Fighter, magic-user, and thief.

Everything else in the game is a minor variation of those three.

Cleric, divine magic-user crossed with fighter.

Paladin, fighter crossed with divine magic-user.

Ranger, nature-focused thief crossed with fighter.

Barbarian, fighter with more hp and dps but less armor.

Bard, fighter, magic-user, thief.

Artificer, item-focused magic-user crossed with thief.

Monk, fighter crossed with thief.

Druid, nature-focused magic-user.

Warlock, pact-focused magic-user.

Sorcerer, the “I’m special” magic-user.

 

[squibbles]

Initial off the top list?

Fighter
Wizard
Rogue
Druid
Cleric
Artificer

Not that I would want that, but that's how I would do 5 + Artificer.

Which of those classes subsume which parts of the other 7? i.e. is barbarian being collapsed into fighter?

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

Easy.

Warrior, the fighter. Covering all weapon focused themes: Weapon master, Guardian, Berserker, Cavalier, Hunter)

Warden, the protector. Half-spellcaster dedicated to protect something: Knowledge ala Bard, Freedom ala Ranger, Goodness ala Paladin, Oppressive rulership ala Blackguard etc

Warlock, the delver. Those seeking lost knowledge, walking the thin line between curiosity and madness: wizards, witches and warlock.

Seeker, the rogue. Scholars and thrillseekers, treasure hunters, beast masters and generic travelling adventurers.

Priest, the fated. Pick a domain (nature, healing, magic, war) and the way you defend you faith (war priest, monk faith healer, oracle, tongue of fire & hexes etc)

Scion, the heir. Those born with an inner reserve of power. Psions and sorcerers.

 

[ad_hoc]

Either we need to increase the power of the classes a little or load more onto the subclasses.

Fighter: Fighter, Barbarian, Ranger, Paladin, Monk

Fighter is already a blank slate and Battlemaster is a great template for adding lots of abilities with resource costs. Easy to slot in the other tough classes with subclass abilities and limited spellcasting.

Monk can be fueled by Superiority Dice.

Sorcerer: Sorcerer, Bard

Sorcerer has the theme of innate casting. While Bards train to weave magic through performance that is ultimately not how they learn spells. Both use Charisma and Sorcery Points can be repurposed to be Bardic Inspiration.

Wizard: Wizard

Cleric: Cleric, Druid

Remove some core cleric features to load onto some subclasses, ditch Nature and replace it with Druid. Wildshape uses Channel Divinity.

Rogue: Rogue

Warlock: Warlock


Monk is the only one I struggled with. Ultimately though it just needs alternate armour and unarmed attacks which don't take up much of a budget when the base class has full weapons and armour to start with and a Ki mechanic with special abilities which Superiority Dice already do. They will be happy with more hit points.

Wizard, Rogue, and Warlock all need to be on their own. Wizard studies spells and uses Intelligence. Rogue does not use limited resources. Warlock has a special casting mechanic which makes it incompatible with Wizard.

 

[Scribe]

Which of those classes subsume which parts of the other 7? i.e. is barbarian being collapsed into fighter?

Fighter > Barbarian/Monk.
Rogue > Bard.
Wizard > Sorc/Warlock
Druid > Ranger.
Cleric > Paladin.

I would drop Artificer into the Rogue list, but it's a requirement of the challenge.

 

[squibbles]

You only need three. Fighter, magic-user, and thief.

Everything else in the game is a minor variation of those three.

Cleric, divine magic-user crossed with fighter.

Paladin, fighter crossed with divine magic-user.

Ranger, nature-focused thief crossed with fighter.

Barbarian, fighter with more hp and dps but less armor.

Bard, fighter, magic-user, thief.

Artificer, item-focused magic-user crossed with thief.

Monk, fighter crossed with thief.

Druid, nature-focused magic-user.

Warlock, pact-focused magic-user.

Sorcerer, the “I’m special” magic-user.

I don't disagree. My Ideal class list certainly would not consist of 6 classes.

But getting from 3 which make sense to 6 that make sense is the challenge

 

[jgsugden]

I would never do this in reality, but if you're going to do it for academic purposes, here is the way I'd break it down.

1.) Scout - Strengths: Exploration abilities. They'd be decent in combat, but in peculiar ways that drew upon their exploration abilities. Rather then great defenses or great damage, they'd have eccentric abilities to augment them in combat. While some would be stealthy, not all would be.
2.) Spellcaster - Strengths: They'd be the only full casters. You could be a divine, nature or arcane based, but they are the most powerful spellcasters.
3.) Defender - Strengths: They'd be the ones capable of enduring combat, and dictating options to enemies through control powers. They'd be the ones that set the stage in combat through limiting enemy options opening options for allies, and taking hits.
4.) Beater - They'd be the best concentrated damage dealers. They'd be less reliable to hit, but hit much harder.
5.) Striker - They'd be capable of selecting targets better than other classes, as well as being more reliable with their damage. They might be archers, martial artists, combat rogues, etc....
6.) Leader - They'd have abilities that augment their allies. While a defender creates opportunities for allies, leaders influence their allies more directly by issuing commands, giving abilities, etc...

Many existing classes would be split up into these 6 different role baed classes. Any of the 6 could have spells, but only the spellcasters would be full casters.

 

[squibbles]

I would never do this in reality, but if you're going to do it for academic purposes, here is the way I'd break it down.

1.) Scout - Strengths: Exploration abilities. They'd be decent in combat, but in peculiar ways that drew upon their exploration abilities. Rather then great defenses or great damage, they'd have eccentric abilities to augment them in combat. While some would be stealthy, not all would be.
2.) Spellcaster - Strengths: They'd be the only full casters. You could be a divine, nature or arcane based, but they are the most powerful spellcasters.
3.) Defender - Strengths: They'd be the ones capable of enduring combat, and dictating options to enemies through control powers. They'd be the ones that set the stage in combat through limiting enemy options opening options for allies, and taking hits.
4.) Beater - They'd be the best concentrated damage dealers. They'd be less reliable to hit, but hit much harder.
5.) Striker - They'd be capable of selecting targets better than other classes, as well as being more reliable with their damage. They might be archers, martial artists, combat rogues, etc....
6.) Leader - They'd have abilities that augment their allies. While a defender creates opportunities for allies, leaders influence their allies more directly by issuing commands, giving abilities, etc...

Many existing classes would be split up into these 6 different role baed classes. Any of the 6 could have spells, but only the spellcasters would be full casters.

Interesting, that's a much different balance of full casters to non-full casters than 5e has currently.