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

[DeviousQuail]

Soldier (most fighters, berserker, battle rager, hunter)
Vanguard (most barbarians, EKs, paladins, some clerics, moon druid)
Adept (wizard, sorcerer, clerics, caster druids)
Sentinel (arcane trickster, warlocks, trickery cleric, bards)
Engineer (artificer, pet subclasses)
Infiltrator (rogues, some rangers arcane archers)

How did you know I like Mass Effect?

 

[fba827]

Since you picked ‘6’
How about one class built around each ability score. And then the names classes are various combinations of multi classing between them

no? Ok not but a random thought even if not entirely viable

 

[Vaalingrade]

I never saw the Rogue as Martial.

Definition of martial​

: of, relating to, or suited for war or a warrior​

The Rogue is of the Underground, not War. It's not a martial class.

I mean snipers, assassins, espionage and special ops all have places in war.

 

[steeldragons]

Fighter: combat expertise
Thief: skill expertise
Cleric: support expertise
Mage: magic-expertise
Ranger (the Fighter-Thief): support, combat and skills
Swordmage (the Fighter-Mage): support, combat and magic

<drops mic>
Boom. Done.

 

[steeldragons]

Since you picked ‘6’
How about one class built around each ability score. And then the names classes are various combinations of multi classing between them

no? Ok not but a random thought even if not entirely viable

Oh! Sure. One can do that too...

Str: Fighter (combat)
Dex: Thief (skills)
Con: Barbarian or Ranger (combat, some skills)
Int: Mage (magic)
Wis: Cleric (support/combat and magic)
Cha: Bard (support/skills and magic)

3 combat-capable classes. 3 skill-capable classes, 3 magic-capable classes.

Boom. Done.

 

[squibbles]

Stonetop has the best “class” nomenclature I’ve seen.

I haven't heard of Stonetop. Could you elaborate on the nomenclature.

Since you picked ‘6’
How about one class built around each ability score. And then the names classes are various combinations of multi classing between them

no? Ok not but a random thought even if not entirely viable

Yeah that could work if well executed. So far we've seen folks organizing them around party roles, power sources, magic/fighty/skilled permutations, and others--no reason ability scores couldn't be the organizing device.

 

[Vaalingrade]

The Smart Hero
The Charismatic Hero
The Strong Hero
The Dedicated Hero
The Tough Hero
The Fast Hero

The nostalgia...

It's overwhelming!

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

That's a fun exercise. I'd go with the following:

The adventurer is all about cunning, stealth, and skill. This is where rogues, some bards and monks, and also most rangers should be, along with most soulknives.

The channeler's power rests on creating, manipulating, and understanding the supernatural, either through talent (sorcerer/psion), study (wizard), or connection to the land (druid).

The commander excels in leading others to greatness. Most bards, warlords, and beastmaster rangers should be put into this class. The ardent would be here as well.

The engineer uses the tools of the trade to get the job done. Artificers, alchemists, and gunslingers are members of this class.

The oathsworn receives power in exchange for service to a mighty entity. That would be a cleric, a warlock, or a paladin.

Finally, the warrior is a master of combat skills. Fighters, barbarians, and monks should be put under this umbrella, and psychic warriors and a few soulknives would join them.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I haven't heard of Stonetop. Could you elaborate on the nomenclature.

The Blessed
The Fox
The Heavy
The Judge
The Ranger
The Marshall (in the sheriff sense)
The Light-bearer
The Seeker
The Would-be-Hero

 

[Lanefan]

So many people leaving the Rogue in. First thing I would do is merge them with the Fighter to create a proper martial hero class. One that can function in combat and out of combat.

Which would leave only one non-casting class out of six. Not enough.

My list would be something like:

Warrior (includes Fighter, Knight, Ranger, Barbarian, bits of Swashbuckler, etc.)
Rogue (includes Thief, Assassin, Archer, "face" type, bits of Swashbuckler, etc.)
Cleric* (includes Druid, Paladin, etc. - all the religious types)
Mage* (includes Sorcerer, Warlock, Artificer - all the arcane types)
Monk
Bard*

Monk and Bard here would be unique classes each with bespoke mechanics that no other class can use or access. Due to this each could only ever be played as single-class characters, so as to avoid dipping to get access to these mechanics.

3 casting classes marked with '*', 3 non-casting.

I would move Ranger back in as a Fighter class more like its 1e version, as every version since has been varying degrees of terrible.