D&D (2024) How quickly should WOTC add new classes?

[Nightfly]

I'm sorry to go full crusty grognard, but I do not want to play at a table with a Shaman, a Psion, an Investigator, a Kineticist, and a Certified Public Accountant. That's not D&D to me. There's nothing at all wrong with "not D&D" -- I play other systems and love them -- but I want my Dungeons and Dragons to be more firmly rooted in the game's history than that.

I do realize I'm being a grumpy old man. But I like my core 12 classes, dammit.

 

[DEFCON 1]

So... we're getting rid of the wizard, right? They're just a cheaty sorcerer, after all.

Actually, I believe the Sorcerer is merely the cheaty Wizard... the one who's never had to study or work hard like the Wizard because his dad works in the same field and the Sorcerer grew up already exposed to everything.

The Sorcerer is the Nepo-Baby of D&D.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

I'm sorry to go full crusty grognard, but I do not want to play at a table with a Shaman, a Psion, an Investigator, a Kineticist, and a Certified Public Accountant. That's not D&D to me. There's nothing at all wrong with "not D&D" -- I play other systems and love them -- but I want my Dungeons and Dragons to be more firmly rooted in the game's history than that.

I do realize I'm being a grumpy old man. But I like my core 12 classes, dammit.

Except those 12 core classes and nothing else is a 5e thing, and not rooted in ancient DnD....

Psionics goes back to ADnD, while the first dedicated class for it goes back to 2nd edition.

 

[Minigiant]

I'm sorry to go full crusty grognard, but I do not want to play at a table with a Shaman, a Psion, an Investigator, a Kineticist, and a Certified Public Accountant. That's not D&D to me. There's nothing at all wrong with "not D&D" -- I play other systems and love them -- but I want my Dungeons and Dragons to be more firmly rooted in the game's history than that.

I do realize I'm being a grumpy old man. But I like my core 12 classes, dammit.

The shaman and Psion are over 30 years old at this point.

Older than the D&D barbarian.

They are iconic D&D now.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

If we're going by grognard rules, we're going to need to remove warlock and sorcerer too. They're 3e classes, so more recent than psions.

 

[TwoSix]

Since the poll question said “should”, I voted Other, since the correct answer is “in the PHB”.

 

[TwoSix]

I understand that previous editions have gone well overboard with how many classes they have.

But there are more options than 12 classes or literally hundreds of classes.

“Assuming the current class and subclass design is static, what is right number of classes for 5e” would be an interesting poll question in and of itself.

 

[the Jester]

Only when there is a real need. I don't want a proliferation of classes with no real identity except for a mechanical one (e.g. the invoker from 4e, the ninja from 3e, etc). Only classes that fill a real missing archetype in fantasy should be added.

If you can do it as a subclass, it doesn't need to be a class; and if you can do it as a feat, it (probably) doesn't need to be a subclass.

We need a warlord. Maybe a psion/mystic. Maybe a dedicated shapechanger without spells. Other than that, I can't think of anything worthy of a full class.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

“Assuming the current class and subclass design is static, what is right number of classes for 5e” would be an interesting poll question in and of itself.

Most people would say 12 and list the 5e PHB classes. For the sole reason that's all they know.

 

[TwoSix]

I do realize I'm being a grumpy old man.

Kinda, yea.

The Shaman/Psion/Investigator/Kineticist table sounds way more fun to me than Fighter/Rogue/Cleric/Wizard again. Personally, I’d be happy to never see the same class twice at any of my future games.

But again, I’ve always been pretty vocal that I don’t see D&D as having a strong identity for me outside of being the melting pot for fantasy tabletop play.