D&D General Which of these should be core classes for D&D?

[Divine2021]

I just want a dedicated archer. That’s all I’ve ever wanted.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

and does anyone else want a Druid that is actually Tree based instead of Animal?

I'd like one that is terrain/land-based, yes.

The land druid could have been that, but its just 10 variation of ''cant be attacked by angry grass'', instead.

 

[Cadence]

I'd like one that is terrain/land-based, yes.

The land druid could have been that, but its just 10 variation of ''cant be attacked by angry grass'', instead.

I liked that PF 1e went all out on the variety of Druids and Rangers.... Although I always wondered if that would be very limiting for PCs who travelled to different places.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Something I was playing around with thinking about this.

View attachment 302210

Interesting. I definitely disagree with Warlock. Other than the Celestial Patron the class has absolutely no association with the divine, divine magic, or divine classes.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Alternatively, a paladin is a fighter with extra stuff (a subclass) which is balanced with restrictions.

Better to cannibalize the fighter for the benefit of actual class concepts like Paladin, Ranger, Monk, and new focused class options with some degree of identity.

Right but the claim was that there are multiple classic D&D classes that "aren't even subclasses" and I am pretty sure the Warden (Warlord? I forget) is the only one since we got the artificer.

Psion, I guess.

Warlord, Warden, Invoker, Shaman, Swordmage, several psionic classes. Id add Assassin because the 5e subclass is a joke that I can’t take seriously as an attempt at an Assassin, but technically it does exist in 5e.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Also y’all, the Warden isn’t a Barbarian. It’s closer to a warrior Druid than it is to a Barbarian.

 

[Stormonu]

Interesting. I definitely disagree with Warlock. Other than the Celestial Patron the class has absolutely no association with the divine, divine magic, or divine classes.

It was based on the idea that the Warlock's spell comes from a Patron, like a cleric's spells come from a god.

 

[Reynard]

It was based on the idea that the Warlock's spell comes from a Patron, like a cleric's spells come from a god.

That's not really how warlock spells work, though, I don't think. The patron shares secrets with the warlock, teaching them how to acquire their magical power. But it isn't "granted" like a cleric's. The Warlock does not worship the Patron. They might even hate the Patron and actively work against their interest. They just have to abide by whatever Pact they formed.

 

[Micah Sweet]

That's not really how warlock spells work, though, I don't think. The patron shares secrets with the warlock, teaching them how to acquire their magical power. But it isn't "granted" like a cleric's. The Warlock does not worship the Patron. They might even hate the Patron and actively work against their interest. They just have to abide by whatever Pact they formed.

Except the pact doesn't require anything from the character by the rules, so the pact is effectively valueless.

 

[Reynard]

Except the pact doesn't require anything from the character by the rules, so the pact is effectively valueless.

That may be true but "the rules" aren't the sum total of the interaction between characters and the world.