D&D (2024) Would you be fine with classes that you can't always play but are better than base classes?

[UngeheuerLich]

Yes. Reward great dice luck with... even better class features!

I'm sure that will work out great

The price paladins had to pay was harsh. Putting your probably highest stat in charisma was quite some nerf to their other stats.
Fighters had a reasonable chance to get an 18/xy in strength. Paladin's chances were slim at best. You had to roll a 17+ and an 18 for strength. And you had to be a human. So no bonuses.

Our DM allowed us sometimes to roll for exceptional strength and then decide of we really want that in strength so the penalty was a bit lower (only rolled 18/23 or so with a +1/+3 bonus - > put the 18 into charisma).

Edit: and I think the PHB disallowed even weapon specialization, so their melee damage is way lower.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Thank you for letting us know how much we should value your input.

Higher than yours? As he is still an expert in that system?

 

[cbwjm]

Nowadays, I don't think I'd go back to that. I think if I was playing 2e back in the day knowing what I know now, I'd allow people to play any class regardless of stats. Back then, I'd bump up stats, but also require them to put their highest stats against the requirements meaning a paladin that rolled a 16 as their highest stat would have to put it in charisma, not strength.

I should note that I do like rolling stats to see what I can play, or which class my stats would excel at, but the ultra rare paladin isn't something that I'd care for now. Roll a decent strength and constitution and decide that you'd like to be a paladin but you have an 8 charisma, go for it! You may not inspire people with your presence, but you might still inspire them through your deeds.

 

[Chaosmancer]

It's simplifying because it's getting rid of unnecessary and gatekeepy rules. The fact that those rules add nothing and make the game worse is a bonus.

Right, I always forget how some people just love gatekeeping rules that make the game worse and less popular...

 

[FrogReaver]

Back in the long long ago, Paladins and Rangers where just better. They were Fighters+.

But you couldn't just pick it. You had to roll stats high enough. And even if your DM let you insert your rolls into any stat still didn't mean you had high enough stats to be a Ranger or Paly. They were special and you wanted one in the party if possible. It was always a pleasant surprise when one got to be in the party. Now-a-days it's just ho hum another Ranger.

Of course, with the standard being Point Buy or whatever now there would have to be an alternate method. Like roll a 6 on a D6 if you want to make a Paladin or Ranger. This is assuming they are Better Class Plus. Could be whole new classes that are a take on the regular balanced class. Not a Sorcerer but a... Witch King! Or whatever.

Do classes need to be balanced anyways? Most people seem to get a character idea and not really worried if they will be A+ tier in combat.

Game will not explode if you do this.

Our group often chooses to randomly roll for class/race/background/stats already - and some of those combinations can be much better/worse than others. We still have fun.

However, I wouldn’t like stronger classes as baseline for modern d&d but that is a different discussion.

 

[Horwath]

I remember a friend wanted to qualify for psionics or somthing. He wanted to play Yoda. He filled an entire page, on both sides, with stats. He must have rolled 30 or 40 times before he got a set of stats that qualified him. He made his character and then rolled HP. He rolled a 1. He spent most of 1st level unconscious.

When he finally made it to second level, he rolled another 1. So, with 2 HP, he spent most of 2nd level unconscious.

This is why rolling for stats and for HP should be optional rule with warning disclaimer: you are doing this at your own and your entire group peril.

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

This is why rolling for stats and for HP should be optional rule with warning disclaimer: you are doing this at your own and your entire group peril.

I disagree. EDIT: I think multiple ways to produce stats should always be an option. Peril is a bit overstating.

I do think rolling stats is better if you don't choose a class first. In fact, I think it's ideal for people who aren't sure what they want to play. Once you roll, you can look at the stat layout and pick a class that fits. If you have a character idea in mind ahead of time, Point Buy is the way to go.

I do agree that rolling HP at 1st level sucks. I've played a couple 1hp characters. For those characters, I encouraged the party to avoid combat, used ranged weapons or ran away. It worked fine. But probably wouldn't have if my character needed to be the front line fighter.