D&D General What is the right amount of Classes for Dungeons and Dragons?

I wonder how long that would take. Especially now that we have 5e-adjacent RPGs like Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition and Tales of the Valiant around. Nothing hastens a new edition like a rival RPG or two. ;) Especially two built using the 5e chassis.
It's never competition.

It's the designers running out of ideas that the community are excited enough to buy.
It's why D&D NEVER sticks to 4 classes. You run out of ideas fast.
 

log in or register to remove this ad



Was wondering this when it comes to new editions of Dungeons and Dragons. How many classes are too many and how many are too little?

Is it for flavor purpose and fulfilling certain archetypes? Having certain roles be fulfilled?
never enough... but 4 could cover it... but 18 isn't enough
 

I 100% believe that the lack of a arcane 1/2 caster equal to the Paladin and Ranger in 5e is Appeal To Tradition and WOTC's artifical rule against new classes.

So before you even think about warlord or psion, we are at 14 class tropes in D&D.
 

I 100% believe that the lack of a arcane 1/2 caster equal to the Paladin and Ranger in 5e is Appeal To Tradition and WOTC's artifical rule against new classes.

So before you even think about warlord or psion, we are at 14 class tropes in D&D.
Well, Eldritch Knight is 66.7% of the way there, give or take 20–30%. 😛 :confused:
 

I think this completely depends on whether we have subclasses, prestige classes, and multi-classing. All of these are things that expand the total number of "classes" and have their own particular design implications. Subclasses inherit abilities from their primary class. Multiclasses allow players to create a union of abilities from two separate classes and subclasses.

I think my personal preference would be something more akin to a first edition D&D view where there was just a top-level class with no inheritance and then add in no multi-classing. That'd mean that a Bladesinger, rather than being a subclass of Wizard or a fighter/wizard multiclass would require it's own class and definition of abilities. That would expand the number of classes overall to a large number because nothing is trying to inherit abilities from a top level class. My reasoning is that I dislike the multi-class dipping, and for balance purposes, I would like designers to plan classes without thinking about whether every barbarian subclass gets a rage ability, or every fighter gets an action surge, etc.

So how many classes would this end up meaning? Easily dozens of classes.
 
Last edited:


Two, the wizards and the others.

Jokes apart, I think 5e hit the right spot in "one more and it would fall apart eventually", and for me the artificer is that "one too much".

For the minimum amount I would say four classes at least .
 

Sorry, haven't watched any of those, so i'm not familiar with characters. Except FMA way back in the day. I was more thinking in line of concepts. FE Guts from Berserk when broken into concept is tough, resilient guy with big ass sword. So bear totem barbarian/champion fighter, GWM feat, max str and con, greatsword and medium armor.

Reskin and re-flavor things was always thing in D&D. Thing is, too many classes and they go into niche specialization. And then we get 3.x all over again.
Somehow this jumped to mind. (First five frames)
 

Remove ads

Top