D&D (2024) 6e, how would you sort the classes/sub-classs?

[Thurmas]

I would be fine with a 6th Edition in a few years, but I think much of what I would change could be covered in a 5.5 Edition.

To start, include all classes that eventually get included in 5th in the 6th Edition PHB. None of this condensing classes down to 4 groups or anything else. I think what 5th edition did with the classes and subclasses works great. State there will be no new classes in the future. I'm hoping this means that the PHB would include classes that will eventually get released, such as the Warlord or Mystic. All future 6th supplements would add subclasses, but not new classes.

You could include most of the current material, just make it more balanced and desirable.

To that end, standardize when classes get a Subclass, preferably all at level 2 or level 3.

Emphasize the subclasses with abilities that really make the subclass stand out versus other subclasses in the class. This should be a good portion of their power.

Make an even number of subclasses for each class. PHB could include 3 or 4 subclasses for each class and be fine. None of this 2 for some and 7 or 8 for others.

I like the ASIs in 5th edition. I like Feats also. I think they should be independent of each other. You still gain an ASI every few levels in a class, but it has to be an ASI. You gain feats at set levels also, but it has to be a feat. Choices and options that give flexibility make characters more unique.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Just to take this further, why have multiple offensive stats that do the same thing? If you are going to advance one offensive stats, the other offensive stats seem to be potential dump stats.

At least in theory, it should matter whether you are stabbing something or shooting it or casting a spell at it, such that a character with balanced stats will have more options to exploit enemy weaknesses and rarely be caught in a situation where they can't contribute.

Of course, that is somewhat at odds with the idea that each class would only focus on a single offensive stat, which is the core of the idea you were responding to. My own ideas for 6E run along the lines of eliminating redundancy in classes and ability scores, such that Strength is the melee attack stat and Int is the magic attack stat, so everyone is using the same rule-set and classes are just about which type of thing you want to specialize in.

 

[extralead]

Cavalier is about the only class focused on Animal Handling with Folk Hero, Mercenary Veteran, Sailor, and Soldier the only backgrounds that give Vehicle Skills.

No one-singular class or multiclass combination is necessarily-good at both Negotiation (Charisma-linked skills) and Investigation (combination of Intelligence and Wisdom linked skills). 5E makes it so that the duty must be cross-character. I actually prefer this. Have a Negotiator role (e.g., high-Charisma Rogue Arcane Trickster) and an Investigator role (Observant-feat Arcana Cleric, Light Cleric, or similar).

In my version of the game, there'd be two types of spellcaster, a generic counterspeller and a spell sniper.

Thus, I'd like to see more focus on the main ingredients:
1) A melee Fighter with sword and board as well as a hand-to hand defensive-style Monk dodger. Or both, like the Barbarian
2) A Spell-Sniper Arcana Domain Cleric with high-Int/Wis and all of the Int/Wis skills for investigating and seeing through lies
3) A Sorcerer with the ability to do many things, e.g., Divine-Soul or Wild-Magic or a Wizard like the Abjurer but with more party-level effect (similar to the Aura of Warding subclass feature in the Oath of the Ancients Paladin or the many features of the Bard)
4) A focus on Breaking In. This is the classic Rogue with Thieves' Tools. Disarms traps; picks locks; sneaks by enemies unseen/unheard; climbs walls
5) A specialist for the non-arcane tinkering, smithing, and artisaning. The Rock Gnome as a class and/or background instead of just a race. The crafter
6) A negotiator. Plain and simple. Can be deceitful but comes across as a smooth-talker
7) A world traveler. The Ranger, Circle of the Land Druid, or Cavalier but focused on ensuring the party sails smoothly around the globe, in any environment. Fast and efficient. My favorite 5E example of this is the Elk Barbarian Path of the Totem Warrior Aspect of the Beast subclass feature

Remove the Warlock. It's hokey and feels overly-contrived. Not a fan.

 

[mellored]

Hmm... actually, i'm thinking about going back to more 1e style. But more of a 5e scaling, 3e multi-classing, and 4e attacks structure.

There are 2 different levels.

Character level: This is the primary power scaling. Like 5e's proficency bonus, you get a scaling bonus to attacks, skills, saves, cantrip damage, etc...
It's based on your total XP.

Class level: Gives you features, skills, spells, etc... scaling the non-damage parts of those abilities. (firebolt -> burning hands -> fireball -> meteor swarm) or (hide -> hide as a bonus action -> hide in pain sight -> can't be tracked by magic).
All classes have different number of levels, and each level has a different amount of XP. Depending on how powerful the abilities are. DM's can adjust this for certain campaigns.


Also, use the 4e style attack roll. Where the attacker rolls always rolls the d20.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Hmm... actually, i'm thinking about going back to more 1e style. But more of a 5e scaling, 3e multi-classing, and 4e attacks structure.

There are 2 different levels.

Character level: This is the primary power scaling. Like 5e's proficency bonus, you get a scaling bonus to attacks, skills, saves, cantrip damage, etc...
It's based on your total XP.

Class level: Gives you features, skills, spells, etc... scaling the non-damage parts of those abilities. (firebolt -> burning hands -> fireball -> meteor swarm) or (hide -> hide as a bonus action -> hide in pain sight -> can't be tracked by magic).

That sounds just about perfect. I hope they go with that.

 

[cbwjm]

While I do like class/subclass as a way of specialising your character, another way might be a buildable class system similar to what they have for ACKS. The PHB could have some of the basic classes, at the very least the 4 groupings of fighter, priest, rogue, and wizard. They can have additional classes built using the build system and show how they are built later in the book for those players that want to create their own.

If not that then a more streamlined subclass system so that subclass abilities are gained at the same levels and generic subclasses for at least the 4 base classes are available for anyone to take. This way rather than a fighter picking up champion or eldritch knight they can pick up cleric or wizard which adds on abilities from those classes. We kind of have this now with many subclasses allowing a class to dip into another class via subclass. You could also have background subclasses, barbarian might be a subclass that any class can pick up, it might even be a couple of abilities that can replace abilities in your chosen subclass, similar to how the multiclassing feats in 4e allowed you to replace a class power with a another classes power.

I wrote class and subclass so many times in this post.

Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app

 

[Wulffolk]

No Classes!
No Levels!
No Hit Points!
No Armor Class!
No Alignment!
No d20!

Well . . . I guess it is no longer D&D without all of that garbage. Those things may be the foundation of the game, but they are also the biggest problem with it. I would be very happy to see D&D evolve beyond many of it's legacy issues.

What I would start with:
Choose Group Concept, then create character.
Choose Race/Gender, roll Abilities
Choose Culture/Background, determine Talents/Gifts/Flaws
Determine Childhood Training
Life Event (shapes personal nature)
Determine Youth Training
Life Event (affects personal demeanor)
Determine Adolescent Training
Life Event (influences goals and methods)
Determine Adult Path
Life Event (the catalyst for adventuring)
Begin Adventure!

Not all people are created equal, rolling Abilities reflects nature.
Playing the character begins with choices made during creation.
Every choice above adds a template overlay to the character.
Races give flavorful features, not stat bonuses.
The end result should be steered in a direction of fitting into the original group concept.
The game would use a unique (but still simple) dice pool system.
Armor would provide protection through a combination of deflecting and absorbing damage.
Weapons would have specific maneuvers and options associated with them (such as a sword being able to slash/thrust/bash/parry to varying degrees based on type, or a shield providing cover as well as being able to block/bash).
There will be more to playing a warrior than simply "I Attack!". Tactics and maneuvers will be important choices.
The rules of Magic use will be determined by the source of the Magic (divine favor, arcane manipulation, raw sorcerous power, Magic borrowed through pacts, psychic powers, power drawn from elements of nature, etc)
Magic is meant to have an impact, and to do things that can't be accomplished through mundane means. Thus when Magic is seen it will be significant, even if it is less common and less frequent.
Characters don't gain character or class levels, they improve their abilities and add more templates. Their power level is determined by their total experience.

And that is the problem, every time I start thinking about what I would change I essentially completely re-write the entire system, and it is no longer D&D any more. Maybe someday a better-written system will find mass appeal and our hobby can grow past the limits of D&D, but I am not holding my breath.

In the meantime, if I must deal with all of the problems associated with D&D, then 5e does a better job than any previous edition. I think that 6e might be done best by simply polishing the rough edges off of 5e after all of the options are covered. If they do that then 6e could potentially become the "evergreen" product line that they could use to sell a long line of stories and adventures.

TLDR - Grumpy old gamer rambles incoherently for far too long about things that will never change. Just ignore.

 

[77IM]

No Classes!
No Levels!
No Hit Points!
No Armor Class!
No Alignment!
No d20!

Well . . . I guess it is no longer D&D without all of that garbage. Those things may be the foundation of the game, but they are also the biggest problem with it. I would be very happy to see D&D evolve beyond many of it's legacy issues.

You realize you're describing literally thousands of existing RPG systems, right? For decades, "Classless!" was a major selling point for basically every published RPG other than D&D.

The question that drives me in circles is: has the use of classes helped D&D's popularity and adoption, or hindered it?

 

[The Crimson Binome]

The question that drives me in circles is: has the use of classes helped D&D's popularity and adoption, or hindered it?

Based on personal observation, class-less systems don't typically exhibit much staying power. The big competitors to D&D have historically been Palladium and White Wolf, both of which used class delineations (much more obvious in the former than in the latter) to keep characters distinct.

My guess is that class-less systems don't provide as much of a hook, for the players to immerse themselves into the world; and the freedom to make anything you want means there's little incentive to make a second character after the first campaign ends. If you play a campaign that takes your paladin from 1-20, you might really want to play another game as a rogue, or as a sorcerer. Being class-based has helped D&D maintain relevance throughout each edition cycle, while providing a convenient and obvious flaw for competitors to break themselves against.

 

[Guest 6801328]

As I've posted elsewhere, I would like to see another dimension added to Race/Class/Background, and that would be "Template"

Classes would be: Fighter, Wizard, Rogue, Cleric...plus maybe a few others like Warlock, Druid, Bard, Spiritualist

Templates could be overlaid on any class and would have a few iconic abilities. Templates might include:
- Paladin
- Woodsman
- Barbarian
- Knight
- Shadow..something? (Shadowcrawler?) Basically the Shadow Monk sub-class, but as a template for any class
- Lycanthrope
- Vampire
- Tomb Raider
- Archer
- Alchemist
- Shapeshifter

So you could play a Rogue Woodsman, or a Hunter Woodsman, etc. Some of the combinations might seem weird...like Rogue Knight, but hey if you can come up with fluff to explain it more power to you.