• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

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

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?
For adoption, classes help. Having 30 points to spend on 30 things is 900 options, more than enough to overwhelm new players.

Having a class gives you 10 clean options. Each one with a partially baked story let's say "I'm a wizard" and everybody knows what to expect.

Though, the ability score system and spell levels vs character level don't help. No need for 20 Str to give +5, and for level 5 wizard to cast level 3 spells.
It's about as unnecicaray as THAC-0.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

A system like in shadow of the demon lord could be quite cool.

You gain abilities at different levels for your race, novice path, expert path, and master path and the paths can be combined in any combination meaning that you can start as a warrior, pick up wizard at level 3, and then mage knight at level 7. Meanwhile, your friend might be building a similar character but goes with warrior, fighter at level 3, and then mage knight at level 7. You have more magic at you disposal while the they have more combat abilities. Something similar might work well for a potential 6th edition.
 

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?

There is a reason for that. So many other game systems do so many things so much better than D&D. What they do not have, and have rarely ever even come close to, has been D&D's name recognition and influence. The reason for that is that D&D came first and defined the hobby, thanks to the huge amount of publicity (usually negative and ignorant) that it received.

My plan to use layered templates is similar to what [MENTION=6801328]Elfcrusher[/MENTION] is talking about. A character would have the option to improve through free-form unstructured growth, or apply templates of multiple pre-defined aspects, sacrificing customization for the ease of learning from a mentor or organization. Templates would function kind of like Feats that add special class-like features, but usually have some sort of pre-requisite or membership requirement.

And to answer your question, having Classes seems to help keep D&D accessible as an entry point into the hobby. It offers structure that is rarely seen in real life, keeping it feeling more like a game than a fantasy simulator.
 
Last edited:

For adoption, classes help. Having 30 points to spend on 30 things is 900 options, more than enough to overwhelm new players.

Having a class gives you 10 clean options. Each one with a partially baked story let's say "I'm a wizard" and everybody knows what to expect.

This. Though by rights, D&D already as too many options - for most people, somewhere between 5 and 9 distinct options is generally best.
 

A system like in shadow of the demon lord could be quite cool.

You gain abilities at different levels for your race, novice path, expert path, and master path and the paths can be combined in any combination meaning that you can start as a warrior, pick up wizard at level 3, and then mage knight at level 7. Meanwhile, your friend might be building a similar character but goes with warrior, fighter at level 3, and then mage knight at level 7. You have more magic at you disposal while the they have more combat abilities. Something similar might work well for a potential 6th edition.
This was one of my first thoughts as well, but I have also not yet seen SotDL in play yet, so I'm reluctant to say that this optimal. But fas best as I can tell, it does allow for a tremendous degree of character customization.
 


So to borrow/carry on from this...

Base Class: Broadest theme/archetype of a certain fantasy trope, focus on the specific features/mechanics upon which the class relies. A character's specific flavor is left, nearly entirely, to the player or other elements of character creation (such as themes/backgrounds, accumulated skills, feats, etc...)
--Less Broad Thematic subclass with slight mechanic difference, e.g.: a subclass that relies on a specialty of a certain feature/facet of the base class.
--More narrow thematic subclass with heavier mechanic differences.
--Most narrow thematic subclass, probably including some alignment or other restriction, with the heaviest mechanic differences from the base, including the use of magic and/or other specific feature from a different base class.

We get the following D&D Game [presumably all PC] Classes:

The Warriors
Fighter:
broadest possible/default "warrior" archetype. Use weapons. Hit hard and often. Stand longest.
--Knight [or Cavalier if you prefer] - a specific flavor/theme of warrior, honing in on the character's expertise and background flavor.
--Barbarian - a specific flavor/theme of warrior, including assumptions of culture [if not race], hones in on a particular fighting style with a unique mechanic ("Battle Raging/Berserking") other warriors don't have access to.
--Martial Adept - a very specific "martial arts" disciple kind of warrior, particular martial arts "style" allows for above/beyond attack damage and effects and supernatural abilities particular to the Adept, heavily oriented toward Dexterity features -likely taken from the Thief/Rogue class, the discipline and honor required of the flavor/theme of the archetype requires a dedication to a Lawful alignment.

The Wizards
Mage:
the broadest possible/default "wizard" archetype. Guy/gal who uses Arcane Magic the most. All types. Knows and learns, researches and figures out, seeks out and hunts down spells. Mo' Magic, Mo' bettuh. You're going to have a grimoire as part of your spellcasting/feature -even if you want to fluff the character as innately magical. Fluff it as your notebook, a dream journal, however you want if you don't like actual "spellbook" but it's something you will want to have and guard rigorously to protect the magical secrets, formulae, and epiphanies within. You access are the definitive magic-user of the Arcane Magic spell list.
--Illusionist: to go back to the origins of the game and give a lad/lass their due. a specific flavor/theme of wizard, using mind-altering and phantasmal magics from creative to downright horrifying effect. A slate of differing or slightly more narrow features to the Mage's: a save bonus against Illusions & Enchantment effects, cast a spell without notice, etc... You get your own [arcane] spell list that has some overlap with the Mage, but is [at least half] spells only those trained in your special sorcery can master.
-----SIDE BAR: This will be the model class for all other "specialization schools" in the 2e+ style: a couple of individual features + a spell list that includes some from the Arcane List and some specific to your type of magic. Note, I would not bother with all 8 types, but boil them down and condense them into "schools" of casters that are more thematically distinct. I would think, including Illusionists, you should be able to get it down from 8 to 5 at least.
--Witch: a specific flavor/theme of a magic-user that is more rooted in "folk-magic," crafting, learning from passed down tradition vs. rigorous academics, and ritual. The witch's unique features include a die roll altering "Hex," work ritual magic above their apparent experience level, and their unique mechanic (a la a Barbarian's Rage) the ability to "Craft" spells into potions, common items, and treats. So you can, however many times per day or prof bonus or Cha. modifier or what have you, you "cast" a spell into a brew and then that creation can be carried around however long until someone eats it or you throw it at, hit with, or splash it on someone. They also learn/accumulate the designs and glyphs to inscribe special talismans as they advance in level to simulate the abilities of other spell-casters (such as being able to Turn Undead). The witch "makes" magic in a variety of forms, more-so than learning/accumulating spells. Spell selection is limited to a combination of the Illusionist's spell list (see above) and the use of Nature Magic Spells (see below, Druid)...might throw in Light armor and a couple of simple weapons other wizards wouldn't have (hand axe, scimitar, etc...)...
--Psychic: a most specific and extraordinarily rare [in most worlds] type of "magic" worker that uses the powers of their own mind (and potentially the minds of others) to generate effects that can only be described as "magic"...though psychics (and most wizards) understand it is not. The mechanics are the most different from the base "Mage" because there is no accumulation of "spells" or grimoire, using a Power/Psy-Point system that allows access to any/all Mental Talents/Powers so long as the psychic has points to spend (the industrious player/DM/group can easily extrapolate this system to apply to all magic/spell-casting if they so desired...so an "alternate casting mechanic" is built right into core classes of the game). Telepathy and Telekinesis are the most obvious options to begin with -as all mental powers end up reduced back into one of those two slots. Other "schools of thought" [haha!] -as the Warrior Martial Adept will have styles of martial arts- may [probably should] be introduced later. Linking and protecting the minds of others, overexerting oneself when their PP are low or depleted -doing themselves physical harm in the process. The psychic is the only class that can, literally, kill themselves simply by using their abilities.

The Rogues
--Thief:
the broadest possible/default Rogue archetype. Are they a burglar, a treasure hunting tomb raider, smuggler, thug/enforcer, street corner conman/flim-flam artist? Who knows? They're a thief. Watch them! Everyone's favorite skill monkey with a bag of tricks up their sleeves -or stashed in their boot, behind their belt buckle, and just about anywhere else. Primarily NON-magical Stealth and skills are the Thief's bread and butter.
--Acrobat: a specific flavor/theme of rogue, the much overlooked, long maligned, and poorly -if ever- implemented star of the 80's cartoon, the Acrobat. Slightly different from the Thief in their array of skills, with more focus on speed and agility to accompany the stealth and second-story work. An entertainer's and entertaining combination of the thief's patented "Sneak/stab Attack" and some of the Martial Adept's maneuvers.
--Swashbuckler: a more specific flavor/theme of rogue, with certain sailing/mariner skills built-in, speed and flourish, stealth and conniving cunning are the swashbuckler's stock-in-trade. Their signature feature (like a Barbarian's Rage or Witch's Craft) would be -because I rather like the term but am not sure how it would be implemented- "Panache"...some kind of special movement-based combat maneuvers that the Swbkr accumulates (in type and/or frequency) as they gain levels.
--Ranger: the most specific and, arguably, powerful iteration of the Rogue. The often imitated, but never duplicated, wilderness "warrior" and defender of the borderlands. Is their role to fight? Shouldn't they be a warrior? Yes and no, respectively. The Ranger, in flavor and practice, is defined moreso by their skill set -which includes fighting ability above/beyond most rogues- than their raw fighting ability, alone. Tracking. Scouting. Hiding. Hunting. Knowledge and expertise of Terrain/Flora/Fauna (whether or not one chooses to incorporate that into some kind of non-magical healing ability...I certainly do). Survival skills. The ranger's position as protector of the borders/wilds means they MUST rely on their skills, a rugged toughness, and no small degree of stealth. And yes, when they come across a patrol of goblins or rabid dragonne, they must be capable (and knowledgeable) enough to defeat it. The ranger would receive more armor and weapon options than other rogues (increasing over experience levels). They would have their "Hunter's Quarry/Marks/Prey/whatever you want to term it", to gain bonuses to knowledge rolls about and inflict better attacks and more damage on creatures they have previously fought/chosen as their recurring enemies (also increasing in number through level). They could get to some sort of "animal empathy" or mundane "animal handling/training" feature other classes do not possess (except maybe the Knight and/or Witch). The herbalism healing/poultices or the Knight's First Aid mechanic would certainly fit.

I have always referred to the last cardinal group of D&D/Fantasy classes as "The Priests," but have never been quite satisfied with it [mostly because I would like to HAVE a "Priest" subclass...I think I may change it and quite like the above title (sorry not sure who it was, right now) of "Mystics"...it's a bit more broad...a bit less tied up in religion...though most of these classes, by definition, are/will be..but for now, we'll go with that...

The Mystics
--Cleric:
the broadest possible/default "Mystics" archetype. Uses of armor, weapons, and magic. A tie to a "greater power" beyond what normal people experience or are capable. A force of faith, ideals, divine clarity and enlightenment. And, yes, most player's go to "Healbot" but in reality so much more...so much deeper. The Cleric channels the divine essences of their god, uses their sanctioned weapons, and invokes the heavenly (or hell-spawned) hosts to enact miraculous magical spells, broadly classified -due to the source- as Divine Magic.
---SIDEBAR: All Mystic classes are more stringently devoted to their ideals -or those of their religion/deity- and thus are more involved with, tied to, and cognizant of their Alignments (which must at least closely -if not exactly- match the forces which they serve. Prolonged or egregious deviation from their Alignment will result in any number of ramifications on the Mystic's abilities, from prayers for spells going unanswered, a refusal of energies to channel, to outright excommunication or exile from one's institution, and/or complete disconnect from their "greater power." Atonement to regain both worldly and otherworldly favor is often possible, though never easy, if the character is so inclined.
--Priest: a specific flavor/theme of the Mystic. No armors and more severely limited weaponry are the trade-offs for an increase in the priest's devoted capacity to channel divine energies and use [more] divine magic than the cleric is typically able. Whether a robed top priest of a temple or a cowled monk/friar/mendicant from a cloistered abbey or lone hermit of your own private shrine, you are the devout servant of the power to which you have devoted your life and training.
--Templar: a specific flavor/theme of the Mystic. The "other side," if you will, of the Cleric's coin from the Priest. More armor? More armor. More weapons? More weapons. More martial training and ability? You get the picture. What does this mean? Well, less magic of course! The Templar channels, but their spell use is severely limited/behind what either a cleric or priest can muster. What the templar DOES have in addition to their martial prowess, a seemingly supernatural ["divine"] health and vigor, and channeling a variety of divine effects, is their personal signature feature, the Sacred Smite, to defend the faithful and mete out divine justice.
--Druid: a specific flavor/theme of the mystic, the druid differs from other mystics in its devotion and protection not of an established religion or specific divinity or pantheon, but of the overarching holiness of Nature and the forces thereof. The sun and moon, the sky and storm, animals (including people) and plants, wood and rock are all connected and intertwined within "the Balance" to which the druid is devoted and dutybound to defend. Druids' magic is Nature Magic, a differing sort from Arcane or -some sages might argue "subset" of- Divine Magic. In that same vein, while the druid is priest of nature and is able to channel energies, these are Natural and not Divine in origin. In short, the Druid Channels Nature to a variety of magical effects including, eventually, shapeshifting themselves into various animal forms. The Druid's extraordinary abilities, so different from their brother-/sister-class, Clerics, are related to their defense of, movement through, and communion with the natural world: beasts, trees, weather, the elements, following the turning of the sun and moon, stars and seasons...the "living" world, which by definition includes death and rebirth. A Druid acknowledges and MUST remain devoted to the dual complimentary nature of the natural world, predator and prey, light and dark, summer and winter, one can not exist without the other and one must never assume supremacy over the other. The Balance is all. To that end, Druids must be -and act the majority of the time toward- Neutral in alignment. That is not to say a druid will -nor should- turn on his/her allies to assist evil...but in a grand, cosmological sense, the concerns of Law or Chaos, Good or Evil, are not the Druid's concerns.

In the Appendices: Limited prestige-style classes that can be tacked on to other classes.
-Assassin [maybe rename as "Bounty Hunter"?]: Prereq. None. Available to anyone. Anyone can develop skills to be paid to kill targets. Must have or move into any Evil alignment. This 1 trick pony from the day it was born never even deserved a subclass, imho. I've never understood what Gygax was thinking other than, I suppose, to throw some "interesting" [a.k.a. disruptive] intra-party dynamics into people's games. "Kill" attack instead of a "Backstab" [originally], which always struck me as a way of killing someone anyway. Add in some damage bonus to sneak attacks. Stealth bonus. Disguise ability. Throw in some Poison skill, I suppose.
-Avenger: Prereq. X levels of any Warrior or any Rogue. Must have or move into a Chaotic alignment. Attack/Damage bonuses against selected targets. Tracking ability and trap circumvention. Uncanny dodges. Some bonus knowledge areas and practical skills.
-Bard: Prereq. X levels of Druid, any Rogue, or any Mystic of a knowledge-, music/arts-, or nature-related deities. Must have or move into any Neutral Alignment. Music/Vocalization Magical effects, "Channel Nature" based. Inspirational bonuses. Fascination/Enthrall. A very limited amount of spell use/bonus spells from Illusion and Nature Magic lists only.
-Paladin: Prereq. X levels of any Warrior or any Mystic of a light/sun-, truth/justice-, or battle/combat-related deities. Must have or move into a Lawful alignment. Lay on hands. Protective Aura. Damage bonuses to undead and fiends. A very limited amount of spell use/bonus spells from Divine Magic lists only.
-Thaumaturgist: Prereq. X levels of any Wizard or Mystic. Must have or move into a Good alignment. Gains "Channel" effects. Ability to alter/improve spells. Meta-magic, perhaps? Bonus to rituals (in power or effectiveness). A limited amount of spell use/bonus spells selected from any/all types of Magic the base character does not possess. So a Cleric could learn some Nature or Arcane spells. A Psychic could learn some Illusion or Divine magic. A Witch could pick up some Psychic powers or Arcane spells not found on the Illusion list. etc...

...Whew!...

There. There's your base 6e. Looks REMARKABLY like Steeldragons' homebrewed World of Orea RPG[tm]. Imagine that. Even a bit more complete than my own. lol.

Naturally, when the "Unearthed Arcana, 6e" comes out you can add in things like an arcane magic-using "Bladecaster" Warrior, "Shaman" and "Ki-channeling 1-5e Monk-style" Mystics, "Beastmaster" Rangers or Barbarians, [Faustian] "Pact" Witches [a.k.a. Warlocks] etc. etc...

Sprinkling in Backgrounds and non-weapon skills liberally for further specialization and granularity of character concept types.

Yeah...I can definitely play/work with that.
 
Last edited:

Not that I am one to normally care much about the RW versions of things, but in the RW, berserkers were as much about intimidation as damage, and that amuses me (even more so when you think that one of the main reasons for intimidation is not to have to fight), so maybe move them under the bard....
 

Oh, I like this!

First, no paladins. HA!

Okay, my main goal would be to make it a little less magic-riffic.

So, classes and subclasses in BASE. (h/t [MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION] ) I would add that I would view subclasses as more differentiated than they are now, so my subclasses would be closer to "full" classes. And that only cleric-types and wizard-types get spells. Period.

Fighter
- - Ranger (because history)
- - Knight (Because Cavaliers suck, and they are too close to paladins)
- - Barbarian (because Conan)
Cleric
- - Druid (because history)
- - Witch (something not as religious-y)
- - Battle Cleric (more mace than spell)
- - Priest (more spell than mace)
Wizard
- - Illusionist (the classic)
- - Warlock (the newbie)
- - Sorcerer (less bookie)
Thief
- - Assassin (history)
- - Bard (throw those bard-lovers a bone)
- - Monk (YES!)

In other words, stay with the core four.

Then, you can add psionics, alchemists, and other stuff in an expansion.

Did you revert from Rogue to Thief because it's a more appropriate word, or because of history?

Also, in your structure the base classes can be played without a sub-class (it seems). Do sub-classes just add more abilities, or do they give something up? If the former (again, old school) what's the incentive to play the base class?
 

This is something I never want to see: a jack-of-all-trades class.

Why?

Because a true jack-of-all-trades doesn't need a party as he-she can do everything on his-her own.

The most compelling game-mechanical (and narrative, if the characters have half a clue) reason for an adventuring party to form, gain members, and stay together is that each character (usually) brings strengths that cover off weaknesses of the others. The characters thus come to rely on each other, and the whole becomes a bit more than the sum of the parts.

J-o-a-T characters blow this up because, if designed and-or built properly, they have no weaknesses. And that is bad. (and this is also a primary reason why I really don't care much for multi-classing)

Lanefan

I don't care for multi-classing either, but I can see a place for a Jack-of-all-trades. The JOAT is good at almost everything, but not great at any. A lot of tasks need someone who is great at something, making the JOAT need others. The JOAT can fill some holes in a party, but could never do it all and not nearly as well as an expert.
And all seems to pushing it pretty far; I'd probably back that off to Jack-of-most-trades, leaving room for weaknesses.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top