D&D 5E All classes should be broad enough to be split into subclasses

[Drowdruid]

And thats why i think each should have at least 3 subclasses (builds) that cover different fluffwise and mechanically archetypes within common theme.
Also fluff although influence mechanics is mutable and can always be discarded or changed, so we don't that many Sorcerer classes as you suggest. Rather than more subclasses which some may achieve Heritage not by ancestor but for example by being born under certain star conjunction or whatever you come to your mind and cause you inherited sorcerous talent.
Also i like concept of Fanatic (it is broad) but i proposed Barbarian (classic name) that also covers many of the same archetypes you mentioned for your Fanatic and have also slightly magical (primal) touch to it.

 

[Remathilis]

Some of us think that four jars is more than enough...?

Personally, I would be happier with only three jars. Physical Butt-kicker, Arcane Butt-kicker, and Divine Butt-kicker.

Why stop there? Combine the casters and you have Hero and Spellcaster and maximum flexibility.

There is room for that kind of game, but folks its not D&D.

 

[kerleth]

I think that all that is really NEEDED in a class based system is Warrior, Mage, and Skillmonkey. That said, I don't think that D&D is going in that direction. There are definite perks to fewer, customizable classes, but there are also perks to the other side of the coin.

My personal opinion. You should be able to have two characters of the same class and race in a party and have them play very differently. At least as important is to have a base system that allows you to play a CHARACTER, not just a Designer Approved Class Concept (TM). Make classes as broad and inclusive as possible. But if you have to jump through hoops and squint at your character sheet to make what you want, it needs a new class. BUT, this new class should also be designed to be as inclusive of other concepts as possible without losing it's own uniqueness.

In an effort to bring the thread back to the OP's seeming intention, here is a suggestion from me.

Monk
Paths of Enlightenment
-Path of the Opened Eye. This would feature abilities like communing with nature, healing, seeing through illusions, challenging conceptions of space and time, and effects that are mystical nature. It emphasizes an understanding of the true nature of the world around you.
-Path of the Ascendant Spirit. This would focus on the religous side of being monastic. It would emphasize gaining wisdom and blessings from a union with a higher spirit/ancestor/etc. Possibly limited spellcasting. There would likely be room for some conceptually overlap with this and the previous path.
-Path of the Perfect Union. This would be the most physical path, combining mind, body, and spirit to perform feats of strength, agility, and endurance. The warrior monk would fit here.

Note that I would not make the monk's defining schtick "I don't need no stinkin' weapons!". That would be one valid build, but I would like a weapon focused aescetic as an equally valid option. As well as less combat focused monks. (Also, a good option for an unarmed fighter without all the enlightenment trappings, but that's a seperate class issue).

 

[Ratskinner]

Why stop there? Combine the casters and you have Hero and Spellcaster and maximum flexibility.

There is room for that kind of game, but folks its not D&D.

Nah...three classes Fighter, Expert, and Caster. Unify Arcane and Divine Magic. Handle crossbreeds with multiclassing.....oh wait, that's True20.

I think the best course for D&D is actually something of a middle ground. Classes in D&D have never been uniformly broad or narrow in concept (AFAICT). So, for classes as broad as Fighter and Rogue, sub-choices like scheme and fighting style make some sense, just from the perspective of not having to write the identical stuff repeatedly for the six, eight, or twenty sub-choices.

For other classes (if those concepts return as full classes) like Barbarian, Assassin, etc. They seem pretty narrow to me, already, and I don't think having sub-choices just for the sake of having sub-choices does anyone any favors.

I do, though, think that some of those narrow classes would be better off gone as separate classes. Rather, they make more sense as one expression of a class (subclass)-background-speciality. So, for instance, I think "Barbarian" would make more sense as a Background. The traditional D&D Barbarian would be a Fighter (Berserker) - Barbarian - Endurance Spec.

Ranger and Paladin, I would say, are the two that I'm on the fence about. I think you could make a decent expression of the modern woodsy ranger with Fighter (Sharpshooter) - Woodsman - Ambusher\Skill Specialist. However, that isn't a perfect match for all the various grounds that "Ranger" has covered, especially considering the old-school "I'm Aragorn" version of the class. Paladin also seems to have a lot of historical gimmickry that is hard to fit well within that structure, but might be done. In any case, if they are done as classes, I don't really see enough room for subclasses that couldn't be adequately covered by Specialties and Backgrounds.

 

[Li Shenron]

- Is not a class. A 'class' that implies culture, beliefs, or personality is not broad enough. Barbarian is background, and a 'barbarian' could be any sort of class whatsoever.

I have changed my mind on Barbarians many times, but this is my current feeling and undestanding.

I totally agree with you that "barbarians" could be any sort of class, maybe not "all" classes fit well (probably the wizard doesn't fit, but a sorcerer or warlock would do better) but many for sure.

Still, a Background (by the current rules) does NOT work, because it is based on skills and they are not good to define a barbarian culture. Perhaps the Survival skill fits, but that's it. You can push Natural Lore and maybe even Intimidate but then you start missing the point that if "barbarians" is a culture, they just CAN'T all be experts at the same skills...

My current opinion is that Barbarians should be a human subrace. This is an option with enough freedom to let you give them anything you feel appropriate, starting with HP/HD increase and saving throw bonuses, and yes also the Survival skill can be granted by the bundle.

The only downside is that in some settings you might want to put dwarves and other races into the barbarian tribes mix. I don't think we need this in the core, but it can be done by mixing the human barbarian subrace with the dwarf race.

 

[Drowdruid]

[MENTION=84383]kerleth[/MENTION]
I like your proposition for monk and I am sorry but at the moment i cannot give you experience point as promised but as soon as it could be possible i will do it.

Returning to your monk. Lets summarize it. According to your proposition monk main shtick is its monastic training and not an unarmed combat and I agree with you. You give 3 subclasses that are quite broad although coherent because its main difference as i see it is not exactly single archetype but power source (opened eye is more psionic, ascendant spirit is more divine, and perfect union is more martial, although all they not exactly strictly match to single power source based on description).
The problem I see with that division is difficulty to go further with new subclasses (and I may say 3 is minimum when i described Assassin but I think 5-7 subclasses is optimum. Lets see official classes and they have 5 subclasses in Fighter, Rogue and Cleric so far, 3 subclasses in Wizard, and all these classes seems to have enough space for few more subclasses.
Overall good job, kerleth with the monk and it is what I intended when I created this thread. THE GAME OF CREATIVITY, but without mechanics which require much design experience and is better left to professionals from WotC.

 

[Ratskinner]

Still, a Background (by the current rules) does NOT work, because it is based on skills and they are not good to define a barbarian culture. Perhaps the Survival skill fits, but that's it. You can push Natural Lore and maybe even Intimidate but then you start missing the point that if "barbarians" is a culture, they just CAN'T all be experts at the same skills...

I'm not sure you're right here. Suppose you could have a small suite of barbarian backgrounds, but then...how many can you think of that make sense for adventurers? Our standard Barbarian Warrior, maybe Shaman/Witchdoctor,...then what? Barbarian Chief? What other barbarian types could/would be adventurers? Barbarian Merchant?...how is he different from regular merchant dude? Barbarian Peasant?....still a Commoner IMO. If you really want to play one of these preliterate outliers, then the game is better off letting you kitbash a custom background rather than put all the possibilities in the game for everyone else to ignore.

It's not like real "barbarian" cultures (anthropologically speaking) actually have a lot of specialties, either. You have Warriors (Chief often included), often a Shaman, maybe a few artisan types, but they are often Warriors in a pinch...oh and Women. There are no Barbarian scholars, Druids are the closest, but they are really just Shamans whose culture survived contact with literate cultures long enough that we have some vague understanding of what they called themselves, etc.

 

[Drowdruid]

Re: Barbarian as culture

I'm not against having a Savage, Chief, Tribal Shaman backgrounds, but i want also have Barbarian class who IMO cannot be renamed as Berserker because it is very specific type of rage and I want encompass in class all types of physical Rage including bloodlust of Lycanthropy, increament of size associated with Hulk archetype, demonic possession of Maniac (or Demoniac) and religious zeal of Fanatic. Another reason to put all this archetypes into Barbarian class is that Rage in any form is vastly different from steady damage output of the Fighter and deserve its own mechanic. I wish there be in DnD Next some kind of rage powers like in Pathfinder version of Barbarian.
Edit:
BTW Celebrim proposed name Barbarian class as Fanatic. Celebrim, it seems you have concept of this class why did you not present its defining feature and give at least few examples of subclasses and archetypes or short descriptions related to this subclasses?

 

[kerleth]

You have a point about the broad nature of the paths drowdruid. I imagine subclasses performing one of two purposes.
1)Allowing a class to lean towards a certain archetype or playstyle in it's own unique way. In that case they should be like a cleric's domain or deity choice, in that they have unifying features but are still further customizable within that framework (spell choice, weapon choice, etc) OR
2) They function like the fighter's fighting styles and give you a preplanned list of choices that all fit a theme. These should allow the player to say "none of these work for my (insert something the designers couldn't anticipate here), so I'm just gonna pick a la carte." A la carte needs to be even with the default options, so that you are not punished for playing something other than WOTC APPROVED CONCEPT (TM).

Perhaps narrowing the paths down more. Something like.....

Path of the Iron Fist- This is the unarmed warrior path. Strength, speed, and stamina are key. It would likely have overlap with the Path of the Focused Will, but it sees relying on weapons as a weakness. Abilities to turn an opponents weaponry and armor against them would help make it feel distinct and be very thematically appropriate.

Path of the Purifying Flame- This is a more mystical path whose abilities are based on fire symbolism. Some healing (fire cauterizes wounds and cooks food), seeing through deception (fire creates light, and light is often used as a metaphor for knowledge and enlightenment), protection from extremes of cold and heat, and the obvious fire damage. Perhaps even some limited cold damage and effects that mimic freezing. Quenching someone else's internal fire, so to speak.

Path of the Opened Eye- This would be all about knowledge and awareness. There would be some overlap with fire's ability to see through deception (not a bad thing when subclasses are organized this way. different combinations can make very different characters). Bonus Knowledge skills. Being able to put together seemingly unrelated facts to come to conclusions no one else would have realized. A few ablities to ignore pain, speed healing, and push your own limits since your "eyes have been opened" and you know how to push past them. Probably with a price, since the body has limits for a reason.

Path of the Aescetic- This one would be all about doing without things that everyone else takes for granted. Probably unarmed combat, but not as much of a focus as path of the iron fist. Doing without food, shelter, healing, this guy is almost completely self sufficient. Obviously it would have to be built in such a way that the party gets some perks from all this, so he wouldn't feel tacked on.

Path of the Focused Will- This one would take the opened eyes ability to occasionally push oneself and really focus on it. It could push oneself farther and with less drawback. Also much less sagey and more warrior than opened eye. This seems like a good place for a monk wielding weaponry, be it a quarterstaff, katana, or their own hair as a whip. (hokey, I know, but some people would like it.)

Path of the Eternal Dance- This one is focused on the concept that each person, plant, and animal is interconnected. Some healing abilities, buffs, and debuffs. Damage dealing would be in the form of knowing anatomy and manipulating your opponents life force. Very "pressure point" like.


Each of these would be unified by the general class framework and probably some sort of unified power structure (ki perhaps?). Also by the fact that their training required them to step aside from normal society. Backgrounds would also help differentiate between the more "religousy" monks and the moe "wuxia" ones.

 

[Drowdruid]

From Ultimate Classes:

Defining feature is called Ascendancy:
Way Of Beasts: Beast monks find animal world a fascinating place, and studying behaviors of various predators and their prey allows them to emulate those qualities to a great effect. Beast monks believe that only by going to the beginning (becoming one with your less evolved friends) one can see the end and thus ascend.

Way Of Heart: A heart monks believe that every living creature has a pool of mystical energy called Chi. The Chi of all living beings is connected in some fashion and a monk in tune with her Chi is much more powerful than any other. Only by mastering that energy can one achieve ascension.

Way Of Might: Might monks are very straightforward in their psychology. They trust that might makes right, and the way to ascend is simply to be more powerful than the others. Might monks spend countless years honing their physical skills, preferring moutainous areas for their monasteries.

Way Of Revelations: Revelation monks are most the mystical ones. They believe that rash actions will get one nowhere and contemplation upon one's past mistakes is the true way to become perfect being. Revelation monks are least interested in fray, but are bestowed with amazing senses and wit.

Way Of Shadows: Shadow monks believe that one must remove herself from earthly matters and distractions to achieve balance within herself. They practice art of stealth, supernatural movement, and disappearance. Shadow monks can be effective assassins, scouts, or messengers.

Way Of Winds: Wind monks believe that secrets of ascension are not locked into any creature or object, but rather scattered in the air of the world around them. Wind monks emulate natural elements of weather to become something more than an ordinary mortal.

Edit:
[MENTION=84383]kerleth[/MENTION]
Now it really suits my critteria for subclasses (6 choises! Thats middle of optimum!). Thanks!