Another Core Class

[Roman]

Well, the title is not entirely accurate, but I am not sure how to make it better. I basically want to ask EnWorlders if they think that there is a niche for another D&D core class (or perhaps if not a true core class than a base class?) and if so what focus should such a class have? Is there even potential for another core or base 'class group' (as in Warrior, Priest, Magic User and Skill User)?


Current core classes:

Barbarian
Bard
Cleric
Druid
Fighter
Monk
Paladin
Ranger
Rogue
Sorcerer
Wizard


Non-core base classes:

Favored Soul
Healer
Hexblade
Marshal
Psion
Psionic Warrior
Samurai
Shugenja
Sohei
Soulknife
Spirit Shaman
Swashbuckler
Warmage
Wilder
Wu Jen


Eberron core classes:

Artificer

 

[Mouseferatu]

There's always room for new base classes (for campaign-specific reasons if nothing else). Frankly, I actually prefer new base classes to new prestige classes for many concepts.

I've created almost a dozen myself, for personal use, Dragon Magazine, and my (as yet unpublished) Shadow Branch Campaign Setting. And I've converted several of the PrCs from the DMG into full 20-level classes for a project that was (sadly) put on hold. (Though I hope to be able to tell the publisher that I'd like to go back to it in the near future...)

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Other than the psionic variants on magic-using classes, I don't think any of the non-base core classes are really "needed." That said, I think quite a few of them are very spiffy (I think the Marshal is great, if a bit underpowered), although they're outnumbered by goofy things like the Hexblade. Personally, I'd like to see some super-expert core classes without the rogue trappings, and maybe something like a super-adept that blends arcane and divine magic in a more seamless fashion (maybe a witch class).

I am looking forward (although with a bit of trepidation) to the new core classes in the Complete Arcane and Complete Adventurer.

 

[haiiro]

There's certainly room for setting-focused base classes, like DragonMech's coglayers (or Eberron's artificer, from your WotC-only list).

While I think there probably is also room for more mainstream base classes, no specific gaps jump to mind for me. I'm a big fan of the variant core classes, like the pugilist (fighter) from Dragon, or the ones from Unearthed Arcana. I tend to think of those bridge concepts as a good way to give things a twist without needlessly introducing more 20-level base classes.

 

[DragonLancer]

I don't think there is need for another one. Pretty much any character you want to build can be done using the core classes alone.

 

[Frost]

I think a Pirate/Buccaneer class would be a cool core-class, but maybe not a needed one.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I a Pirate/Buccaneer class would be a cool core-class, but maybe not a needed one.

Pretty easy to build one off of the Complete Warrior's Swashbuckler class, with Profession: Sailor, Swim and Use Rope skill selections.

 

[DragonLancer]

I a Pirate/Buccaneer class would be a cool core-class, but maybe not a needed one.

You don't need it as a base class. Build it from fighter and/or rogue.

 

[Crothian]

There is no need for one. People are saying that they can fit in certain campaign world but that goes against the idea behind the core classes in the PHB; they are general. To add another basic core class it needs to fit in most settings.

Now there is nothing wrong with new ones and many times they do make a better addition then then a prestige class.

Actually, there is one area that could be a core class; the Noble. While any of the core classes could be taken by someone of nobility, none of them really work for a true Noble.

 

[Mouseferatu]

While I agree that core classes are rarely needed, I disagree that they don't fit. Let's be honest; most prestige classes aren't "needed" either. And I've found that I've got a lot of ideas that, while they could be done through multiclassing and/or prestige classes, I happen to feel they fit better as a new core class.