D&D 5E Do you want the Sorcerer, Warlock, Psion, and Artificer separate from the Mage class?

Do you want the Sorcerer, Warlock, Psion, and Artificer separate from the Mage class?

  • Yes

    Votes: 56 54.4%
  • No

    Votes: 47 45.6%


log in or register to remove this ad

If you're going to have classes, then yes. A wizard and a sorcerer are at least as different as a druid and a cleric or a fighter and a barbarian. It doesn't make any sense to consolidate psions and warlocks unless you're also going to make the paladin a fighter variant. And if you only have a couple of generic core classes and innumerably complex variants to patch the system to reduplicate the character archetypes associated with D&D, why even have classes at all?
 


Yes, except maybe to the sorcerer. (It wasn't an independent class in 3.x, but was in 4e.)

I have something to say and is no, the sorcerer was it's own thing even back in 3.x, the only thing preventing him from being unique was design prejudices, and it seems twelve years haven't made much of a difference
 

It might be do-able if you restrict the "mage" spell progression and give the sorcerer and warlock subclasses their extra schtick, while thee wizard ends up getting maybe a few more spell and his specialization boost to compensate for what they get.
Still, I'm not sure how artificers would work. And personally I'd prefer psions to be something different than just a power point system. And having them select "talents" from the spell list rubs me the wrong way even if a few spells overlap with their abilities.
 

Yes, but I'm very firmly in pre-Essentials 4e 'lots of classes are good' camp. Perhaps you'd want to characterize all these classes as being linked somehow, so that they could all gain access to some feats. Maybe you could call it a 'power source'.
 

Didn't vote.

I'm not happy about the various class' being combined (according to latest indications), but I'll wait to see how it finally turns out.

The 3E Sorcerer has more castable spells per day than the 3E Wizard; the August playtest packet doesn't give any indication that this will be the same in 5E, since all Mages in the August packet are shown there to have the same progression of spell slots -- but only Wizardry is shown.

There's a lot of time between now and next year. I'm going to hope that this is all a side-track in order to gauge responses from the masses; and I'm going to hope that WotC will end up giving many of the earlier classes from prior editions their own classes in 5E Next. (Yeah, mindless optimism running rampant here.)
 

I would like each to be a separate class.

I would also like multiple spellcasting systems to choose from, and for them to be swappable between spellcasting classes.

Each class should be built and presented with their default.
 

Classes are a big part of D&D but I want a small number of classes. Too many classes was bad for both 3e and 4e. Choices are nice but there's a finite number before the choices become overwhelming and choices begin to overlap and, just like race, the game quickly becomes people playing unfamiliar options.

I'll approve most ways of reducing the number of classes.
Although options that have been a part of almost every edition, redundant classes that have been around longer than I've been alive, get grandfathered in and can stay.
 

Not just yes, but Hell yes. For one thing, this all-encompassing Mage class kills multiclassing possibilities. Mearls did say something about being able to dabble with feats. So now, not only do feats cost ability score bonuses, but some multiclassing does, too.

The Mage uber-class really presents more problems than it solves. And I never thought any of the "problems" it is supposed to solve were problems anyway. I want more classes. Class is the basic identifier of a character in D&D. The more classes there are, the better. That's not to say that they should just toss variant classes out there to inflate the class list. Variant classes should be subclasses of the parent class. Various schools belong under the Wizard class, and not as their own classes. The same with Pacts and Warlocks and heritage and Sorcerers. But, the Wizard, Warlock and Sorcerer do not belong in the same class. They're very different ideas (no matter how the Sorcerer may have started; it's more now).

Edit: After re-reading this, I've decided that they really need to come up with a better name than subclass. It's turning out to be like "Level." How many times can you write "class" in an intelligible sentence? A lot, it appears.
 

Trending content

Remove ads

Top