D&D 5E Heroic Archetypes and Gaps in Class coverage

[Ilbranteloth]

Interesting exercise in terms of entertainment, but the boundaries are entirely subjective and no two gamers will agree.

For example, the OP distinguishes between Sorcerer and Wizard as one being wise & old, and the other being young with poor self-control. And yet if you tried to define two separate rogue-like classes based on this distinction I think most people would say that's a matter of RP and backround, or maybe sub-class distinction.

That said, for me the only missing space is the shaman/witchdoctor/witchspiritualist. Sure, that could be Druid or Cleric sub-class, but (without going into the specific reasons) I find neither of those satisfactory.

I'm believe 100% that the "warlord" concept is not a class but a "build" that should be applicable to any class.

I think the warlock is a better starting point for a shaman myself.

 

[Ilbranteloth]

Yeah with specific characters, there's a certain amount of bleed over, but if you take out Aragorn's nobility, he's a dude who can fight, track, know the land, live out in the wild, knows the enemies he's likely to find....he's the quintessential old guy with a rifle in the shack that helps the young pups get where they're going without dying.....

Ned Stark is a fair point - he's probably more Druid thinking about it. Spock is a bit cleric I guess, or Data......They are very much rank-and-file characters in thrall to a specific ideal.....

I don't reallly know enough about a mystic to know what the archetype would be for that....but in all honesty, if you strip out the Force powers from Luke Skywalker, he's someone who wanted to fulfil his potential through action and training, which sort of aligns with the very rough Fighteryness of being a trained master of something (thoguh I will readily admit that the Fighter is basically a catch-all for sooooooo many traditional "heroes".

Or Ned Stark for paladin, maybe? Unless that's too obvious...

 

[Tony Vargas]

I mind, for one. Combat Superiority dice should have been given to all martials, and probably some others, hands down. There's a huge wealth of untapped potential there for power design and resource management for the other classes, and it still would have been very distinct from spellcasters so as to belay people claiming everyone has spells.

It was never about having spells - 5e fighters /do/ have spells, and it's no problem.

I think the warlock is a better starting point for a shaman myself.

I can see how it might be, in concept: The warlock bargained with a god-like sinister supernatural entity for power. The shaman forms relationships with less powerful/sinister supernatural entities for power. But the Druid looks similarly close, in concept.

In terms of mechanics, IDK?

Certainly nothing fits the Shaman archetype too well, ATM, so it's one of those 'gaps.'

 

[Hillsy7]

I can see how it might be, in concept: The warlock bargained with a god-like sinister supernatural entity for power. The shaman forms relationships with less powerful/sinister supernatural entities for power. But the Druid looks similarly close, in concept.

In terms of mechanics, IDK?

Certainly nothing fits the Shaman archetype too well, ATM, so it's one of those 'gaps.'

Interesting point.....If a Warlock could be argued that, in broad archetypes, it is someone who has some sort of secretive or dark force/curse "driving" them (So I would argue something like a James Bond, Ghost Rider, Light Yagami....in rough terms), a Druid is an archetype who represents/defends a certain place or culture (Perhaps someone like Superman, Jake Scully from Avatar, Ned "The North" Stark)......A shaman would probably sit as an archetype that draws strength from specific people or things to borrow their power or knowledge.

Off the top of my head I guess you could argue anyone from the RuneLords books, The farseer trilogy has similar themes, anyone who talks to the dead for information. You could argue that would include someone like Tyler Durden, Stephen Leeds from the Legion books, Storm is potentially a Shaman....no actually she's straight up a druid ain't she. Mum-ra, or mummies in general I guess. And Vampires.....

Yeah you're right, I think the Archetype of a character who takes power from people and places into himself through agreement, force or coercion could be considered different enough. Sweet.....

 

[Tony Vargas]

......A shaman would probably sit as an archetype that draws strength from specific people or things to borrow their power or knowledge......

I'm not sure where you got people/things? The usual shaman archetype gets power from 'spirits.'

 

[Hillsy7]

I'm not sure where you got people/things? The usual shaman archetype gets power from 'spirits.'

That's the archetype for a Shaman, yes. However, I started this thread to look at the heroic archetypes from fiction to see how they might've informed the D&D classes from a narrative starting point and where they have built a class on top of a typical heroic archetype. Therefore, strip away the bag of bones waiving, ancestor conversing poncho from what we see in a d&d Shaman, and is there something underneath that would fit as a heroic archetype.

In this instance, I'd say yes. Strip away the D&D Class dressing of a shaman, and someone with multiple personalities (like Echo from Dollhouse), or even (at a stretch) a character like Captain Picard, would fit in the same archetype.

 

[Tony Vargas]

That's the archetype for a Shaman, yes. ...Therefore, strip away the bag of bones waiving, ancestor conversing poncho from what we see in a d&d Shaman....

Oh, I see. Oddly, this is one case where the D&D class and the RL definition are not in as profound disagreement as usual.

A few non-D&D definitions:

a person who acts as intermediary between the natural and supernatural worlds, using magic to cure illness, foretell the future, control spiritual forces, etc.

a tribal healer who can act as a medium between the visible world and the spirit world.

a person who is thought to have special powers to control or influence good and evil spirits, making it possible for them to discover the cause of illness, bad luck, etc.

(at a stretch) a character like Captain Picard, would fit in the same archetype.

'Leader,' then?

 

[Hillsy7]

Oh, I see. Oddly, this is one case where the D&D class and the RL definition are not in as profound disagreement as usual.

A few non-D&D definitions:

a person who acts as intermediary between the natural and supernatural worlds, using magic to cure illness, foretell the future, control spiritual forces, etc.

a tribal healer who can act as a medium between the visible world and the spirit world.

a person who is thought to have special powers to control or influence good and evil spirits, making it possible for them to discover the cause of illness, bad luck,

Ok, we're getting closer to my point. Now that might not be d&d parlance, but it is still reliant on fantasy (classic or urban) tropes. Try the same again, but do it for, say, the legal thriller genre.....what would a "shaman" archetype look like in that setting with no magical or supernatural fluff?

 

[Tony Vargas]

Ok, we're getting closer to my point. Now that might not be d&d parlance, but it is still reliant on fantasy (classic or urban) tropes. Try the same again, but do it for, say, the legal thriller genre.....what would a "shaman" archetype look like in that setting with no magical or supernatural fluff?

Hrmmm....

BD Wong, as Dr Huang, in Law & Order?

 

[Ilbranteloth]

It was never about having spells - 5e fighters /do/ have spells, and it's no problem.


I can see how it might be, in concept: The warlock bargained with a god-like sinister supernatural entity for power. The shaman forms relationships with less powerful/sinister supernatural entities for power. But the Druid looks similarly close, in concept.

In terms of mechanics, IDK?

Certainly nothing fits the Shaman archetype too well, ATM, so it's one of those 'gaps.'

Yeah, I've been having some difficulty with the spellcasting aspect of warlocks for a shaman. I get what you're saying about a druid, but I think they are more distinctly different, particularly because of the shape changing ability (I know that's a conceptually good option for some shamans, but it seems a bit powerful, although the UA variation where they only know three forms would work better).