How Many Base Classes?

[MoogleEmpMog]

Allow 'em, bend rules for 'em and actively encourage my players to use 'em. I'm especially fond of the scout and warlock.

The spellcasters obviously don't show up in my spellcaster-less campaign, though.

 

[Jdvn1]

I only _like_ a select number of the base classes, but unless it strikes me as unbalanced I'll let my players use them. Why wouldn't I want my players to make characters they like?

 

[Tyler Do'Urden]

I'm just starting a Forgotten Realms Unapproachable East campaign, and I'm allowing any base class that fits a character's background. For instance, Samurai, Ninja, Shugenja and Wu Jen are fine for Shou Expatriates, Spirit Shamans fit right in among the Rashemi and Tuigan, Swashbucklers are naturals for the cities of Thesk and Aglarond, Hexblades could be members of elite units under the command of Thayan Tharchions or Zulkirs, Scouts aren't bad additions to Aglarond or The Great Dale, Favored Souls can fit about anywhere, Marshals could lead Aglarondan, Rashemi, or Thayan armies, and Healers could work in Aglarond or among the elves... the only new classes that don't really seem to have a comfortable niche (from the new books) are the Battlemage, Warlock, or Spellthief.

But that's just core- that's not even considering Unearthed Arcana variants, Arcana Unearthed classes (most of which I would prohibit), FFG Path Book variants (most of which could fit)...

I have no problem allowing new core or prestige classes, as long as they seem flavor/background appropriate...

 

[KB9JMQ]

I agree with Jdvn1.

I have always allowed everything. I have never had any class/race/spell break anything in my games yet. When it does happen I will look closer then.

I see gaming as a fun hobby with friends so I let them try anything as long as it is fun.
It has worked since the Red Box.

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

I allow them all except for the CW Samurai, the Swashbuckler, and the Favored Soul. Though many of the rest only fit certain cultures within the homebrew.

 

[Desdichado]

I think Crothian hit the nail on the head right away; this isn't a new issue with the Complete books; those of us into 3rd party publishers have more base classes than we can shake a ransieur at.

Personally, I want more base classes. As a player, ideally I'd have a base class that perfectly epitomized my character concept. That's more and more unlikely with fewer base classes, so the more I have, the better off I am. A la carte menu type classes, as in Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed help in that regard too.

And at the end of the day, I still have to make minor tweaks even so. But the more options I have to choose from, the less likely that is, and the more minor the issues and tweaks become.

 

[RFisher]

Generally I'm going to give the players a set of classes to choose from that I think fit the melieu & campaign. You can make your PC one of those classes without prior DM approval.

If a player really wants to play another class, I'll probably let them. At least once. I just want anything that not on the pre-approved list to remain uncommon.

 

[Aust Diamondew]

The thing that bothers me is that I'm starting to find that it's hard to differenciate between what is a prestige class and what is a core class. The scout could easily be a prestige class, as could the samurai even. Maybe not the warlock, but then the magic using classes then to be closer to base than prestige. Of course, Wu Jen is just a wizard with a different spell list. I like the idea of a core base of classes which is kind of a 'bare bones' thing on which you can add your prestige class to give it more flavour. Prestige classes are something special, IMHO.

Pinotage

I agree. I find it annoying when base classes are made that should probably be PRCs and vice versa (PRCs with too little flavor that are so generic they should be a core class).

 

[Mercule]

Ideally, I'd like to see about a dozen (arbitrary number) base classes that represented broad archetypes found in fantasy, or a specific fantasy world. Things like feats and skills help round things out. Multiclassing blends the archetypes. PrCs represent narrower, specialized archetypes; often associated with specific organizations, races, or localities.

This isn't how the core rules play out, although they're moving that way. For instance, there is no good way to build a swashbuckler from the PHB. Likewise, one can't really build a useful martial artist without the mystic/oriental baggage.

Anyway, the list of base classes allowed in my game are:

• Adept
• Aristocrat
• Artifacer
• Barbarian
• Bard
• Commoner
• Druid
• Expert
• Fighter
• Magewright
• Noble
• Priest
• Psion
• Psychic Warrior
• Ranger
• Rogue
• Spellthief
• Spirit Shaman
• Swashbuckler
• Warlock
• Warrior
• Wilder
• Wizard

Hexblade and Scout would be available on request, but aren't advertised. I'm not completely certain whether there's a good place for Hexblades in my game and I'm trying to decide if Scout is actually needed. Also, either Druid or Spirit Shaman will be removed -- I had slotted Druids as animists before CD was released, but love Wild Shape too much to outright replace them with Spirit Shaman, despite the much better fit.

 

[el-remmen]

I am not a fan of any of the new bases classes and ad far as I am concerned they are not needed. You can make almost anything you want with the existing core classes and multi-classing or proper feat/skill/spell choice - or the few prestige classes I allow (most of which are unique to specific cultures or organizations).

The exception to this is the Cleric class - which I have made into as many different classes as there are gods - however, you may not multi-class between those.

So in Aquerra we have:

Barbarian
Bard
Fighter
Monk
Paladin
Priest (includes Druid)
Ranger
Rogue
Witch (sorceror variant)
Wizard (and specialists)