How many character classes do you need, anyway?
- Thread starter Vespucci
- Start date
Ideally, I'd like a classless system- HERO is my favorite system of all time- but a D&D game with a small number of very flexible classes would be pretty cool by me. True20 gets close, but it changes some things I didn't care for...
Possibly 4-6 base classes with their own huge lists of options...and the ability of the others to get access to those options (at an "increased cost" of some kind). Or something. Then, perhaps an overlay of Kits/PrCls/Paragon paths (or whatever you want to call them) that reflect specialized aspects of the campaign world.
Possibly 4-6 base classes with their own huge lists of options...and the ability of the others to get access to those options (at an "increased cost" of some kind). Or something. Then, perhaps an overlay of Kits/PrCls/Paragon paths (or whatever you want to call them) that reflect specialized aspects of the campaign world.
Ahnehnois
First Post
You don't need any classes to play an rpg. Classless games are fine and work well.
However, to play D&D in a way anything like what I know the game as, you need a boatload of classes. Picking a base class is one of the most interesting character-defining choices, really lays things out for you. I know my group has played more than 12 base classes successfully, so that's what I voted. Anything else (like a small number of generic customizable base classes) would be a radical redesign. I'm sure it could be done, but I have yet to see it done in a D&D-like game. For now, I'll take my seers and my dragon shamans.
However, to play D&D in a way anything like what I know the game as, you need a boatload of classes. Picking a base class is one of the most interesting character-defining choices, really lays things out for you. I know my group has played more than 12 base classes successfully, so that's what I voted. Anything else (like a small number of generic customizable base classes) would be a radical redesign. I'm sure it could be done, but I have yet to see it done in a D&D-like game. For now, I'll take my seers and my dragon shamans.
JamesonCourage
Adventurer
I voted for "effectively infinite" as I run as classless game based on 3.5 rules. I dislike classes, but I was a fan for years. I now find the idea of them much too constraining. Something about going classless to make a mundane social character after years of settling for bards or rogues (why do I have evasion, sneak attack, trapfinding, etc?) struck a chord with me. Making what you want, tailored to the individual, is by far my preferred way of playing things now.
But, were I to play with classes, I'd like as many options as possible. Thus, my vote.
But, were I to play with classes, I'd like as many options as possible. Thus, my vote.
5: Fighting Man, Cleric, Magic-User, Dwarf, Elf - both of the demi-humans using race-as-class. Some folks feel that the old races add color to a game, but think the Thief/Rogue as "skill guy" encourages the view that other adventurers are unskilled.
7: As 5, plus Thief and Halfling - again, race-as-class is in play.
7: As 5, plus Thief and Halfling - again, race-as-class is in play.
kitcik
Adventurer
I'm not sure what this poll really means as far as "need" and some of the choices are odd, but it certainly brought the "classless" DMs out of the woodwork (sorry, double meaning intended but only in a joking way).
In any case, I like the wide variety of class & other specialization options in 3E. It is one of my favorite aspects. I also very much enjoyed 1E with its much more limited array - due to other aspects of the game.
In the end, I voted "12 or more."
And let me add I am shocked by the number of people voting "11" - exactly 11 is ideal? really? Just poked my funny bone.
In any case, I like the wide variety of class & other specialization options in 3E. It is one of my favorite aspects. I also very much enjoyed 1E with its much more limited array - due to other aspects of the game.
In the end, I voted "12 or more."
And let me add I am shocked by the number of people voting "11" - exactly 11 is ideal? really? Just poked my funny bone.
Jimlock
Adventurer
ok... i got it now.
Personally, I like to think that the rest of the classes are not "unskilled",
just that the rogue is "really good" at that.
Giving skills to all would render the rogue pretty useless.
Mind you, I see the paradox you are referring to, but on the other hand, all classes can buy whatever skills they want... it just costs more.
So if a wizard wants something else than concentration and spellcraft, he can always get some, only that he will not be as good at concentration and spellcraft. Not every wizard and cleric has to necessarily max out concentration and spellcraft!
If you pay more attention to the skills in the game, (making them more important I mean), you can always use that as a balancing factor between classes.
I hate it when every time a spellcaster has to max out concentration and spellcraft! It has gone down as the ONLY way to spend his skills!!!
Not everyone has to be EXTREMELY good at those...
xigbar
Explorer
I love the 3.5 class system. People complain about the balance, but the details of how they can be unique mechanically and flavor wise are gorgeous. With feats and ACFs, you not only have a "few" highly customizable classes, you have a cavalcade of them. Then you can prestige classes. With one base class, you get a way to narrow the search for the character you want, and with prestige/multi classing, and everything else I've already mentioned, you can make exactly who you want.
RUMBLETiGER
Adventurer
Had to Vote "Effectively Infinite".
For me and my friends, Variety and Customization is everything. The more gear/equipment, feats, PrCs, classes, effective multiclassing and so on, the better. Multiple ways to make a build within the same class such as Ceric domains, Psion disciplines, ToB classes with maneuver selections, Sorcerer spell choices... it's glorious.
To say "I want to do This..." and then find a build that can do that, is satisfying.
For a player to roll out somebody new and everyone else wonders what he can do, that's satisfying.
To be completely unable to put a players character into a box with preconceived expectations, that is satisfying.
This is obviously an opinion poll, and so I can only speak for myself and those I play with. Some other people may like to stay inside a comfy box.
For me and my friends, Variety and Customization is everything. The more gear/equipment, feats, PrCs, classes, effective multiclassing and so on, the better. Multiple ways to make a build within the same class such as Ceric domains, Psion disciplines, ToB classes with maneuver selections, Sorcerer spell choices... it's glorious.
To say "I want to do This..." and then find a build that can do that, is satisfying.
For a player to roll out somebody new and everyone else wonders what he can do, that's satisfying.
To be completely unable to put a players character into a box with preconceived expectations, that is satisfying.
This is obviously an opinion poll, and so I can only speak for myself and those I play with. Some other people may like to stay inside a comfy box.
Similar Threads
