Paladin/Ranger Belong

[Sadrik]

Survey

 

[GX.Sigma]

As.. what? As base classes? As subclasses? As themes? Or just in general?

 

[Sadrik]

In 5e as a base class, not as a theme, or a background, or subclass - a base class.

 

[Li Shenron]

Definitely both.

 

[GX.Sigma]

Ideally I'd like to see them as subclasses, but it only takes one sentence to make a base class into a subclass, so sure.

 

[Arctic Wolf]

To me they aren't classes, maybe if you pick a specific list then you would be able to make them. The ranger is basically a rogue or fighter that specializes with a bow and has a wilderness background so I can safely rule it out. The paladin is a cleric who specializes in melee combat and has a protecter background. That is my take but I can still be convinced otherwise.

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

Wizards have flat out said they're going to be in 5E, there isn't really a debate in serious circles.

 

[grimslade]

Wizards have flat out said they're going to be in 5E, there isn't really a debate in serious circles.

No, the designers have said that their GOAL is to have all 1st PHB classes in the 1st D&D Next PHB. There is no guarantee. Ask the poor Illusionist. It is still a very valid discussion.

I voted both should be in. If we are going beyond Fighter, Wizard, Rogue, and Cleric, then Paladin and Ranger belong on the roster. It is part tradition and partly that the ranger and paladin fill a distinct D&D niche. The design of the two classes should make them distinct from clerics, fighters and rogues before adding theme and background.

 

[TerraDave]

One thing on this, and similar questions on races (gnome, half-orc...):

It doesn't even matter what the majority thinks. The majority of potential players could care less. It matters what a minority thinks, if omission--as a class--messes with their play experience. If it does, then that omission is a serious problem for WotC. Both for the direct effect, and the network effect (this one guy in my old group doesn't like it now...)

The trend for D&D, going all the way back, is to have a fair number of classes (B/X resisted this the most...but even their there was a tendency to add some new classes). Paladin and ranger aren't even really debatable: they will be there. (as will the druid, bard and probably monk and warlord or something like it). The question is, would omitting, say the barbarian or warlock, annoy enough people as to merit inclusion in the first PHB or equivalent.

 

[Halivar]

Excluding either from the core would indicate the designers had completely lost their minds.

In other words, they will be core.