D&D 5E Really concerned about class design

[Tony Vargas]

Witch was a kit in 2E. Warlock and wizard would be the best bet.

It was also a sample new class in the 2e DMG, no?

 

[Zardnaar]

It was also a sample new class in the 2e DMG, no?

I don't remember. One minute loading screen.

Page 22 no witch. The create a class rules are basically point buy with an xp multiplier for progression table.

 

[Einlanzer0]

I think what people are trying to say is: each new class that we add needs to be justified on its own. You really can't argue "there should be more classes" or "there should be fewer classes" without arguing for specific classes to add/remove. Starting with a number is just an butt-pull. (If you're gonna do that, I suggest 8.)

Now, I can and have made the argument that Eldritch Knight should be its own class (with arcane archer, hexblade, and rune knight as core subclasses) because the existing classes don't have the structure to make that particular fantasy or playstyle work. That's a class we should add (but that's a retcon, which WotC won't do.)

But that's the only way to make the argument: note which class is missing. (And witch is a poor example class because no one agrees on what a witch is.)

What you're describing is exactly what I'm proposing. I'm not sure how you extracted anything different from my posts. Just because no one agrees on what a witch is doesn't make it a poor example. In fact, it makes it a really good example because of all the different possible directions you could go in with it - hence why it would need a lot more design space than a subclass would provide.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I don't remember. One minute loading screen.

Page 22 no witch. The create a class rules are basically point buy with an xp multiplier for progression table.

Nod. I finally remembered: the example of class-building was in 3e, even though there was no system or it, per se.

I didn't remember the Kit, either, though, FWIW - was there any sort of 'theme' to it? Or was it the stereotypical broom-riding cackling crone of 0e/1e unofficial-NPC-class tradition?

 

[Parmandur]

What you're describing is exactly what I'm proposing. I'm not sure how you extracted anything different from my posts. Just because no one agrees on what a witch is doesn't make it a poor example. In fact, it makes it a really good example because of all the different possible directions you could go in with it - hence why it would need a lot more design space than a subclass would provide.

But the concept can be done without even a Subclass, just using the PHB. Same with Shaman. If anything, the game could be fine with fewer Class options, and I haven't seen a really strong case for any new ones.

 

[Zardnaar]

Nod. I finally remembered: the example of class-building was in 3e, even though there was no system or it, per se.

I didn't remember the Kit, either, though, FWIW - was there any sort of 'theme' to it? Or was it the stereotypical broom-riding cackling crone of 0e/1e unofficial-NPC-class tradition?

Paraphrased
Not proficient in weapon, you make a pact. Get detect and read magic for free.

Find familiar level 3 for free
Brew sleep elixir in an hour (basically a poison save negates 8hd or less) level 5

Level 7 brew poison type L
Level 9 charm monster type ability no save
11 brew fly ointment roughly as spell.
13 witches curse roughly as bestow curse no save
And some hindrances.

Curses and potions kinda.

 

[TiwazTyrsfist]

Seems like we have this particular heated thread every few months.

Should there be more Classes?
You already have an opinion and it's either Yes or No, and you won't be shifted by discussion.

Personally, I favor new classes. There are a lot of things that cannot be done via subclasses. For example, neither the 5e cleric nor paladin can be altered via subclass to be the Pathfinder Warpriest. It has to many different powers. So if we wanted to do that, it would have to be a new class.

I think that a LOT of options can and should be done via subclass. Psionic Warrior and Mind Blade for example work very well as they are in the UA.

I think Psion should be a class on it's own, with subclasses for the old Psionic Modes.


Basically, I think that if a concept allows for even 2 subclasses, it stands up to being a Class.

 

[Arilyn]

I feel that there are not enough entry points in the archetype design to give strong flavour to sub classes. It can be a long wait to get goodies that make your archetype unique.

In a game like D&D, where you choose from a menu of predetermined abilities, having lots of full classes is a boon. They shouldn't be churned out too rapidly, because that can lead to carelessness, but I believe the game could have benefited from more than one new class addition by now. More classes means you can tailor your world, and well, most players enjoy a wide variety. If WOTC brought out a book adding 4-6 new classes, I guarantee it would be a huge seller.

The class books EN publishing brought out, for example, have been very welcome at my table. Adds more inspiration, and more choices to get the creative juices flowing.

 

[Parmandur]

Seems like we have this particular heated thread every few months.

Should there be more Classes?
You already have an opinion and it's either Yes or No, and you won't be shifted by discussion.

Personally, I favor new classes. There are a lot of things that cannot be done via subclasses. For example, neither the 5e cleric nor paladin can be altered via subclass to be the Pathfinder Warpriest. It has to many different powers. So if we wanted to do that, it would have to be a new class.

I think that a LOT of options can and should be done via subclass. Psionic Warrior and Mind Blade for example work very well as they are in the UA.

I think Psion should be a class on it's own, with subclasses for the old Psionic Modes.


Basically, I think that if a concept allows for even 2 subclasses, it stands up to being a Class.

Mearls laid out the standard that for WotC, the standard is about ten possible Subclasses at minimum (not that all the PHB Classes are there yet).

 

[bedir than]

I hope that the WotC offices base their class decisions not on what less popular games are doing, but instead what the literature, movies, video games, and other stories have for classes.

It doesn't matter what classes Pathfinder has.
It matters if D&D players can recreate stories at their own table.