D&D 5E Should 5e have more classes (Poll and Discussion)?

[TwoSix]

I feel like a lot of the discussion here is about a future 6e, not 5e. Or at least about an alternate timeline 5e.

 

[Maxperson]

Yep, that is what I would like to see. In fact, I think that is what @Morrus should do with LevelUp. Provide just the bare bones classes, but expand the subclass roll and bring it on sooner with more decision points.

Subclasses already happen at 2nd or 3rd level. If they happen sooner, then they're essentially just all classes

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

Classes as they currently exist are very inconsistent in terms of conceptual specificity. You’ve got “guy who fights” sitting in the same character building and conceptual space as “guy who made a pact with a powerful and potentially sinister otherworldly entity for magic power.” The ranger struggles to find a niche somewhere between the broad conceptual spaces filled by the fighter, the rogue, and the druid. Paladins and Clerics compete for being “the holy warrior.” It’s a huge mess. Pairing down to a small number of very broad character archetypes and allowing them to be further refined by subclasses and kits would address this problem.

Well, that is true. But I don't see how this is a problem. What specific issues does this sort of overlap cause? Why is the fact that either paladin or cleric can be used to represent a holy warrior an issue?

 

[Cadence]

Besides organization (mental and book), what's the big difference between a class and subclass. Is it basically...

Subclasses already happen at 2nd or 3rd level. If they happen sooner, then they're essentially just all classes

 

[Azzy]

The shaman disagrees

Honestly, I think the shaman needs to be absorbed into the druid.

 

[Minigiant]

Besides organization (mental and book), what's the big difference between a class and subclass. Is it basically...

Class features

Classes get big impact class features (Full spell casting, Action Surge, Rage, Invocations)

Subclasses get class tweaks (1/3 spell casting, superiority dice, minor damage bonuses, expanded spell list)

 

[dave2008]

Subclasses already happen at 2nd or 3rd level. If they happen sooner, then they're essentially just all classes

What I am talking about is a complete re-write of the class / sublcass model as @Charlaquin suggested. So you would have:

Class: Provide basic structure and a few features that are a part of every class, little to no choice about these features. You get certain features at certain levels - all subclasses get these features
Subclass: all or at least most character choices are about your subclass. You get to choose certain features at certain levels. Those choices are unique to your subclass.

So you could pick your class as fighter and then at level 1 or 2 you pick a battlemaster, or champion, or ranger, or barbarian subclass. Sure, I agree that they could feel like separate classes, but the are all built off the fighter framework (what ever that is), which is truly, IMO, the "class."

The separation between class and subclass is more about structure and choice, not when it happens.

 

[Maxperson]

So you could pick your class as fighter and then at level 1 or 2 you pick a battlemaster, or champion, or ranger, or barbarian subclass. Sure, I agree that they could feel like separate classes, but the are all built off the fighter framework (what ever that is), which is truly, IMO, the "class."

The separation between class and subclass is more about structure and choice, not when it happens.

For me, if class in't a separate 1-20 thing that you add onto like 3e did with class and prestige class, then it isn't a class at all. If you yank out the subclass in 5e, you have a broken thing that can't function effectively in the game. Class doesn't really exist.

 

[Minigiant]

For me, if class in't a separate 1-20 thing that you add onto like 3e did with class and prestige class, then it isn't a class at all. If you yank out the subclass in 5e, you have a broken thing that can't function effectively in the game. Class doesn't really exist.

The opposite is also true.

A subclass is a sub, as in under or beneath, a class. If you cant break the subclass into 4-5 parts over 20 levels while remaining true to the concept of the subclass AND the class, then it isn't a subclass at all.

If a fantasy concept when made into a subclass overpowers the fantasy concept of the class then the subclass isn't a subclass. It's a class.

 

[Maxperson]

The opposite is also true.

A subclass is a sub, as in under or beneath, a class. If you cant break the subclass into 4-5 parts over 20 levels while remaining true to the concept of the subclass AND the class, then it isn't a subclass at all.

Which in 5e makes every subclass = class. The "fighter" is three separate classes. The Battle Master class, the Champion class and the Eldritch Knight class. They share some things in common, but they are three classes.