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

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Sure, and I imagine most gishes wouldn't use fireball as a spell strike option for precisely that reason. It's not like the concept was balanced around players spell striking fireballs.

Also, if they want to do a similar thing, but not blast their own face with a fireball, they can use Lightning Bolt.

 

[DND_Reborn]

FWIW if you're using feats (which I would imagine you do since most tables employ them), this is screaming for Shield Master/Fireball combo.

I hit. You take full fireball damage.
I save. I use my reaction to take none.

Have a nice day!

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

That might be balanced, but it is bloody stupid. Higher level D&D characters being crazy resilient might make it a viable tactic from the rules perspective, but from in universe perspective it is absurd.

There's an example in the Forgotten Realms of a group of soldiers that would do a similar thing. They'd store fireballs inside of chardalyn fragments which they would put inside their shields. They would then smash their enemies with the shields, breaking the chardalyn and releasing the fireball. They wore rings of fire resistance to be able to survive this blast.

Sure, it's kind of a stupid thing to do in combat, but it's not baseless, and is valid if you can survive it.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

FWIW if you're using feats (which I would imagine you do since most tables employ them), this is screaming for Shield Master/Fireball combo.

I hit. You take full fireball damage.
I save. I use my reaction to take none.

Have a nice day!

Requires you to use a shield and give up a feat (ASIs are very valuable to this class, needing Int, Con, and Dex/Str). It requires a saving throw and reaction, still, so I don't think that's terribly unbalanced.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Requires you to use a shield and give up a feat (ASIs are very valuable to this class, needing Int, Con, and Dex/Str). It requires a saving throw and reaction, still, so I don't think that's terribly unbalanced.

Well, for a gish build I would likely use a shield, personally (I am not a fan of TWF because of the bonus action cost, the investment in TWF style if you want a damage bonus with your second weapon, and also taking a feat if you want the +1 AC bonus). Really the only potential downside is needed War Caster so you can have a shield and weapon both in hand, but since you gain advantage on Concentration checks (never a bad thing for any caster IME), not a horrible cost. Finally, since I could start with 14's or better in three scores (I am not obsessed with the 16 and 17 at level 1 like some people... ), ASIs are not as valuable IMO. I certainly won't need them much for my INT since if I hit the target auto-fails its saving throw.

But yes, everything is a trade-off, but this is still a very potent combo with the auto-fail save idea on the table. Still, looking forward to your revisions and getting a better idea for the class on Sunday. FWIW, the "click to expand" finally started to show up and I have it bookmarked.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Well, for a gish build I would likely use a shield, personally (I am not a fan of TWF because of the bonus action cost, the investment in TWF style if you want a damage bonus with your second weapon, and also taking a feat if you want the +1 AC bonus).

I personally made this class open. You can do any type of melee weapon; thrown, great weapons, finesse, versatile, etc. I agree, TWF his its disadvantages, but can be worthwhile to this class for Spell Striking.

Really the only potential downside is needed War Caster so you can have a shield and weapon both in hand, but since you gain advantage on Concentration checks (never a bad thing for any caster IME), not a horrible cost.

This class can use magic weapons as a spellcasting focus.

But yes, everything is a trade-off, but this is still a very potent combo with the auto-fail save idea on the table. Still, looking forward to your revisions and getting a better idea for the class on Sunday. FWIW, the "click to expand" finally started to show up and I have it bookmarked.

Thanks. I'll get most of the revisions done tomorrow, hopefully.

 

[DND_Reborn]

This class can use magic weapons as a spellcasting focus.

It was more an issue of having a free hand for spells with somatic components.

Thanks. I'll get most of the revisions done tomorrow, hopefully.

Cool. We're playing tomorrow and I'll run the general concept by the group.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

It was more an issue of having a free hand for spells with somatic components.

I know. The whole "same hand for somatic and material components with a spellcasting focus, but not with only somatic components" rule is dumb, and should not be a rule.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Okay, we've been discussing an arcane gish class for awhile, and that train of thought detour is probably come to an end for the time being.

I am a strong advocate of adding a few more classes, and here's an analogy to support that:

D&D is a plant, a tree for example. This tree needs pruning with errata, sunlight from money that the players give for the hobby, to breathe fresh air, that is the new settings and adventures, and a solid foundation in the ground that is legacy, tradition, and history of D&D. The crunch (rules, classes, races) are the water that keeps the tree alive. D&D needs all of these aspects, but too much of any of them will kill the tree. Too many errata will cause D&D's rules to be fluid and unknown, causing more and more debates of the rules, which will cut away too many branches of the tree. Too much money, and WotC is suddenly only making rules to grab cash, which will scorch the tree. Too many settings and adventures, and they will stop feeling unique and distinct. Too hard a foundation, and the tree is stuck in stone and starved of ever changing or growing. Too much water, and you will drown the hobby with bloated rules, too many classes, and too many options for the races.

But, there is another aspect of this. Too little errata, and the broken aspects will be set in stone, and the hobby/tree can't grow properly. Too little money, and the company goes bankrupt, and the hobby/tree starves. Not enough settings and adventures, and the hobby/tree is suffocated by lack of ideas and concepts. Not enough of a solid foundation, and the tree will be blown over and die by no continuity in the hobby.

But, most importantly to this discussion, D&D needs water. Not too much, or the game/tree will be drowned by content and rot away, and have a new edition take its place. Too little, the hobby/tree is killed by thirst, for lack of content (classes, races, races).

Is the tree drowning right now? No. It's not. It's nowhere close to drowning. Is the tree being killed by thirst? I am not sure. I certainly am thirsty for more content, but I am not being killed by this need right now. Certain parts of the tree are fine and healthy, even prospering, but some parts are thirsty. Paladins are fine, Bards are mostly fine, so are Wizards, Barbarians, Fighters, and most other classes and aspects of the game. But, D&D is thirsty for an arcane gish class. D&D is thirsty for psionics right now. D&D is thirsty for a few more classes, but not too many. We don't want to flood the tree, but we don't want to keep it from drinking.

Now, I don't want these classes to be added immediately. I only want to add maybe one or two at a time, here a little and there a little. Psionics in Dark Sun, Warlords, Occultists, Arcane Gish, and other classes in future books, maybe other setting books. We don't need to go crazy, but we do need more. Just a bit more.

 

[Minigiant]

I am a strong advocate of adding a few more classes, and here's an analogy to support that:

D&D is a plant, a tree for example. This tree needs pruning with errata, sunlight from money that the players give for the hobby, to breathe fresh air, that is the new settings and adventures, and a solid foundation in the ground that is legacy, tradition, and history of D&D. The crunch (rules, classes, races) are the water that keeps the tree alive. D&D needs all of these aspects, but too much of any of them will kill the tree. Too many errata will cause D&D's rules to be fluid and unknown, causing more and more debates of the rules, which will cut away too many branches of the tree. Too much money, and WotC is suddenly only making rules to grab cash, which will scorch the tree. Too many settings and adventures, and they will stop feeling unique and distinct. Too hard a foundation, and the tree is stuck in stone and starved of ever changing or growing. Too much water, and you will drown the hobby with bloated rules, too many classes, and too many options for the races.

But, there is another aspect of this. Too little errata, and the broken aspects will be set in stone, and the hobby/tree can't grow properly. Too little money, and the company goes bankrupt, and the hobby/tree starves. Not enough settings and adventures, and the hobby/tree is suffocated by lack of ideas and concepts. Not enough of a solid foundation, and the tree will be blown over and die by no continuity in the hobby.

But, most importantly to this discussion, D&D needs water. Not too much, or the game/tree will be drowned by content and rot away, and have a new edition take its place. Too little, the hobby/tree is killed by thirst, for lack of content (classes, races, races).

I agree.
I find that many pople in many fan communities put theirown wants over what is good for the subject itself.

I'm not a fan of constantly adding morespells and magic items to D&D but I understand that it is needed for 5e D&D to stay alive. Because if 5e gets dull and stagnates, it dies and 6e comes to restart us from scratch.

New classes help 5e live. However only if they areoriginal and give new experiences.
And that's the double edge. The classes that will keep 5e alive will appeal to the new and not the old. Because if it appealed to the old, it would be in the game by now.

And that's what this whole 30page discussion kinda boils down to.
If you have everything you want, you don't see the appeal of new classes.

As a salesman myself, I naturally come from the other side. New product mean new customers or more spent by less enthusiastic customers mean more money means business plan lives longer.

That's why most of my suggestion have be for classes that have been in 0-1 editions. 5e should have more classes to bring in more players and dms to keep it alive.