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

[DND_Reborn]

Did that scratch a lot of the new class itch?

Probably, but we never used any of them unless they later made it into Unearthed Arcana.

 

[Cadence]

Probably, but we never used any of them unless they later made it into Unearthed Arcana.

We tended to have a few long running campaigns back then and so I never even played all of the classes in the PhB. I can't remember if we had someone play a Bounty Hunter, or just used it for an NPC or talked about it. But I think it gave us something to argue and kibitz about. Do most folks today have first hand experience with most of the archetypes? Or is it the discussion and having it as a possibility a big part of keeping the game exciting in terms of new material?

Wow there were a lot of them...

Dragon Magazine NPC Character Class List - Dragonsfoot

www.dragonsfoot.org

 

[Minigiant]

I think another source of apprehension and hesitation is that D&D had a history of very very narrow class interpetations and a history of being forced to create a new class or variant/kit/subclass/prestigeclass to encorporate many new ideas. Especially common ideas that today we would consider crazy to be forced to make a whole class for. Seriously in a game about medieval era heroes, we had to make variants and classes to make fighters resemble knights and samurai in the past.

5e is better now as it can eliminate all those slight tweak classes and kits of the past. There should be no fear of the class bloat for past editions. The narrow design of the pre-2010 eras has left D&D. So now any new classes should be major shifts and departures into totally open fields of fantasy. There is no need for simple ideas like summoner classses or cultural classes.

 

[MichaelSomething]

Why don't the people who want more classes just buy the Masterclass Codex and leave everyone else alone??

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Why don't the people who want more classes just buy the Masterclass Codex and leave everyone else alone??

Because a few reasons:

1. They're not official.
2. It's a bit expensive.
3. It doesn't have all the niches that I think should be filled by classes.

 

[Mecheon]

Yeah, nothing against the Masterclass folks but, its hardly filling all of the niches out there people are asking for

There are options out there and heck knows that's why Kibble's stuff is so popular, because he's slammed down home on those niches, but the existence of them hardly stops new classes coming about. Its just, people are interested in more stuff

 

[Undrave]

We tended to have a few long running campaigns back then and so I never even played all of the classes in the PhB. I can't remember if we had someone play a Bounty Hunter, or just used it for an NPC or talked about it. But I think it gave us something to argue and kibitz about. Do most folks today have first hand experience with most of the archetypes? Or is it the discussion and having it as a possibility a big part of keeping the game exciting in terms of new material?

Considering I rarely get to play, this sort of discussion is my way to engage with the game, so I like to have more stuff to talk about.

 

[Maxperson]

We tended to have a few long running campaigns back then and so I never even played all of the classes in the PhB. I can't remember if we had someone play a Bounty Hunter, or just used it for an NPC or talked about it. But I think it gave us something to argue and kibitz about. Do most folks today have first hand experience with most of the archetypes? Or is it the discussion and having it as a possibility a big part of keeping the game exciting in terms of new material?

Wow there were a lot of them...

Dragon Magazine NPC Character Class List - Dragonsfoot

www.dragonsfoot.org

1e was incredibly deadly. I played every class in multiples. Our adventures went something like this....

We're wandering through the dungeon, oops, rotgrub! You're dead.

Next PC. Moving on back into the dungeon and look, giant centipedes. One bites you and with the +4 to your poison save you get lucky and roll a 16. Uh oh, a second one bit you. Looks like you need a new PC.

Whew! Made it to level 4 and what's that? Wraiths?! Well now I'm level 2, let's head back to town and see if we can find a cleric that can cast 7th level spells to cast Restoration. We'll cut through the woods and what's that? Ahhhh! Giant spiders. Time for PC #4, and it's only lunch time.

Okay, so it wasn't QUITE that bad, but we did go through a lot of characters.

 

[Zardnaar]

I like the artificer but don't want it in the core rules.

For settings and splat I don't really care what they put in them.

Settings in particular should be different to the phb around 50% of the time imho.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

I like the artificer but don't want it in the core rules.

For settings and splat I don't really care what they put in them.

The real issue is the concept that divides core content (classes, sub-classes, seeds [Ares's phallic spear be blessed]) from non-core content. In my mind, the division is a false binary. Which classes, seeds, etc. are available should be wholly dependent on the setting, not their arbitrary inclusion and distribution among a set of books.

In one world, artificers may have no place. In another, fighters not. Both of those are equally compelling limitations.

Whose to say? Only the DM/setting designers.