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

[Crimson Longinus]

I understood that the idea was to create a non-magical scholar. So the bard is obviously out.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I understood that the idea was to create a non-magical scholar. So the bard is obviously out.

Could very well be the case. I missed the first part of the discussion. If that is the case, I maintain due to Expertise alone the Rogue makes for a superior scholarly PC over the Fighter. The only real edge I see the Fighter having is the additional ASI at level 6 that could be used for Prodigy or Skilled to gain three more skill proficiencies. shrug

 

[Minigiant]

Could very well be the case. I missed the first part of the discussion. If that is the case, I maintain due to Expertise alone the Rogue makes for a superior scholarly PC over the Fighter. The only real edge I see the Fighter having is the additional ASI at level 6 that could be used for Prodigy or Skilled to gain three more skill proficiencies. shrug

The edge of the fighter is the fighter actually has lore and knowledge skills.

Sure the Rogue can double your proficiency but the rogue itself doesn't offer the skills. You must use the background.

That's the flaw of having every application on mental power in your system be a spell.

This baffles me why so many want "low magic" settings but don't want to add nonmagical classes.

 

[Undrave]

"Fighters are the dasic mundane warriors, they're soldiers, knights and mercenaries. They know to use wide variety of weapons and armour. Their expertise is fighting in mundane means without relying on magic or favour of gods. "

Okay yeah that's good... But it still feels like ANYBODY from fiction who uses a weapon can be a Fighter. But suddenly, if they're charming, now they have to be a Swashbuckler Rogue?

Right. So heavy focus on 'defender' stuff. That is limiting and doesn't logically flow as only possible approach from the fiction of the class. A lot of people wanted 'striker' fighters. Roles like 'striker' and 'defender' (and the overlooked 'hybrid') should not be things that define whole classes, at most they should be build options withing classes.

I mean, the fiction can always be adjusted... and just because you start with a defender core doesn't mean you can't design the class to slip into Striker or Leader role. It just means that you have a starting point for your design. You know what class feature are useful for what part of the Fighter's job.

And BTW I actually think the 5e Fighter is generally a good class (at least in combat but that's a whole other thing), even if I feel its fiction is a little vague. I feel its clear the class was first designed as a melee combatant, and its design tweaked to allow the lightly armoured and Archer DEX builds to work too. The flexibility was worked in pretty well because they knew what they wanted the flexibility to do.

The Monk is the one I feel didn't have a clear enough identity... Or rather, the identity they tried to impart on it was built on too much tradition from other editions (where the Monk was never super popular either, I mean the 3.X monk was generally considered a poor class) or on fiction where the Monk-like character works alone so they have to be able to do everything a party could do. There's a bunch of feature in there that are over valued, IMO.

 

[Undrave]

This baffles me why so many want "low magic" settings but don't want to add nonmagical classes.

Seriously!

 

[jmartkdr2]

I'd definitely avoid 'magus' as a gish name. That definitely sounds like a scholary wizard, not like a swordmage.

Really the best name for a gish class is "eldritch knight." Clearly magical without saying what kind of magic, clearly a weapon user without saying what kind of weapon.

 

[Undrave]

Really the best name for a gish class is "eldritch knight." Clearly magical without saying what kind of magic, clearly a weapon user without saying what kind of weapon.

How about 'Mage Knight' or... dare I say it... "Mystic Knight" (of Tyr Na Nog or otherwise)

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

My theory is the duskblade (arcane spellcaster + fighter) will be a hybrid arcane + martial adept. Spending daily spells to can use for an encounter something like arcane magic version of the martial adepts, but with simple mechanic to be easy and fast by nPCs, for example the hobgoblin leader of a squad as mini-boss.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Really the best name for a gish class is "eldritch knight." Clearly magical without saying what kind of magic, clearly a weapon user without saying what kind of weapon.

No class in D&D 5e has a name that is 2 separate words. It's all just one title, so that's why I was initially leaning towards Magus and Gish.

 

[Minigiant]

That's fair. How would you do it?

Basically by having a list of effects, actions, and items made when successfully making certain knowledge checks.

I'm not sure what you think of science is what I think of science.
Science is incremental and repeatable. Advanced nonmagical science in the D&D worlds is what leads to advances like the metallurgy capable of creating rapiers and effective handcrossbows in a medieval setting. If your character has abilities based on having invented gunpowder for example, then gunpowder will become, and forever after be, part of the setting, because anyone can do it after it has been discovered.
If your character invents a grapple-gun, or works out a herbal formula for PCP, everyone from there on can use it when they share their findings.

And I want these in the game.
I'd like a learned loremaster who is on the cutting edge of knowledge and cultural advancement.
Sort of like technology based superhero in comic books who have access and understand technology before it becomes common or a commodity.