D&D (2024) Should a general Adventurer class be created to represent the Everyman?

[EzekielRaiden]

I think it could work, but it should probably be a custom homebrew class. Just from the first three pages of comments here, you can already see that different people have different ideas about what an "everyman" is supposed to be, and do, and how. The only way you'll get a satisfying result is to build it yourself.

That said: if I were going to undertake such an endeavor, I would probably do some kind of ability tree like certain video games do. I think that would be the least-frustrating way to handle it.

One possibility is to combine two things 5e has not yet done (well, one it hasn't really done and one it hasn't done at all):

• Base class with very few, basic, mostly-generic features (as opposed to Wizard or Fighter, which have too much in their base features to allow much room for subclasses; this is vaguely like 5.0 Warlock with its hybrid-subclass model)
• You can choose multiple subclasses, and you get everything a particular subclass offers over (say) ~8 levels, so the GEC gets two subclasses and then a capstone, or perhaps every ~6 levels so you get three.

The trick, then, would be making sure that those few, basic, mostly-generic class features are sufficiently fun to interact with (since you aren't getting very many of them and they aren't super flavorful by themselves), and that the different subclasses are within a relatively well-bounded range of power so they feel worthwhile, neither like dead weight nor like mandatory must-haves.

 

[James Gasik]

Rolemaster has had this since at least 1984.

Oh, the "No Profession" Profession? I mean, kind of, but it's really more about building a jack of all trades, as I recall.

-

I don't know about Fighter as an "everyman" per se, but if you have a character concept like "farmboy", "trail guide", "assistant pig farmer", "random modern day person thrust into a fantasy world" who suddenly goes on an adventure, the current class model isn't going to work out very well. In earlier forms of D&D, you could squint a little bit and use the 1st-level Fighter as a chassis for such a character, but that didn't mean it was a perfect fit either.

I remember reading Ed Greenwood's Spellfire- Shandril was a barmaid who went on one short, ill-fated adventure before discovering her anti-magic superpowers, yet officially, she was a 1st-level Thief, somehow able to backstab and use (probably badly) several Thieving abilities, which didn't make a whole heap of sense.

The problem here is, D&D was never intended to accurately model a Bilbo Baggins, Holger Carlson, Taran, Garion, or similar characters. The fact that even the "simple" class carries more baggage these days that you can't really explain away than it did in times past doesn't help, but it wasn't like I could say "ok, so my character concept is a 14 year old girl from Coal City, Illinois" and say that justified the higher hit die and ability to use advanced weapons and armor she would gain as a 1st-level Fighter- it was just a little easier to swallow than her being able to cast spells or pick locks.

Of course, it's worth noting that even before the modern Isekai boom, the "Earth character who ends up in a fantasy setting with special powers/knowledge" trope was well established- John Carter gains superhuman strength on Mars, Dorothy Gale gets awarded a powerful artifact within minutes of landing on Oz, Corwin of Amber is actually a superhuman demigod with centuries of combat experience- he just has amnesia. So you could justify such characters, if you're willing to accept the "everyman hero" receives a little boost- in Three Hearts and Three Lions, as I recall, Holger Carlson finds he has the ability to speak the local language, ride a horse, and use weapons and armor right off the bat (though, again, as I recall, we later find out he's the reincarnation of a great hero- reincarnation being another way to justify this sort of thing, as seen in The Wheel of Time series).

I'm not saying it wouldn't be nice to have a way to model characters without assuming they have been given divine protection or special powers to keep up, but that ship sailed long ago- the only way you could really do it is if the entire party has a similar background. Otherwise, you're going to be on the back foot in a party with regular character class levels- and yes, I count the idea of "preternatural luck" to be a "special power".

Someone upthread mentioned the Warlock, and that might be the best class for this sort of thing- lots of stories have characters who have a brush with the supernatural at the beginning of their stories, which allows them the ability to stand on their own two feet. I understand that's not exactly ideal if you don't want to play a Warlock, or you want a strictly non-magical character, but it is what it is. Unless of course, you're perfectly fine with not having characters with somewhat equal ability to perform in a dangerous adventure, at which point you could just not use all of your abilities until such time as you feel they are justified- but make sure to discuss this with your group beforehand!

 

[Yaarel]

I don't know about Fighter as an "everyman" per se, but if you have a character concept like "farmboy", "trail guide", "assistant pig farmer", "random modern day person thrust into a fantasy world" who suddenly goes on an adventure, the current class model isn't going to work out very well. In earlier forms of D&D, you could squint a little bit and use the 1st-level Fighter as a chassis for such a character, but that didn't mean it was a perfect fit either.

I remember reading Ed Greenwood's Spellfire- Shandril was a barmaid who went on one short, ill-fated adventure before discovering her anti-magic superpowers, yet officially, she was a 1st-level Thief, somehow able to backstab and use (probably badly) several Thieving abilities, which didn't make a whole heap of sense.

The problem here is, D&D was never intended to accurately model a Bilbo Baggins, Holger Carlson, Taran, Garion, or similar characters. The fact that even the "simple" class carries more baggage these days that you can't really explain away than it did in times past doesn't help, but it wasn't like I could say "ok, so my character concept is a 14 year old girl from Coal City, Illinois" and say that justified the higher hit die and ability to use advanced weapons and armor she would gain as a 1st-level Fighter- it was just a little easier to swallow than her being able to cast spells or pick locks.

In these situations, to represent a Player Character that is a combat-clueless civilian entering combat, "level 0" is the way to go.

D&D level = level in combat training

A high-Ability, Expert, baker is still a "level 0" combatant.

For Nonplayer Characters, the DM can create a statblock with whatever stats make sense for the character concept.

 

[Yaarel]

I'm not saying it wouldn't be nice to have a way to model characters without assuming they have been given divine protection or special powers to keep up, but that ship sailed long ago- the only way you could really do it is if the entire party has a similar background. Otherwise, you're going to be on the back foot in a party with regular character class levels- and yes, I count the idea of "preternatural luck" to be a "special power".

For a strictly nonmagical setting, cap all levels at 8.

Even tier 9-12, is necessarily superhuman in the sense of Batman and action movie heroes, including 'wire-fu'.

(Treat advanced technology settings as magic.)

 

[Yaarel]

One possibility is to combine two things 5e has not yet done (well, one it hasn't really done and one it hasn't done at all):

• Base class with very few, basic, mostly-generic features (as opposed to Wizard or Fighter, which have too much in their base features to allow much room for subclasses; this is vaguely like 5.0 Warlock with its hybrid-subclass model)
• You can choose multiple subclasses, and you get everything a particular subclass offers over (say) ~8 levels, so the GEC gets two subclasses and then a capstone, or perhaps every ~6 levels so you get three.

The trick, then, would be making sure that those few, basic, mostly-generic class features are sufficiently fun to interact with (since you aren't getting very many of them and they aren't super flavorful by themselves), and that the different subclasses are within a relatively well-bounded range of power so they feel worthwhile, neither like dead weight nor like mandatory must-haves.

Along these lines.

Level 1 is front loaded for all character classes. Every class can split its level 1 starting features into two levels: 1A and 1B.

For a gradual transition: start level 0 background, 1A, 1B.

When multiclassing into a new class, one takes 1A only, then when gaining a level takes 1B.

This works better with standardized subclass levels, but is still possible. A character can use the subclass levels to pick up a different class, instead of a subclass.

 

[Minigiant]

Meh. A 1e fighter with Unearthed Arcana or a 2e fighter out of the book had 2 weapon spec's at 1st level which a MASSIVELY more powerful than what a 5e fighter gets. ((1e gave you +3 to hit and damage and 50% more attacks, 2e gave you +1 to hit, +2 to damage and 50% more attacks)). Plus potential percentile strength, as many NWP's as pretty much anyone else.

By 3rd level, that fighter was superhuman.

D&D has never had an "everyman".

The discussion is not about power but about training time.

A PC trains more to become a 5e fighter than a 3e fighter and much more than a 1e fighter.


A 1e fighter is training all simple and martial weapons and all armors.

A 3e fighter is training all simple and martial weapons and all armors, 2 skills and a feat.

A 5e fighter is training all simple and martial weapons and all armors, 2 skills, 3 Weapon Masteries, 1 Fighting Style (feat), and Second Wind.

Training in training all simple and martial weapons and all armors is Heavily devalued in 5e. So this frees up space.

So the question is whether there could or should be a class that gives up the heavy armor, 3 Weapon Masteries, 1 Fighting Style feat, and Second Wind for a Luck feature and Survivability feature to replicate a Player Character who is thrusted straight into adventure and has no time for a long period of intense training?

You can kinda do it with the Warlock. The question is whether you can do it without having an outside force dumping power into you and have it be you Player Characters own strength and minimal training like Frodo or Skywalker or Dorothy.

 

[Yaarel]

So the question is whether there could or should be a class that gives up the heavy armor, 3 Weapon Masteries, 1 Fighting Style feat, and Second Wind for a Luck feature and Survivability feature to replicate a Player Character who is thrusted straight into adventure and has no time for a long period of intense training?

This sounds like two things.
• Start at level 0, using background features.
• Advance to level 1 in a 'Classless' class.

The Classless class has something like a pointbuy system to purchase any feature from any class.

I did this Classless Class for 3e. It works well when features are gated by level prereqs. In 5e, certain features are very expensive, such as Rogue Sneak Attack, which is worth something like 1½ feats, thus require two levels to acquire, meaning, there will be an 'empty level' as downpayment to purchase it in the next level. 5e level 1 is front loaded worth more than one level of design space, in order to start with features like Sneak Attack.

 

[GrimCo]

Characters like that are best represented with sidekicks from 2014 rules. In fiction, to take LoTR as an example, all hobbits are sidekicks for most of the story, they get by mostly by luck, some wit, and abilities of those around them that are far more competent than they are.

Sidekick classes are where i would go for abilities and class features of GEA class. Mix of Warrior and Expert and tweak those a bit.

D&D, 5e specially, isn't a game about everyman. They were probably everyman once (backgrounds), but they are not any more. 1 level classed character is someone who did have decent amount of training in their new profession.

 

[Horwath]

So the question is whether there could or should be a class that gives up the heavy armor, 3 Weapon Masteries, 1 Fighting Style feat, and Second Wind for a Luck feature and Survivability feature to replicate a Player Character who is thrusted straight into adventure and has no time for a long period of intense training?

You can kinda do it with the Warlock. The question is whether you can do it without having an outside force dumping power into you and have it be you Player Characters own strength and minimal training like Frodo or Skywalker or Dorothy.

heavy armor, half a feat, but that is too expensive IMHO, so 1/4 feat
weapon mastery also too expensive in PHB, so each 1/4 feat?ish? 3/4 in total
fighting style; 1/2 feat
second wind? 1/2 feat? maybe?

so that is 2 full feats or 4 background feats, or just +4 ASI
add martial weapons for 1/2 feat,

so d10 HD, with light, medium armor+shields, simple weapons, 2 saves(CON and STR seems good) and 2 skills, add 5 background feats:

crafter,
healer,
lucky,
musician,
skilled,
tavern brawler,
tough,

those 7 are good choice, not too much combat heavy, with starting background feat, that makes it 6/7 to take, human takes all 7 or less and doubles down on skilled if needs be.

for every other level, just give +1 feat to the class.

 

[Horwath]

I did this Classless Class for 4e. It works well when features are gated by level prereqs.

in 4E you literally do not need to modify anything, power level difference between powers is so little that you could pick any power from any class, with level being respected OFC.

5th level fighter taking Fireball once per day instead of 5th level fighter attack once per day?
Who cares, not that Fireball is anything special in 4E.