So what races and classes do we consider core?

[Jawsh]

This has been my list for a long time:

avenger / favored soul (a spontaneous divine caster)
barbarian
bard
cleric
druid
fighter
monk
paladin
psion
ranger
rogue
sorcerer
surgeon (my homebrewed healer, Dr McCoy, ship's surgeon)
swordmage
warlord / marshal
wizard

Races:

dromite
dwarf
elf
ent (use wilden stats)
ferengi (change the name to protect Paramount's IP, but yes, I want ferengi)
gnome
hadozee (winged intelligent ape, from Spelljammer)
halfling
human
lizardfolk
marshwiggle (skinny version of bullywug)
merfolk (only with legs, so tritons really)
mongrelfolk
myconid
orc
wookie
hybrid (any two races combined, does not apply to mongrelfolk or planars)
planar (eladrin, genasi, aasimar, tiefling, and many more)

And I don't want WotC looking at such a list and saying "well, there's too much there to fit into a book, so let's make it modular." No. I want these races/classes and these only. Yes, there's a lot of them, but they're finite, and I think they cover the necessary archetypes. Call me spoiled, and call me close-minded when I reject further suggestions, but this is my list.

 

[NewJeffCT]

Human

Dwarf
Elf
Gnome
Half-Elf
Halfling
Half-Orc

In a pinch, drop that down to:
Human
Dwarf
Elf
Halfling

Eladrin, tieflings, and other wonkiness? Put them in a setting book where I can ignore them unless I am using that setting.


*EDIT* Forgot classes....

Fighter
Cleric
Wizard
Rogue
Ranger
Druid
Paladin
Bard

In a pinch:
Cleric
Fighter
Wizard
Rogue

The Auld Grump

I agree with The Auld Grump - I don't want to have to add dragonborn, tieflings, wilden and shardminds if I don't want to add them.

 

[Raith5]

My vote is for 10 races

Humans
Elves
Eladrin (I like the divide in elf races but I wouldnt mind them getting rid of fey step!)
Half Elves
Dwarves
Halflings
Tieflings (i like tieflings I think they are a great addition to D and D)
Half Orc (maybe full orc)
Dragonborn
Drow


12 Classes

Classic archetypes: fighter, rogue, mage and cleric

Other key archetypes: ranger, paladin, bard, warlord, Druid, Barbarian, Shaman, warlock (should kill the swordmage an take some of its falvour a sword wielding mage without the teleporting defender rubbish)

These for me are the primary archetypes I would expect to see. But I would not be surprised to see the 4 core classes being supported by feats or talent trees such that you can combine cleric and fighter powers to get a paladin or wizard and rouge to get a bard, or a choice to turn a rouge into a ranger etc or a wizard into a necomancer etc.

FWIW I like Psionics but they should come later as per previous iterations.

 

[Dausuul]

To be honest, I hope WotC does everything it can to kill the very idea of "core" in 5e D&D. In many ways, I think the massive divide between "core only" players and "use everything but the core" players during the 3E era is the true root of the modern Pathfinder/4E divide. The goals of 5E, which include reaching out to players in both camps and being as inclusive as possible, are rather antithetical to the entire concept of "core". Defining one thing as "core" and another as "not core" is an act of exclusion, of saying that one way of playing the game is better or more "true D&D" than another, and that should be avoided.

No matter what you call it, there's going to be some stuff that goes in the Player's Handbook, and some stuff that doesn't. What goes in, will be effectively "core" on account of everybody gets it when they buy the book.

Even if nothing is core, some things will be more not-core than others.

Anyway, I think you're wildly wrong on the reason for the 4E/Pathfinder split. I'm of the "core only" or "core mostly" school, but I switched to 4E. Conversely, many of the folks who stuck with 3E did so because they didn't want to invalidate their giant libraries of 3E material--implying they had a use for that material.

 

[mlund]

Core Races:
Human
Elf
Dwarf
Halfling

Core Classes:
4 Super-classes: Fighter, Cleric, Magic-User, Rogue
Pull in sub-classes, 1 classic role by default, 2 alternate role sub-classes

Super-Class: Fighter
- default sub-class: Slayer (striker)

Super-Class: Cleric
- default sub-class: Warpriest (leader)

Super-Class: Magic-User
- default sub-class: Wizard (controller)

Super-Class: Rogue
- default sub-class: Thief (striker)

Those defaults are true to the classics. Other classic classes like Ranger, Bard, Rogue, and Paladin fall under alternate sub-classes of those super-classes. It also leaves room for good modern evolution like the Warlord (Fighter-Leader), Sorcerer/Warmage (Magic-User Striker), or Invoker (Cleric Controller of Fire-and-Brimstone).

- Marty Lund

 

[Greg K]

I don't want to have to add dragonborn, tieflings, wilden and shardminds if I don't want to add them.

Agreed. With the exception of Tiefings, I would never use the above races., That said, Tieflings have no place as PCs in any campaign that I run (the same for Infernal and Star Pact warlocks) which is why I would save them for supplements.

 

[Raith5]

[MENTION=50304]mlund[/MENTION] I like this breakdown but should the default Fighter be a knight rather than a slayer?

I guess the question is whether classes have inherent roles or not

 

[TheAuldGrump]

No matter what you call it, there's going to be some stuff that goes in the Player's Handbook, and some stuff that doesn't. What goes in, will be effectively "core" on account of everybody gets it when they buy the book.

Even if nothing is core, some things will be more not-core than others.

Anyway, I think you're wildly wrong on the reason for the 4E/Pathfinder split. I'm of the "core only" or "core mostly" school, but I switched to 4E. Conversely, many of the folks who stuck with 3E did so because they didn't want to invalidate their giant libraries of 3E material--implying they had a use for that material.

It is, perhaps, worth noting that over time a lot of folks that switched to Pathfinder in order to use that massive library have since reduced it down considerably - as an example, I don't use the Complete books much at all, anymore.

Oddly, the WotC books seem to be among the least used - I think that is more because of the APG than anything else. A lot of classes and prestige classes became redundant.

But Heroes of Battle has seen use not only in Pathfinder but in Spycraft as well. Best book in the later 3.X WotC books, in my not at all humble opinion - and the resolution system for heroic actions does not care what game you use, let alone which edition.

The Auld Grump

 

[NewJeffCT]

It is, perhaps, worth noting that over time a lot of folks that switched to Pathfinder in order to use that massive library have since reduced it down considerably - as an example, I don't use the Complete books much at all, anymore.

Oddly, the WotC books seem to be among the least used - I think that is more because of the APG than anything else. A lot of classes and prestige classes became redundant.

But Heroes of Battle has seen use not only in Pathfinder but in Spycraft as well. Best book in the later 3.X WotC books, in my not at all humble opinion - and the resolution system for heroic actions does not care what game you use, let alone which edition.

The Auld Grump

One of the reasons I chose not to run Pathfinder was because I thought that while it was supposed to be backwards-compatible with 3.5E, there were enough small changes made to the system (usually to improve it, but they were changes), that I would likely have gotten frustrated in remembering a spell or effect or similar in the 3.5E way, only to have found it to have been superseded by a change in PF, and then my nefarious DM plans would then be foiled by some meddling kids with new rulebooks. So, all my old rulebooks would have been questionable here and there, leading me to lose confidence in the 3.5E books in general.

 

[Elf Witch]

Races

Humans
Elves
dwarves
hafling or gnome pick one as core you can add others later.
half elf
half orc

I don't want warforged, dragonborn, tiefling as core I think they make great adds on and work great in certain style campaigns.

Classes

Fighter
Mage
Cleric
skill monkey I hate the term rogue or thief but I have never been able to come with a different word.

Instead of a dozen different classes make it simple by making the core classes able to do more for example fighter can encompass strength fighters, dex fighters, monks, rangers, barbarians.

Cleric would be any divine caster so druids would fall under this. Paladins should also fall under this as holy warriors and allow all churches to have them and get rid of the lawful good restriction and have their alignment match their gods.

Mage design your character to be a spontaneous caster, or more vancian.

Skill monkey your rogue type, scout, bard.