So what races and classes do we consider core?

[Ferrous]

Races: Human, Dwarf, Elf, Halfling

Classes: Fighter, Mage, Thief, Cleric, Bard

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Core Races: Human, Elf, Dwarf, Halfling.
Core Classes: Fighter, Cleric, Rogue, Wizard.

I could even live with:
Base Classes: Fighter, Wizard, Rogue, Elf, Dwarf, Halfing
Yes, races as classes. Why not?

I could envision an underlying core system that has the race and class distinction. But this is basically the "open source" of the game system. The actual standard core rulebook doesn't give you these. It gives you those base classes. A Dwarf is actually a Dwarf Fighter (Axe & Board), and an Elf a Fighter/Wizard, and a Halfling a Halfling Rogue (Thief). But would the "Basic Set" need to tell you these details? Or do you just want to pick your class and get going to get what all this D&D and RPG hubbub is all about? The details is stuff for the advanced set.

 

[delericho]

For the Starter Set, they should stick to the 'classic 4' for each: Human, Elf, Dwarf, Halfling; Fighter, Cleric, Rogue, Wizard.

For the Core Rulebook, they can expand these lists somewhat. However, the choice of races, in particular, seems quite fraught. Therefore, they might be best "playing it safe".

If they can fit them in, I would go with: Human, Elf, Dwarf, Halfling, Gnome, Half-elf, Half-orc, Tiefling and Dragonborn all in the Core Rulebook. If they can't fit them all in, I would be inclined to drop back to the classic 4 again, and relegate everything else to supplements.

The one thing I would definitely do is drop the Elf/Eladrin split. Given that even 4e felt the need to have "elven subraces", I don't think baking that one into the rules is really justified. And having "Elf, Eladrin, Half-elf" as three of the eight core races was really not justified.

For Core Rulebook classes, I would suggest two of each role. My preferred set is probably Fighter (martial defender), Paladin (divine defender), Cleric (divine leader), Bard (arcane leader), Rogue (martial striker), Ranger (primal? striker), Wizard (arcane controller), Druid (primal controller?).

(It's not that I don't like the Warlord. I really do. But the Bard probably has a marginally greater claim to being 'classic'.)

Of course, if space permits, it would be no bad thing to be able to fit in the Assassin, Monk, Barbarian, Sorcerer, Warlord and Warlock as well - why not cover all the bases by including every class that has ever been 'core'? (Unfortunately, space won't permit, especially if they take the step of moving to a single Core Rulebook. Which would be wise, IMO.)

 

[Anselyn]

but it is worth noting (in passing) that 'Race' isn't a particularly PC term in any case.

Yes. I agree with this. I suspect it may have been a natural choice for Gygax given the material in Appendix N but "race" does take on unhealthy association once you get back to Lovecraft and Howard.

Trouble is, what would be better?

 

[delericho]

Yes. I agree with this. I suspect it may have been a natural choice for Gygax given the material in Appendix N but "race" does take on unhealthy association once you get back to Lovecraft and Howard.

Trouble is, what would be better?

You can't change it; there would be outrage.

Besides, anybody who mistakes the D&D fantasy races for anything connected to the real world is, quite frankly, a fool, and should be ignored.

 

[Harlander]

A couple of folks gave their core classes list as "None".

Are you hoping for a classless 5E?

 

[Jawsh]

The one thing I would definitely do is drop the Elf/Eladrin split. Given that even 4e felt the need to have "elven subraces", I don't think baking that one into the rules is really justified. And having "Elf, Eladrin, Half-elf" as three of the eight core races was really not justified.

I would like to see 5E retain the eladrin. I always justified it not as an elf split, but as a clarification on the celestial race of eladrin, by creating a base that the ghaeles and firres and whatnot could then be built up from. In other words, I saw the eladrin as a counterpart to the tiefling, a cousin to the aasimar, a fey equivalent of the genasi, a celestial footsoldier on the level of the dretch and lemure. In that case, I would classify all those human-level outsiders as "planars" (planetouched being a mouthful for anyone new to the game) which could then be counted as a single race entry in the Player's Handbook.

Of course, if space permits, it would be no bad thing to be able to fit in the Assassin, Monk, Barbarian, Sorcerer, Warlord and Warlock as well - why not cover all the bases by including every class that has ever been 'core'? (Unfortunately, space won't permit, especially if they take the step of moving to a single Core Rulebook. Which would be wise, IMO.)

I think space can permit, but it sort of depends on how they do it. 4E saw class write-ups become extremely space-intensive. If the goal of 5E is to make classes modular, step one will be making a simplified base for each class, meaning less page count per class.

3E's solution was to section out the spells that were shared by each class, and move the whole magic section to the back of the book, and that became the bulk of 3E's pagecount. 5E could have an analogous solution in making magical options their own thing, and maybe putting magic spells in their own booklet.

 

[delericho]

I would like to see 5E retain the eladrin. I always justified it not as an elf split, but as a clarification on the celestial race of eladrin, by creating a base that the ghaeles and firres and whatnot could then be built up from. In other words, I saw the eladrin as a counterpart to the tiefling, a cousin to the aasimar, a fey equivalent of the genasi, a celestial footsoldier on the level of the dretch and lemure.

That all makes a lot of sense. If they'd baked that into the 4e core rules, then I wouldn't have had an issue with Eladrin. (Even so, I would have wished they looked considerably less 'elfy'.)

I think space can permit, but it sort of depends on how they do it. 4E saw class write-ups become extremely space-intensive. If the goal of 5E is to make classes modular, step one will be making a simplified base for each class, meaning less page count per class.

That's a possibility. But I'd definitely rather they do a smaller number of things 'right' than try to do too much and fail to cover most of it adequately - I think it was a mistake to include Epic material in the 4e PHB1, for instance, given how little they could include.

Since I'm also very much in favour of a smaller core game, and indeed a single Core Rulebook, that suggests going for a smaller set of classes. They can, of course, quickly expand the roster via DDI and/or supplements.

 

[Destil]

Races:
Human
Elf
Dwarf
Halfling
Half-Elf.

Possibly Half-Orc, Dragonborn and Gnome, if if they have a niche to fill (depends on how they do races).

Classes
Fighter
Wizard
Cleric
Rogue
Possibly Warlord, Ranger, Paladin, Bard, Monk, Psion (based on how things like role and sub-classes are done and if the system wants some degree of redundancy or variance at the basic rolls or not).

 

[frankthedm]

Human
Dwarf
Hobbit <Quit being cheap and just pay for the licensing rights]
Elf

Classes: I want to see the band-aid cleric gone so bad I can't really give good though to what classes I want to see.