The classes you would actually want to play poll

[tuxgeo]

I left out Assassin, Cavalier, Paladin, and the racial classes: the racial ones because we'll get race as race so it doesn't need to be a class, and the Paladin because I've never wanted to be that über.

Would play an Invoker or a Shaman, but probably not a Battlemind. (Yes, I have the 4E book. MEGO.) Probably not a 4E Warden.

 

[CleverNickName]

It will not happen, because people that will not be using Themes might want to have access to those classes as well.

Yep, this is the real question: what is the difference between a Class and a Theme? Right now we have the Cleric of Moradin, who looks a lot like the Paladin class for all intent and purpose. Give him a Lay on Hands ability at 4th level and a special mount at 6th, and you've got a very serviceable paladin.

But what happens if you don't use Themes? How do you get a variety of classes? Or does the "old-school feel" assume that you only want to play a fighter, a cleric, a thief, or a mage?

What happens if you make different classes into themes only? How do you handle multiclassing?

What happens if you use both? How do you prevent power exploits, like a "Paladin with the Paladin theme"?

Time will tell, I suppose.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Insufficient data. Show me the class mechanics and I'll tell you if I want to play one.

Agreed. "Rogue" is hypothetically my favorite class. But 5E's version is abominable, I would never want to play it. The mechanics matter tremendously. Using the rogue example, if "rogue" means the 3E or 4E guy that's a high dex highly mobile dodge tank that can put out consistent high single target damage in return for not being so good at taking a hit, that's what I like. If it means a 1E/2E/5E "I can't fight for , but if I waste half the combat setting up a backstab, I can maybe almost do as much damage as the real classes on the rounds I actually attack!" then...no thank you.

 

[TerraDave]

!) Name one, that is not in the majority.

2) Which classes?

3) I agree.

Posts for something to not be a class that is in the majority now? Ranger, paladin, probably others (bard, druid, sorcerer...not as much posting on, in part 'cause the WotCies have not said much about them).

Bard, druid, sorcerer...even barbarian and assassin are going pretty well.

 

[Derren]

Voted none.

D&D should finally modernize and switch over to a classless system.

 

[Steely_Dan]

Thsan don't play one if your imagination is too limited to grasp them but a lot of people really like them.

Ha, trying to suggest my imagination is limited because I don't dig something, please don't be rude; my imagination is plenty fertile, baby, I'm now imagining Bill Gates mowing through a throng of orcs...hey, I might be able to get into that.

 

[TerraDave]

With about 160 votes....

Wizard 123 77.36%
Fighter 119 74.84%
Rogue/Thief 112 70.44%
Ranger 105 66.04%
Cleric 100 62.89%
Paladin 94 59.12%
Sorcerer 94 59.12%
Druid 90 56.60%
Bard 89 55.97%
Monk 83 52.20%
Warlord/Marshal 80 50.31%
Warlock 76 47.80%
Assassin 70 44.03%
Barbarian/Berserker 66 41.51%
Psion 53 33.33%
(other) Arcane specialist 48 30.19%
Illusionist 47 29.56%
Cavalier/Knight 43 27.04%
(other) Priest 41 25.79%
Other (please note) 29 18.24%
Elf 28 17.61%
Dwarf 19 11.95%
Halfling 13 8.18%

Now with 220 votes

Wizard 171 77.73%
Fighter 166 75.45%
Rogue/Thief 156 70.91%
Ranger 144 65.45%
Cleric 139 63.18%
Paladin 133 60.45%
Druid 124 56.36%
Bard 122 55.45%
Sorcerer 122 55.45%
Monk 109 49.55%
Warlord/Marshal 103 46.82%
Warlock 100 45.45%
Assassin 90 40.91%
Barbarian/Berserker 87 39.55%
Psion 74 33.64%
(other) Arcane specialist 66 30.00%
Illusionist 64 29.09%
Cavalier/Knight 62 28.18%
(other) Priest 60 27.27%
Elf 40 18.18%
Other (please note) 32 14.55%
Dwarf 30 13.64%
Halfling 18 8.18%
Option that is extra 6 2.73%
None 3 1.36%

Pretty much the same. Support for the Sorcerer is a little more, little less for Warlord and Barbarian.

 

[Herschel]

Ha, trying to suggest my imagination is limited because I don't dig something, please don't be rude; my imagination is plenty fertile, baby, I'm now imagining Bill Gates mowing through a throng of orcs...hey, I might be able to get into that.

You're the one telling people that an intelligent fighter is "dumb".

If you want "realism", a dumb fighter is a dead fighter. There's a lot more to being a swordsman than just trying to hack through something.

 

[erleni]

Assassin and paladin. I pretty much like the concept of a front-line, self-healing tank and that of ghost that you see only when it's too late.
I usually play these concepts in videogames too (just played Skyrim with a two-handed wielder with high regeneration and right after with a character maximizing sneak and focusing on critical strikes from behind).

 

[erleni]

Ha, trying to suggest my imagination is limited because I don't dig something, please don't be rude; my imagination is plenty fertile, baby, I'm now imagining Bill Gates mowing through a throng of orcs...hey, I might be able to get into that.

It's easier to imagine Bill Gates mowing through a throng of bugs....