D&D 5E The lazy class idea

[DEFCON 1]

1d8 hit dice. No proficiency from the class. (You still get a background.) Yes you can do feats. Also what if the class included the ability to go over the 20 cap?

You will not know if it horribly broken unless you playtest it.

I suspect though if you do playtest it... it won't be the possibly broken mechanics that will be the issue for the person doing the playtesting.

 

[nomotog]

It would have a few issues.

As to balance, the biggest issue with this design would probably be a form of the "jack of all trades, master of none" problem, where they don't do anything better than any of the existing classes. They don't damage, they don't heal, they don't have features that don't ping on ability scores. Put this guy next to a fighter, and he's going to have...better saves? That's about it. They'd be pretty good at any skill you'd care to mention, but a rogue would have higher results thanks to Expertise, and a Bard would be competitive. In a team environment, that class is not going to shine anywhere, because there's nowhere in particular for it to shine.

So it seems "weak."

My bigger concern personally would be about the concept of the class, though. To me, classes are not just chassis for mechanics, they are identities in the world. A class like this doesn't have much identity - a single mechanic that isn't even an option that they can engage with in play isn't a great vehicle for pushing any identity you'd happen to want to stick on it, either.

Those would just be the biggest hiccups.

That said, you can count me as in the market for a "generic adventurer" class, too. But that's kind of my own pet itch.

Well you caught the idea behind the class. I keep having ideas for different D&D hacks, but I tend to get stumbled when it comes to making the classes*. I am pondering if I can get away with a super generic class + ASI/feats and I want to get a feel of what is needed for a class in general.


(The exact idea that prompted this thread was a kingdom management system that where kingdoms have stats matching players.)

 

[Fanaelialae]

Aslo what if the class included the ability to go over the 20 cap?

Perfectly reasonable as a level 20 capstone ability for this class. Otherwise, I'd say no. Far too much potential for abuse in conjunction with multiclassing.

As an aside, the class probably should grant some kind of proficiency if it is meant to be a stand-alone class (rather than simply for multiclassing with). Saving throws, weapons, and armor are all types of proficiencies. Having given my players a few henchmen in my last campaign that did not have any save proficiencies, I can say with experience that it doesn't work too great. Those henchmen did not feel very competitive after a while. And without weapon or armor proficiencies, a single-classed character of this class will be effectively useless in a fight, regardless of how good his stats are.

There is one circumstance where I might see granting ASI's that can exceed the cap prior to level 20. Randomized ASIs, as that makes it much more difficult to game the system. Something like, roll 1d8:
1- + 2 Str
2- + 2 Dex
3- + 2 Con
4- + 2 Int
5- + 2 Wis
6- + 2 Cha
7- + 1 to two different ability scores of your choice
8- A feat

Of course this might relate to my appreciation of the wacky, unbalanced, randomized options found in AD&D, such as Wild Psionics.

 

[77IM]

1. Don't give this class any ASIs until level 4. Instead, give subclass abilities at levels 1-3.

2. 3 subclasses: warrior, expert, adept (spellcaster).

3. ASIs from 11th level onward allow ability scores to go all the way up to 30. That's an eventual +5 to attack, damage, and save DC. This sounds pretty easy to balance for the warrior and expert branches, but +5 to save DCs for a spellcaster is a nightmare. Still, worth playtesting to find out! The closest analog is the sorcerer's heighten spell metamagic effect (disadvantage on the save, for 3 sorcery points) so the first thing I'd do is make sure the adept is a "spells known" caster with the sorcerer's spells-known progression. However, it might also be balanced to make them a 1/2 caster, or a more novel idea, a 2/3 caster (that gets them 6th-level spells at level 17, which is pretty nice timing). I'd let this subclass trade an ASI for a new spell known, too, or possibly even another spell slot. (Maybe the first time they do it they get a 1st-level slot, the second time a 2nd-level slot, etc., up to a maximum of 5th-level slot.)

 

[Mouseferatu]

It's a big deal that barbarians get to break the cap of 20 on Str and Con, and that's their 20th-level capstone. I would never want to see a class capable of raising its stats past 20 any earlier than that, and never as high as 30.

 

[Lehrbuch]

Simple question, could a class that was nothing but ability score increases pass as a workable class? Like if every level you just gained a bonus ability point and no extra features. It would be a little boring for sure, but would it also be horribly broken?

Seems like it's basically "Fighter" without any class features?

Not broken, but as you say boring. Also weak. Slightly broken if the class allows by-pass of Ability Score limits. But even then, not dramatically broken, and probably not broken enough to outweigh the general weakness of no class features.

If the player could trade the Ability Score Increases for Feats, it would be better. As the player could use Feats to add "class features". However, it would still be liable to be boring beyond level 10 (or thereabouts) when you've likely got all the Ability Scores and Feats that you actually want or could usefully use in play.

 

[Ancalagon]

Well you caught the idea behind the class. I keep having ideas for different D&D hacks, but I tend to get stumbled when it comes to making the classes*. I am pondering if I can get away with a super generic class + ASI/feats and I want to get a feel of what is needed for a class in general.


(The exact idea that prompted this thread was a kingdom management system that where kingdoms have stats matching players.)

Ooof. So it is expressly designed to multi class into to get some ASI? ... good luck. I'm sure some DMs wouldn't have problems with it, but I wouldn't rely on that...

 

[nomotog]

Ooof. So it is expressly designed to multi class into to get some ASI? ... good luck. I'm sure some DMs wouldn't have problems with it, but I wouldn't rely on that...

No. I actually wasn't thinking of multi classing at all. I likely wouldn't use this idea if there was a class that fit the bill. The idea was that it would be the class for when I don't have a classes to use. Like one of my ideas is just a zombie apocalypse game, but I have no idea what you could do for player classes in that game.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[mellored]

1d8 hit dice. No proficiency from the class. (You still get a background.) Yes you can do feats. Aslo what if the class included the ability to go over the 20 cap?

Well... If you took +40 dex...

You'd end up with 1d8+23 damage = 27.5 * .95% chance to hit = 26.125 DPR.
compared to a 1d8+10d6+5 rogue = 44.5 * .65% chance = 28.925. DPR.

DPR is on the weak side, particularly since i didn't factor in advantage, TWF, or assassinate.

+23 to stealth compared to a rogues +17 with min 10 roll favors the rogue slightly, but close enough.

+23 dex saves compared to rogues +8 Dex, +6 Wis, +6 Int saves, and +4 other ABI = +24. Makes you lopsided, but overall balanced.

+23 initiative. But you can't go more first then first, so it's not as impressive as it sounds.

33 AC is massive, but it's also compared to every other feature, like cunning action, sub-class, uncanny dodge, evasion, elusive, and blind sense. Given your lower damage and lack of defense from anything else this might turn out ok. Your still taking more damage from fireballs the rogues do.




So yea, that actually turns out to be lopsided, but overall balanced. At least as long as you can't multi-class.