D&D 5E What 5E needs is a hundred classes

[TwinBahamut]

To me, those three characters are just the same as D&D has always treated them: fighters of different specialization/feats/attacks with a different choice of skills. All three use the proficiency, advanced combat and basic skill systems only. They don't have divine spell, arcane spells, sneak attack, favored enemy, open lock, disable traps, or bardsongs. They just have weapon, armor, attacks, and a few basic skills.

So, in other words, you think that no martial character should have game mechanics to reflect their unique traits? That every warrior class should be a Fighter because everything is a Fighter? You are using rather circular logic.

I think there are tons of perfectly good game mechanics that can be used to differentiate these classes and make them distinct and fun to play. Mechanics can go far beyond weapon proficiency or even attacks. For one, favored enemy and sneak attack are just fine as "fighter" mechanics... 4E introduces tons of good mechanics with things like stances, marking, defender auras, the warlord's inspirational word, and so on. There ware countless such mechanics in later 3E classes and prestige classes. I myself have come up with several different mechanics that can be used to easily differentiate a military soldier from a civilian duelist. Mechanics for these sorts of classes can easily exist, it is just a matter of not trying to force a large number of classes into a generic, lifeless husk of a class like Fighter.

Anyways, the 3E Fighter embraced the very ideals you are proposing, and it failed to properly permit the kinds of characters that a 100 class system would. You needed prestige classes to actually make anything other than "dumb, useless brute" work. I see no reason to continue using a system with a proven history of failure. If you need 100 prestige classes in order to make a 10 class system work, it is better to burn those ten classes and just use the 100.

Class feature swapping (or addition which is better) would facilitate the creation of archetypes that require a little extra. Instead of making a whole new class to make a warrior with a spellsword, just make a spellsword system and do whatever is needed to get it be it feats or gold or skill trained or a special theme. If you want to make a 4E style defender, take a fighter and take the defender feats/attacks. Want an arcane arcobat, make a sorceror and that the feat to get sneak attack equivalent to a rogue ⅓ your level.

Feats are the main source of rules bloat and are a poor mechanic overall. Using gold to acquire skill is a terrible method for all manner of reasons. "Skill trained" is a vague description. Themes should be character themes, not fixes for an incomplete class system. Just adding a few optional mechanics here and there is no the same as properly supporting a concept with a class.

Overall, making classes extremely customizable defeats the entire point of a class system. If you want the freedom to pick mechanics and abilities in order to create a custom character, that's fine, but you would be better off without a class system in that case. You would also run into all the typical disadvantages of a non-class-based system, of which a very high learning curve is one.

No matter what some people here say, it is easier to learn how to play a simple class (regardless of the number of them) than a class with a lot of options and customization. It is easier to mix story and mechanics with rigidly designed classes than with a giant list of unrelated customization options. The game works better with 100 small classes than 10 big ones.

 

[Minigiant]

[MENTION=32536]TwinBahamut[/MENTION]

100 classes may be simple and easy. But it creates redundancies that is not neccesary. Do we need 50 spell lists? Does every concept to have a class? The only difference between 10 classes, 100 classes, and 1000 classees is the level of specialization. The trapsmaster can still be broken in more builds, why not do so?

I'd prefer taking everything that is closely related and combining it into a large selectable group.


Wizard
d4 HD
Class list: Choose 3 from this list: Arcane, Diplomacy...
Wizard Aspects: At the Xth level, Ythlevel, and every Zth levels, choose one.

School Specialization: Gain a school based bonus
Implement Specialization:Gain a implement based bonus
Energy Spec.: Gain an damage type bonus
Familiar: Gain a familiar
Apprentice: Gain an apprentice cohort
Spell Research: Learn a spell
Skill learning: Increase the training of 2 wizard skills or 1 non-wizard skills.
Feature X:
Feature Y:
Cross Class Learning: Gain a Major Class Feature of another class at 1/3 strength

 

[Grazzt]

Has anyone here played in a party that was composed exactly of "the fighter", "the wizard", "the rogue" and "the cleric"? And how long did it last until at least one player got tired of it and switched to something else?

I have. Campaign is still going (20+ years). No one's grown tired and switched to anything at all (other than the basic four classes when a party member dies or retires)

 

[Sadras]

[MENTION=63508]Minigiant[/MENTION]
Redundancies - I dont believe so. As mkill has already said there were over 700 prestige classes in 3.5E with an insane amount of feats lists. A 100 Class system - trumps that anyday.
As for 4E - did you really like wading through 20+ class with power lists, rituals lists and feat lists WITH paragon paths and epic destinies? Sry I cant see what has already been offered to be better than a 100 class system.

In the example you gave on the trapmaster - well within each class there would be class features to choose from - not on a massive scale but enough to make them different/unique.

The Wizard - are you really telling me a Wizard, a Warlock, a Witch, a Sword-Mage, a Wild Mage, a Pyromancer, a Blood Magus, a Dragon Desciple, an Arcane Archer are all one and the same? Sure they can have a shared spell-list - but they would and should have different class features.
Its easier for players to select their preferred focused class from the get go than have to wade through a myriad of lists and/or wait till level 11 or beyond to play the class they want...Just my take.

 

[Mercutio01]

As for 4E - did you really like wading through 20+ class with power lists, rituals lists and feat lists WITH paragon paths and epic destinies? Sry I cant see what has already been offered to be better than a 100 class system.

Do you not realize that the 4E system is nearly identical to what you're pushing for with a 100 class system? If you thought 20+ classes each with its own entire list of class abilities that aren't the same as any other class abilities was bad, I can't for the life of me understand how you think a list of a HUNDRED is going to be somehow better.

Also - bringing up the insane class bloat in 3E is not an effective argument FOR class bloat in 5E. If anything, it's a direct argument against class bloat in 5E.

 

[Sadras]

I have. Campaign is still going (20+ years). No one's grown tired and switched to anything at all (other than the basic four classes when a party member dies or retires)

The generic 4 will always be in the PHB, but if you are one of those groups that only plays the generic 4, well then you're either a loyal fan of old school or you're not the person to splash out on books/magazines - usually, which means your campaign is not normally open to a lot of choice.

However most groups these days have a variety of characters other than the generic 4. And most campaigns have players selecting kits, prestige classes, paragon paths or epic destinies...its to these people with the myriad of choices with endless lists of feats/powers that this 100 class approach should appeal to.

 

[Sadras]

Do you not realize that the 4E system is nearly identical to what you're pushing for with a 100 class system? If you thought 20+ classes each with its own entire list of class abilities that aren't the same as any other class abilities was bad, I can't for the life of me understand how you think a list of a HUNDRED is going to be somehow better.

I'm pushing classes, with class features not classes with Powers. HUGE difference. I'm also eliminating paragon, epic and feats choices.

Also - bringing up the insane class bloat in 3E is not an effective argument FOR class bloat in 5E. If anything, it's a direct argument against class bloat in 5E.

Why should I need to wait till a certain level before I can play the class I want to play (prestige classes)? The reason for making 100 classes is to focus and specialise your character from the get go to enable players to play the character they want to play sooner.

 

[Mercutio01]

I'm pushing classes, with class features not classes with Powers. HUGE difference. I'm also eliminating paragon, epic and feats choices.

Let's postulate best case scenario that allows for at least two class feature options at each level for 100 classes, and we'll say that each class takes up 2 pages. That's probably impossible considering the choices necessary for a 20 level class, but let's just say that. That's 200 pages of choices for a beginning player to read through to pick one class.

And that's assuming a ridiculously low-ball estimate of page-count per class. It'd probably be way closer to 500 pages, so at least 3 separate PHBs just for classes alone, and then adding in multi-classing rules would create so many more "classes" and so much more class bloat that it would simply dwarf 3E and 4E possible class builds combined.

 

[Sadras]

@Mercutio01
Lol! The classes can be released in PHBs, Dungeon/Dragon Magzine, Digital Formats, Setting Specific Books..etc. With the mechanic of the system being released in Unearthed Arcana. I grant you we are talking quite a few pages - but I can assure you it wont even come close to 3-3.5E. Not a chance. the number of Prestige Classes alone dwarfs this, nevermind actual classes.
Google Prestige Classes and count them and then come back and tell me if 500 pages is a lot.
As for a young 4E, well they're new but their no of pages dedicated to Powers (and with the rediculously large writing) is quite substantial, counter the feat lists too and paths and destinies...
I dont know - I think its doable.

 

[Minigiant]

[MENTION=6688277]Sadras[/MENTION]
Bloat is bloat.

All 100 classes does is remove the feat chapter to make make the class chapter bigger.

Literally moving Weapon Finesse from the back of the feat chapter to the front of the class chapter.

100 classes with 3 class features each is the same as 300 feats is the same as 20 classes with 15 class feature options sizewise.

But one option will anger few fans.