D&D 5E What classes should be restricted?

[Greg K]

I don't run 5e, but the following applies to any edition of D&D that I run.

• The class doesn't fit the game world setting
• The class doesn't fit with what I think D&D is
• Too weird for me
• Creates in game issues (balance, etc)
• The theme is counter to a heroic RPG (e.g. a class that is primarily an "evil" class)
• other (please explain)
• Bonus option: I don't care what others play, I just don't want them in my game

Now for the explanations.
Other involves classes that I might like conceptually, but dislike for the game mechanics. The monk has been an example in every edition of D&D (although in 3e, I substituted Hong's variant of the OA Shaman for the monk). In 3e, several official supplemental classes also fell into this category as would several 5e PHB subclasses and Xanathar subclasses.

 

[Flamestrike]

Animating the dead being an evil act is not inherently a part of D&D.

Erm, yes it is. Says so in the PHB, in the magic section, under the necromancy seb header.

Animating the dead is an evil act.

The MM entry for skeletons and zombies also is clear that they are brought into existence by magic described as 'evil, black magic, foul sorcery etc.'

I have nothing wrong with a heroic necromancer, but their alignment is going to be evil. An anti-hero.

I have nothing wrong with a heroic assassin who goes around usong torture and murder on the 'bad guys' either. But his alignment will also be evil.

 

[Flamestrike]

5e Player's Handbook. Necromancer class - no alignment restrictions. Spell List - Animate Dead - No "you must be evil" or "you turn evil if you cast this spell".

Check the back of the PHB, in the magic section under the necromancy school sub heading.

Animating the dead is evil. By its very nature (black magic etc). No good character does so more than infrequently, if at all, and if they do then they're not a good aligned character.

 

[Flamestrike]

Double post. Stupod phone.

 

[hawkeyefan]

In my group, anything published in a product by WotC is available. Anything in UA or a third party is considered if someone wants to use it, subject to revision if needed. Same with homebrew stuff.

We haven’t really played in any settings that would disallow any of the core material yet. But my leaning is to always allow things even if they seem to not mesh perfectly with a setting.

There’d have to be a really compelling reason for something core to be banned.

 

[Ath-kethin]

Worlds are defined as much or more by what isn't in them as what is. I've banned half the Player's Handbook at times based on what seemed right for a campaign.

That said, I also believe that you can find a way to make almost anything work in almost any setting. So if a player has a really great idea for a character, I'm open to working out how to make it for within the campaign's constraints.