What do the D&D classes mean to you?

[steeldragons]

The Fighter: A Warrior...a master of weaponry in all of its forms, possibly a specialist in a few and several other skills that make the life of an adventurer easier. "The Strong One."

The Ranger: A Warrior...in a green cloak, with a bow.

The Paladin: A Warrior...in a helmet, with a shiny horse.

The Cavalier or Knight: A Warrior...on a horse, with a shiny helmet.

The Barbarian: A Warrior...in a fur speedo, with a propensity to "smash" stuff.

The Warlord: A Warrior...in a helmet, with a chip on their shoulder who likes yelling at people and telling them what to do.

The Cleric: A Priest...a defender, teacher, champion of their faith/church/temple and the god from which that stems. Often carrying a metal club of some kind. "The Wise One."

The Druid: A Priest...in a green cloak, with a sprig of mistletoe. Also, likes talking to animals. Often carrying a wooden club of some kind.

The Shaman: A Priest...in a fur speedo, with a bag of runestones. Also likes talking to spirits. Often carrying a bone club of some kind.

The Mage/Wizard/Arcanist: A Magic-user...one who is master of the unknown and trains to control power of and over the arcane and occult secrets of the universe. "The Smart One."

The Sorcerer: A Magic-user...who for some reason just has magic oozin' out of their pores.

The Witch: A Magic-user...with a black cat (or other suitable small creature in tow). Also likes making potions and hexing their enemies.

The Warlock: A Magic-user...who was too lazy, greedy or stupid to learn and gain magic the right way. So they just made a deal with some "entity" to give them power. Often likes throwin' eldritch bolts around all day to fancy themselves a wizard or sorcerer.

The Thief: A Rogue...a master of stealth and getting into "difficult to reach" places, with a nasty backhand if he needs it, and normally very good at throwin' or shootin' stuff. "The Sneaky One."

The Assassin: A Rogue...in a black cloak, with vial of poison. Also likes spying and killin' stuff.

The Bard: A Rogue...in a brightly colored cloak and hat (probably with feathers in it), with a harp or mandolin. Also likes singin' the blues away.

The Monk: A Rogue...in a cloth speedo, with flying fists of iron fury. Also likes walking on walls and ignoring mind-controlling magics.

...Did I miss anybody?

 

[Mercule]

Classes are genre and setting archetypes.

 

[Kannik]

This is a great topic, and I think a great opportunity for D&D^N. In the poll I voted for what class has come to mean for me over the last couple of years, which does, admittedly, differ from how it was for me in previous years, and it describes how I want them to be seen for the future...

A “class” is your encounter “job.” Or perhaps better said, it is your MO when the swords and spells hit the wall. How do you interact when the monsters come-a-calling? How do you fight? Where do you draw your power from? Thus, class is interesting mechanics, your combat role and your combat methodology.
From there it is vitally important to flesh out the other bits with other aspects of character creation, preferably supported with mechanics (again, why I wrote my Trade Skills supplement for 4e). A classic example oft used is the “Ranger” who has so many schticks that comes part and parcel with the class: the wilderness warrior, the divine caster, the dabbler in magic user spells, the dude with the bear companion, the peerless archer, the dual weapon skirmisher, the tracker, the one who has single minded focus on certain enemies. All great, but issues arise when you want one or two of those, but not the rest. A military archer w/o the wilderness trappings? Or what about the wilderness warrior who doesn’t have spells? Or just uses a single dagger all wolf-style? Which class do you pick that matches the few things you want, and then do you ignore the other aspects? Will you be gimping yourself by doing so?

I think 4e began the process of divorcing the strict encounter capabilities and the rest and I would like to see that continue (and it sounds as though that will be the case). A band of wilderness warriors could have some great archers, skirmishers, even a holy priest or two, yet all equally trained in survival and tracking and other things a band of wilderness warriors would have. Maybe even a paladin of a nature god. Yet the PCs ought not to be disadvantaged because their chosen character class (to best model their encounter playstyle) only lets one or two of them get all the wilderness trappings.

Peace,

Kannik

 

[El Mahdi]

I voted Wibble (for none of the above).

I see core classes like how we see Professions in the real world.

When one learns or becomes a member of a profession, they usually learn a common set of skills and knowledge. What provides differentiation between characters are the different Abilities we bring to a profession (Ability Score), the different backgrounds we experienced (background themes that reflect what a character was or knew before becoming an adventurer), and the specializations we learn as we progress in a profession (Skill and Feat choices).

So, a core class is a Profession.