D&D General What is the right amount of Classes for Dungeons and Dragons?

[steeldragons]

Ok...So...

Class #1: The Fighter - Strength class. Combat Expert. "Stamina/2nd Wind." Adds "Fighting Styles (weapon specializations)." Adds -and gains the most over levels- "Maneuvers."
-- Class #2: Specialist ("subclass") Fighter, the Cavalier - Str. Class + Charisma. Highly trained Attack & Tactics Expert. Adds "Code of Honor" abilities. Limited prescribed Fighting Style & Maneuvers.
Class #3: Alternate Fighter Archetype, the Barbarian - Str. class + Constitution. Damage Expert. Adds "Berserker/Rage" abilities. Limited prescribed Fighting Style & Maneuvers. "Subclass choice," a Totem/Clan, built into character progression for varying abilities, "class features," & skills.

Class # 4: The Mage - Intelligence class. Magic Expert. Arcane Magic-user. Spell Progression (levels and numbers cast). Occult Knowledge and abilities.
-- Class #5: Specialist ("subclass") Mage, the Illusionist - Int. class + Dexterity. "Illusion Magic"[Arcane] User. Spell Progression (as Mage).
Class #6: Alternate Mage Archetype, the Psychic - Int. class + Charisma. Mental Powers Expert. Adds "Mental Talents." Limited prescribed Occult Knowledge and abilities. "Subclass choice," a Power/Discipline, built into character progression for varying abilities, class features, & skills.

Class # 7: The Thief - Dexterity class. Skill Expert. "Expertise Progression." Specialized Damage boost ("Sneak Attack"). Adds - and gains the most over levels - "Tricks & Tasks."
--Class #8: Specialist ("subclass") Thief, the Acrobat - Dex. class + Charisma. Maneuverability Expert. Adds "Stunt" abilities. Limited prescribed Tricks & Tasks.
Class #9: Alternate Thief Archetype, the Bravo - Dex. class + Contitution. Covert Expert. Specialized Damage boost ("Coup de gras"). Limited prescribed Tricks & Tasks. "Subclass choice," a Guild, built into character progression for varying abilities, "class features," & skills.

Class #10: The Cleric - Wisdom class. Support Expert. Divine Magic-user. Divine Energy Channeler. Spell Progression (fewer levels and numbers cast than Mages). Sacred Knowledge and abilities.
--Class #11: Specialist ("subclass") Cleric, the Templar (the class formerly known as Paladin) - Wis. class + Strength. Divine Energy Channeler. Spell Progression fuels "Divine Smite" feature. Limited prescribed Sacred Knlowledge & abilities.
Class #12: Alternate Cleric Archetype, the Adept (the class formerly know as Monk)- Wis. class + Constitution. Combat & Skill Support. "Ki/Chi/Divine Self" Channeler. Adds Maneuvers & Stunts (see Acrobat). "Subclass choice," a Martial Art/Path, built into character progression for varying abilities, class features, & skills

Class #13: Ranger - Constitution class. Combat Support. Wilderness Expert. Adds Specialized Damage Boost ("Mark/Quarry"). Maneuvers and "Tricks & Tasks" over levels.
--Class #14: Specialist ("subclass") Ranger, the Swashbuckler - Con. class + Charisma. Combat & Skill Support. Maritime Expert. Adds "Panache" abiltiies. Limited precscribed Maneuvers/Tricks & Tasks.
Class #15: Alternate Archetype, the Swordmage - Con. class + Intelligence. Combat & Magic Support. Arcane Magic-user. Spell Progression ("Half" caster) Adds Maneuvers. "Subclass choice," an Origin/Source, built into character progression for varying abilities, class features, & skills.

Class # 16: the Druid - Charisma class. Magic Support. Nature Magic-user. Nature("Primal") Energy Channeler. Spell Progression. Nature Knowledge and abilities.
-- Class #17: Specialist ("subclass") Druid, the Bard - Cha. class + Dexterity. "Inspiration" Channeler. Limited Spell Progression ("Half" caster). Adds "Tricks & Tasks," Limited prescribed Nature Knowledge & abilities.
Class #18: Alternate Druid Archetype, the Witch - Cha. class + Int. Occult (Multi-) Magic-user. Arcane Channeler. Spell Progression. Mental Powers. Adds "Incantations." Limited prescribed Nature & Occult Knowledge and abilities. "Subclass choice," a Coven, built into character progression for varying abilities, class features, & skills.

 

[Minigiant]

Doesn't most of the power budget and design space for each of the classes in 5e already go to the subclasses? IMO this seems to be the case when you compare a class like the 5e Fighter to its' counterparts in 5e-adjacent RPGs like Level Up (which has more class features to cover the three pillars- combat, exploration, and social interaction).

No.

Only the Ranger and Druid have more than 1/3 of their power budget in their subclass.

 

[jmartkdr2]

Not a fan of this 'make it a subclass' design approach. Every full class I've seen turned into a subclass has lost basically everything which made it fun and unique to play as its own class.

Only way I'd be happy with the 'three/four classes and everything is a subclass' approach, would be if subclasses took up the majority of the power budget and design space.

An example is eldritch knight and bladesinger when put next to duskblade, magus, and swordmage from other editions and systems. I absolutely adore all of those classes, but I despise EK so much that I changed class half way through a campaign to stop playing it.

Well, if the only feature the fighter class gives is proficiency with weapons and armor, there's plenty of design space to fit in all weapon-using classes!

(And no point to calling them all fighters when it's easier to just list proficiencies by class.)

 

[Vaalingrade]

Their theme in 3e was simply "wanna be a wizard but hate traditional Vancian casting?"

Which was more than enough because Vancian Casting is an active deterrent to playing a caster.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Doesn't most of the power budget and design space for each of the classes in 5e already go to the subclasses? IMO this seems to be the case when you compare a class like the 5e Fighter to its' counterparts in 5e-adjacent RPGs like Level Up (which has more class features to cover the three pillars- combat, exploration, and social interaction).

To me it depends which class and when. Also how you count the warlock, which has most of its power budget in optional features but not necessarily the subclass. Two warlocks can have almost nothing in common.

But the actual point is that both Xanathar's and Tasha's tried to rebalance certain classes through stronger subclasses. Rangers and sorcerers spring to mind, as does the Way of Mercy monk.

And I think the designers of OneD&D have realised that strong subclasses are a good thing.

 

[Neonchameleon]

ranger is not the powerful class it was back in 1e and 2e.

Depends which version. Post Tasha's is great, the PHB not so much. But the classes are pretty well balanced by comparison.

not many mind-control enemies in this edition.

Officially released spells have Dex at 30%, Wis at 25%, Con at 24%, and the rest under 10%

the front-line line tanks are all still mad as hell, honestly balancing caster would be easer by making them more mad.
dex is the king of minmaxing this eddition.

Yup. And this is a problem. And the problem isn't the Dex-classes. It's the number of Dex 14 or Dex 16 characters that aren't rangers, monks, or rogues.

Wisdom is the nearest thing Dex has to a rival. It is a great saving throw stat (top 3), a great defensive utility stat (Passive Perception, Passive Insight), and as a skills stat has the joint most skills (five) that come in handy in both the social and exploration pillars.

Charisma? Charisma doesn't come close. Charisma saving throws are near non-existent. Charisma passive abilities are non-existent; there is no equivalent to the AC or Initiative bonus from Dex or Passive Perception and Passive Insight. Charisma has fewer skills than Wisdom - and has zero exploration skills; it's only social. Charisma gets dumped by non-charisma classes the way strength or intelligence do.

 

[Not a Decepticon]

I would replace classes with roles: meele, skill, support and control, that give standard abilities to make the character fufill their role, then allow players to pick abilities to make whatever character they want.

 

[Mecheon]

D&D Wizards are less inspired by magic than psions are. Of the two, the psion is the more traditional spellcaster.

D&D wizards are inspired by Dying Earth. Like, we don't need this whole other stuff, we can just say "D&D wizards are inspired by the Dying Earth books which are basically irrelevant in today's pop culture"

You see the D&D wizard isn't based on historical magical tradition at all. Instead, it's based on something else that started appearing in late 19th century - the sanitized literary wizard in children's books.

Every class in Dungeons and Dragons isn't based on historical traditions and instead based on fictional representations. The wizard is from Dying Earth. The cleric is a mash up of a templar and Van Hellsing. The paladin is Lancelot or any Knight of the Round Table. The ranger is Aragorn. The monk is a mash-up of various martial arts movies. This is how every D&D class was developed

If "Not inspired by real life traditions" is a problem for the psion, then it should be a problem for every single class in the game

So yes, Tassadar from Starcraft is a wizard.

You and I have really different definitions of wizard and you are stretching that thing hard. D&D's wizard is "The guy who what uses a spellbook to cast spells". The sorcerer is "The guy who can cast those spells the wizard casts but not spellbook (sometimes other ones)". Tassadar ain't doing either of those.

And yes, I watched your super smash brothers video and those two characters are clearly wizards or maybe sorcerers. I don't know enough to know the lore, but I'm watching them cast spells using somatic components in the video. There is a complex blended heritage here from several sources, including eastern magic that got tied with martial arts (which in turn inspired the aforementioned Jedi and Bene Gesserit) but that's magic and wizards still.

They're clearly not? Mewtwo's a psychic abomination cloned from the few scraps they could get from Mew who destroyed a laboratory. He isn't a wizard. He isn't a sorcerer. He's the strong Psychic type pokemon around. Go and tell Pokemon fans he's actually a wizard or sorcerer and you'll be laughed out the building

Hell, his main ability is Shadow Orb which is a ghost type attack.

Nope. A sword swing isn't a spell. And a stick of dynamite isn't a spell either. Spells are a specific type of thing you can do and have very specific characteristics. Most (Ex) abilities in 3.X don't look like spells.

Are you saying you wouldn't just use a similar function to the spellcasting mechanics to represent that? Chop off the top stuff, sure, but its 3d6 damage all the same

The only reason Aberrant Minds don't nail this is the restriction to sixth level before they actually stop looking like other casters.

I mean, no, its because when people expect to play a psion they expect to play a psion, and Aberrant Mind's flavour is "You're an arcane caster with a pinch of psionics and also tentacles"

Different people have different opinions.

I mean, this is ultimately the crux of the thread. I'm a "Yeah 15 classes is fine, trying to squish everything into 3 classes is a doomed endevour that just strips flavour and interest away from those classes and, despite people often saying it as a plan, I have never seen it executed well, merely giving the barest approach to those consumed classes. Its better to have more classes to really live the class theme" person, after all.

Making them perfect for a sorcerer subclass.

Which fails to capture the sheer depth of psionic characters and themes. We're getting back to "Battlelord is sufficient for Warlord" arguments here, which many, many, many threads at this point have shown it isn't and folks still want a fully fledged Warlord class. Aberrant Mind is the same but for psions.

So ... all we have to do to say that the Thief-Acrobat, the Jester, or the Truenamer are popular enough is find a homebrew one of those?

And 5e would be meaningfully a far far worse game if it had a new class that just spewed 70 pages worth of spells all over the gaming table, making them hard to learn, hard to understand, and annoying for DMs. One of 5e's actual strengths is this discipline that keeps the barrier to entry relatively low.

I mean, if you can get the numbers of Kibbles Psion or Warlord, or just like, this platnium selling one on the DMs guild, then sure, that'd prove it! (I actually did come across a neat Truenamer on the DMs guild, had some fun alterations for a more high tech setting)

We're gonna agree to disagree on that. Stuff like Level Up shows people are fine with adding complexitiy to 5E's system, with a lot of people saying its problems are not adding in these extra classes and options older editions had

 

[Neonchameleon]

D&D wizards are inspired by Dying Earth. Like, we don't need this whole other stuff, we can just say "D&D wizards are inspired by the Dying Earth books which are basically irrelevant in today's pop culture"

D&D wizards have a very very vague resemblance to Dying Earth wizards; a Dying Earth archmage might be able to remember as many as six spells at a time. And could probably use a sword.

Every class in Dungeons and Dragons isn't based on historical traditions and instead based on fictional representations. The wizard is from Dying Earth.

Nope. As mentioned. D&D wizards are a popular culture mash-up with there being a couple of recognizable influences there.

The cleric is a mash up of a templar and Van Hellsing.

And serious caster.

The paladin is Lancelot or any Knight of the Round Table.

Mostly all fighters. Galahad and Percival might qualify as D&D Paladins.

The ranger is Aragorn.

Only in 1e

The monk is a mash-up of various martial arts movies. This is how every D&D class was developed

All as mash ups

Are you saying you wouldn't just use a similar function to the spellcasting mechanics to represent that? Chop off the top stuff, sure, but its 3d6 damage all the same

So if you cut the spell parts out and changed all the mechanics you could turn it into a spell.

I mean, no, its because when people expect to play a psion they expect to play a psion, and Aberrant Mind's flavour is "You're an arcane caster with a pinch of psionics and also tentacles"

And a Psion's flavour is and always has been "you're an arcane caster with some of the serial numbers filed off. And here are 70 pages of extruded psionic spells so we have the excuse to sell another book."

70 pages of spells meaningfully makes the game worse and the class more likely to be banned. And without it the main difference is a hint of calamari.

Which fails to capture the sheer depth of psionic characters and themes. We're getting back to "Battlelord is sufficient for Warlord" arguments here, which many, many, many threads at this point have shown it isn't and folks still want a fully fledged Warlord class. Aberrant Mind is the same but for psions.

Psion has never been sufficient for the sheer depth of psionic characters and themes. Psion has always been "Wizard with the serial numbers filed off" - fine for Professor X but largely useless for Psylocke. The Psion isn't just a psychic character - but one with the lowest possible hit points, armour, weapon proficiencies, and base skill points and who does everything through what are essentially spells.

Meanwhile you know what works well for Psylocke (at least 90s Psylocke?) The 5e Soulknife. This is because 5e has a much better understanding of the depth and themes of psionics and doesn't try to ram almost all of them in to the framework of a squishy wizard with the serial numbers filed off.

The Aberrant Mind on the other hand keeps both classic psion mechanics like power points and ramps up the creepiness that is inherent to strong psionic characters but gets lost in D&D where the tendency is to make psionics an antiseptic version of magic where you lack components.

Like the Psion the Aberrant Mind isn't so suitable for Psylocke. I would however argue that due to the extra creepiness it might be more suitable for maintaining Professor X's themes. And then we get to Jean Grey. Who I think is not so much a Psion or Aberrant Mind but a straight up 5.24 GOOlock (the revised one from the OneD&D Playtest 7 not the lacklustre 2014 PHB version) with the Phoenix Force being her patron.

So yeah, talk to me about themes. And about how one-size-fits-all would be an improvement (people always talk about the Psion and never the much more interesting Psychic Warrior).

And then about how once we're talking about the very limited number of psionic characters whose entire schtick is casting psionic spells that this tiny group should get oodles and oodles of custom spells just for them, rather than just tweaking the calamari quotient of the psionic sorcerer subclass.

We're gonna agree to disagree on that. Stuff like Level Up shows people are fine with adding complexitiy to 5E's system, with a lot of people saying its problems are not adding in these extra classes and options older editions had

And adding in extra stuff is great for third parties. But keeping it out of the core is also smart to keep the game newbie friendly.

 

[Celebrim]

D&D wizards are inspired by Dying Earth. Like, we don't need this whole other stuff, we can just say "D&D wizards are inspired by the Dying Earth books which are basically irrelevant in today's pop culture"

I would encourage you to read the works of Jon Peterson, starting with "Playing at the World". The D&D wizard comes from Chainmail and predates D&D itself. And most likely inspiration for the Chainmail wizard was a war game scenario where the battle of Minas Tirith was played out and which included a Wizard figure with the power to cast fireballs and lightning bolts. Spell memorization and forgetting spells when used was adopted from Vance as a means of controlling the power of the wizard out of several possibilities, but it was not the inspiration for the D&D wizard and for that matter, Vance creation itself would fall into this literary wizard tradition.

I never claimed that the convoluted creation history of the psion was the problem. I outlined that history merely to show that psion was a misnomer on top of the concept of psychic which itself had been used as a more wholesome replacement for mystic and thus that the class was in fact a magic using class and not as its name would suggest a cybernetic class.

The fundamental problem with "psionics" is that a wholly new magical system that isn't integrated with the primary magical system and tacks on another 100 or more pages. There was never a need for a class and the only reasonable interest of the system died when it became a class rather than an alternative to spell-casting being tied to class. It survives solely because of mechanical fascination with mana point systems.