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

[Minigiant]

Plenty of point-based systems out there. No reason to assume D&D players couldn't handle such, and absolutely no reason to assume that the reason they wouldn't is because they love spellcastibg too much to pay for it. That just sounds like anti-caster bias to me.

Those games aren't D&D.

When 2 attacks costs 100 points and 3rd level spells costs 200 points plus 20 more for Fireball, D&D fans will get mad.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Those games aren't D&D.

When 2 attacks costs 100 points and 3rd level spells costs 200 points plus 20 more for Fireball, D&D fans will get mad.

Why? How much do other things cost in this hypothetical system? Those numbers mean nothing without context.

 

[Scribe]

ah, i think i'm seeing the disconnect, i'm less advocating for full 'build-a-bear' and more for various mechanics just being shared between classes more, at least where it makes sense to share them, some access might be more on individual subclass basis or feature choice, but still built into the class design, no more intricate than a warlock picking both pact and patron.

Thanks for the clarification.

In that case, I can see where you are coming from but I still prefer a 'this is part of the class identity' something that is THE unique draw to the class.

 

[Libertad]

I think the real question should be how many classes should be in the core rules vs how many classes there should be total. Personally speaking, I don't mind a huge amount of classes being available as options, but do favor a DM limiting access to fit the particular needs and styles of their campaign.

Overall, I think that 10 to 12 total classes is a good sweet spot. Perhaps 6-8 for lighter clones and spinoffs, and 3-4 for those old-school minimalist systems. For the Fighter/Thief/Magic-User/Cleric being the baseline, 10 to 12 has just enough variation for things to fit into the four archetypes.

Fighter: Barbarian, Fighter
Thief: Thief/Rogue
Cleric: Cleric, Druid
Magic-User: Sorcerer, Warlock, Wizard
Hybrids: Bard, Monk, Paladin, Ranger

The above covers just about each of what's in 5e today. For pre-WotC systems one could swap out the Warlock for an Assassin. Or a Warlord for 4e.

I recall reading in an issue of Carcass Crawler (Old-School Essentials' official zine) something that resonated with me in regards to how many classes are too many:

One approach that works well is for the referee to select a limited set of classes (say between 7–10 in number) that are available in the campaign. For example, in one campaign, the acolyte class may replace the cleric.”

“In this way, the number of choices available to players when creating characters is kept within reasonable bounds, while the hand-picked set of allowed classes can heavily reinforce the flavour of the specific campaign.

In looking through various classes published both officially and for various D&D retroclones, I was able to come up with some tightly-themed campaign styles just by what's available. For instance, here's a sample array I made for an OSR Folktale Fairy Setting:

1. Beast Master (Carcass Crawler)
2. Changeling (Carcass Crawler)
3. Druid
4. Elf
5. Fairy (Reddit Homebrew)
6. Fighter
7. Gnome
8. Thief
9. Warden (Carcass Crawler)
10. Witch (Oh My Lost Darklords)

I kept the Fighter and Thief, but ditched the Cleric and Magic-User in favor of more specialized types of casters. The Druid fits with one relying upon the powers of nature, while the Elf and Gnome both have spells drawn from Magic-User/Illusionists but have their own distinct playstyles to make them feel different. The Warden is a variant Ranger, and the Witch is a folkloric arcane caster that favors more subtle magic. The Beast Master is all about befriending animals to fight alongside them, while the Changeling plays into the "face-stealer fey" archetype.

 

[Daztur]

A class can still have a clear mechanical role and theme while drawing upon multiple kinds of mechanics, i'm not saying kludge every feature into every class whether it fits or not for the sake of adding mechanics but the classes each monopolise their assigned mechanics in a way that i feel is needlessly strict.

They certainly can. I'd just prefer that they not.

The Ranger doesn't even get it's own signature mechanics (unless like wizards you count hunter's mark as being worth enough to define the entire class around (i don't)), but you could seriously give it an injection of flavour giving it sneak attack, apropriate maneuvres and wildshape to really reinforce the identity of being the stealthy hunter of the wild.

I don't think giving a class some features that other classes already have is a good way to reinforce its unique identity.

Like, people say that metamagic used to be a mechanic that all casters could use but in 5e it's exclusively the sorcerer's thing, and there's no theoretical reason it couldn't return to everybody(in practice, sorcerer really does need to retain it in 5e as big brother wizard looms large and it's basically all it's got to call it's own), but you could give cleric careful spell reinforcing how they protect their allies, warlock subtle spell which supports them being sneaky tricksters, maybe wizard gets extend spell to show how they can craft their spells with more precision so they last longer...

do you see what i'm saying?

Edit because I was dumb: metamagic has never been a universal mechanic in any edition of D&D so I'm not following what you're talking about here.

 

[Minigiant]

Why? How much do other things cost in this hypothetical system? Those numbers mean nothing without context.

The point is that in most editions, additional weapon attacks have never been considered as powerful or versatile as increasing spell slot capacity.

Therefore once you take classes out of the system and make it purely point-based spellcasting will cost more than extra attack.

Therefore a person creating a warrior would hit their second and third ten faster than a spellcaster. It does it would not match up to traditional D&D and get many of the fans upset.

That's one of the main reason for classes because it allows you to have an overpowered ability by taking away other abilities or giving other classes more abilities which would add up to the overpowered ability.

Because of this this is why you would most likely need to get to at least 15 classes in standard D&D.

 

[Micah Sweet]

They certainly can. I'd just prefer that they not.


I don't think giving a class some features that other classes already have is a good way to reinforce its unique identity.



Metamagic was always the Sorcerer's baby ever since it became a thing in 3e, it was never a mechanic that all casters could use.

Metamagic belonged to wizards in 3e.

 

[Daztur]

Metamagic belonged to wizards in 3e.

Wait...yeah...you're right...I'm an idiot. Haven't played 3.5e since 2007 or so and almost always played martials...still should've remembered something basic like that.

In any case metamagic was never a universal thing.

 

[CreamCloud0]

They certainly can. I'd just prefer that they not.

I don't think giving a class some features that other classes already have is a good way to reinforce its unique identity.

Because I’m not concerned most with making classes these Super Exclusive Unique Mechanical Packages but rather reinforcing the themes and playstyle of those classes, if another class has something that can be repurposed or plays into what they’re about i’m more than willing to share that resource between classes.

Edit because I was dumb: metamagic has never been a universal mechanic in any edition of D&D so I'm not following what you're talking about here.

Okay i got things wrong there too but i feel like you've focused on the wrong half of what i was saying: if i could design a more cleric-y feeling cleric by giving them certain metamagics, or bardic inspiration, or auras, or pact magic, or fast hands healer's kit, or, or, or... i don't see why we shouldn't do that, i'd love to tear down all the classes down into their mechanical components and just go 'kill and bury the idea of X mechanic being Y's exclusive thing, these are all the tools we have available to build with, using them in any (balanced) combination, how do we make each of the classes best fufill their respective class fantasies?' synergise and combine their resources in a way that makes the class more than just the sum of their parts.

 

[Horwath]

Simple:
every class feature should be coded as a feat that you can take. Some level or other feat(ures) as pre requirements may apply.

Then a class is just a preselected kit of feats that follow some thematic. For the lazy.