D&D General What kind of class design do you prefer?

[Scribe]

The sorcerer idea is fine. We just need to get the community to not see it as a discount wizard.

The 5e playtest had an idea where the sorcerer had spell like abilities similar to invocations based on their bloodline. The community didn't buy into the idea high enough to get over the very very high bar of acceptance needed to make the PHB.

I mean in 5e's dragon book, the one class with an OG dragon subclass gets no exclusive spells. It ties with the favorite Marcia: wizard.

/Rant

The Bloodlines in PF are much more interesting to me.

If Sorcerer had that, and didn't need components, I'd be quite happy with them.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

The sorcerer idea is fine. We just need to get the community to not see it as a discount wizard.

Sure, the idea is fine. A person imbued with magic so that they're an inherently magical person. We have class that perfectly represents this. It's called Warlock. Always-on magical effects and rapidly recharging magic fits the theme perfectly. And we don't need separate class depending on whether you were imbued with magic at birth or via a pact later. The end result is the same.

 

[cbwjm]

The Bloodlines in PF are much more interesting to me.

If Sorcerer had that, and didn't need components, I'd be quite happy with them.

I love the ideas around magic in PF2 with 4 different spell lists that you draw upon depending on your class, the coolest thing with sorcerer is that depending on their bloodline, they use different spell lists. I think this would make things much easier than having a spell list for each class.

 

[Scribe]

I love the ideas around magic in PF2 with 4 different spell lists that you draw upon depending on your class, the coolest thing with sorcerer is that depending on their bloodline, they use different spell lists. I think this would make things much easier than having a spell list for each class.

I havent looked too much at PF2 spell lists, but for sure I dont like how 5e is doing it.

 

[Minigiant]

Sure, the idea is fine. A person imbued with magic so that they're an inherently magical person. We have class that perfectly represents this. It's called Warlock. Always-on magical effects and rapidly recharging magic fits the theme perfectly. And we don't need separate class depending on whether you were imbued with magic at birth or via a pact later. The end result is the same.

I'd go to the sorcerer having more monster powers whereas the warlock just getting the magic of their patron. Like Final Fantasy Blue Mages.

I see a dragon sorcerer turning their whole arm scaley and big and clawing the heck out of some ogre's face. A divine soul sorcerer would summon angel or devil wings and blows foes away with blessed or foul winds.

Whereas the warlock is zapping with eldritch blast or cutting with hexblades.

I think D&D is still missing a "monster-man" class and the sorcerer should be it. Death/Shadow sorcerers to be vampires. Clockwork sorcerers to be robots. Dragon sorcerers to be dragons.

I think the "Warrior Rogue Priest Mage" pillars is frankly old thinking as many fantasy ideas don't fit in them. I can respect someone thinking an idea doesn't fit the scope of D&D and it does fit in Warrior/Rogue/Priest/Mage it should be in D&D. However I'm totally against liking a archetype and forcing it into an existing class just to not create a new one.

That's why I can't get down with the "Few classes with a lots of build choices" option. Because the people who what it want build options that have almost nothing in common. And that point, you might as well created 2 different classes. How are X and Y the same class if X and Y have nothing similiar.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I'd go to the sorcerer having more monster powers whereas the warlock just getting the magic of their patron. Like Final Fantasy Blue Mages.

I see a dragon sorcerer turning their whole arm scaley and big and clawing the heck out of some ogre's face. A divine soul sorcerer would summon angel or devil wings and blows foes away with blessed or foul winds.

Whereas the warlock is zapping with eldritch blast or cutting with hexblades.

I think D&D is still missing a "monster-man" class and the sorcerer should be it. Death/Shadow sorcerers to be vampires. Clockwork sorcerers to be robots. Dragon sorcerers to be dragons.

Still sounds like it should be same class with the warlocks. Vampire powers, dragon arms and whatnot all sound like they would make sense as invocations. Warlock has solid mechanics, except it is pigeonholed to be an eldritch blaster. This would also widen its scope.

 

[Minigiant]

Still sounds like it should be same class with the warlocks. Vampire powers, dragon arms and whatnot all sound like they would make sense as invocations. Warlock has solid mechanics, except it is pigeonholed to be an eldritch blaster. This would also widen its scope.

Well my personal preference would be tilting warlock back more to its 3e self and having the class be more based on tweaking its 5-6 exclusive cantrips. A patron could give you an eldritch blast, a hex, a summonable ally, a binder book, or a hexblade.

Whereas sorcery turns you more into an actual monster or force of nature if you channel your blood origin.

Basicaly at-will magical abilities vs daily monster abilities.

 

[Minigiant]

I think there should be a design goal to make a warrior and a caster for every ability score if possible. It shouldn't be force but there should be an earnest attempt. So more than 10 classes would be a must.

• STR
  • Barbarian- Rage/Reckless Attack
  • Brute-Special Moves
  • Champion-Action Surge/Second Wind
  • Fighter*- Superiority Dice/Fighting Styles
  • Ranger* -Favored Enemy/Terrain, Hunter Styles
• DEX
  • Fighter*- Superiority Dice/Fighting Styles
  • Monk- Martial Arts/Ki
  • Ranger* -Favored Enemy/Terrain, Hunter Styles
  • Rogue- Sneak Attack/Cunning Action
• CON
  • Saint- Divine Gifts
  • Warden- Guardian Might
  • Warlock*-Invocations
• INT
  • Artificer- Infusion
  • Gish-???
  • Scholar- Field of Study/Coordinated Strike
  • Wizard- Wizardry Charges/Implements
• WIS
  • Beastmaster- Animal Companion
  • Cleric- Channel Divinity
  • Druid- Wildshape
  • Shaman- Spirit Communion
• CHA
  • Bard- Bardic Inspiration
  • Paladin- Aura/Divine Smite
  • Sorcerer- Sorcery Points/Metamagic
  • Warlock*- Invocations

 

[Lanefan]

I was thinking of a limited selection generic items/training/boons in the PHB, as a sort of "here's the kind of stuff you could get your hands on and what they might cost", but the DM has the more extensive listing with the crazy stuff. Just so players can have an idea what the growth of their character MIGHT look like.

Sure, OK - that works.

The other issue I have with putting the whole list player-side like 3e and 4e did is that doing so sort of soft-discourages the DM from coming up with new or custom homebrew items. And where's the fun in that?

 

[TwoSix]

Sure, OK - that works.

The other issue I have with putting the whole list player-side like 3e and 4e did is that doing so sort of soft-discourages the DM from coming up with new or custom homebrew items. And where's the fun in that?

Yea, I definitely don't do that. A ton of my items are custom, and the players don't know what they do until they experiment a bit.

To my mind, an ideal campaign of D&D is a lot like Talisman, the board game. (Minus spending 10 turns trying to land on the square with the items, of course.) You have a diversity of character options to start with, but how you grow is going to depend a lot on luck or what you encounter. Maybe your sorcerer ends up being really strong and getting a magic weapon and armor. Or your assassin becomes a powerful magic user. You don't know until you play.