• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D 5E Which classes have the least identity?

Which classes have the least identity?

  • Artificer

    Votes: 23 14.6%
  • Barbarian

    Votes: 17 10.8%
  • Bard

    Votes: 12 7.6%
  • Cleric

    Votes: 14 8.9%
  • Druid

    Votes: 4 2.5%
  • Fighter

    Votes: 59 37.6%
  • Monk

    Votes: 17 10.8%
  • Paladin

    Votes: 5 3.2%
  • Ranger

    Votes: 39 24.8%
  • Rogue

    Votes: 15 9.6%
  • Warlock

    Votes: 19 12.1%
  • Wizard

    Votes: 36 22.9%
  • Sorcerer

    Votes: 69 43.9%

Clint_L

Legend
I think this poll suffers from very unclear definitions.

For example, the identity of a fighter or wizard (formerly "magic-user") is very clear: person who fights, person who uses magic. Everyone gets it, right away.

On the other hand, maybe identity needs to be specific. In that case, the more narrowly defined a class is, the more identity it has. A paladin would therefore be more specific than a fighter, since they are a fighter with an ethos plus faith-based magic. And so on.

In terms of my personal experience, the following are the most confusing to explain to new players:

1. Sorcerer (and it isn't close). "It's like a wizard. But their spells come from inside them, instead of from study. Or maybe from outside them."

2. Ranger: "It's like a fighter. But in nature. And some of them have a pet."

3. Barbarian: "It's like a fighter, who gets very angry. And doesn't wear much."
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Stormonu

Legend
Can we talk about the Artificer a moment? They are essentially "wizard(/sorcerer/warlock) who makes magic gear", and while they certainly have some unique abilities, their subclasses are so constraining. If their abilities were just rolled back into Wizard downtime creations, I wouldn't miss them - and having just recently started playing one, I think that's a shame. They really need a lot of development to turn them into a much broader class. They also tend to stick out like a sore thumb in "typical" S&S style campaigns, like trying to justifying including the monk.
 




Remathilis

Legend
If one can't model what is probably the most popular fantasy TV show of all time in D&D, I think that's an issue.

Your campaign might need more blood hunters and fewer champions, but the game is bigger than any one campaign world, for better or worse.
You can't model it now, unless you ban every species but human and every class and subclass but two. You want GoT? Get the ASoFaI RPG. I care about Dungeons and Dragons, not Generic Fantasy Simulator d20.
 


CreamCloud0

One day, I hope to actually play DnD.
Tell me the story of the fighter without relying on background or subclass.
they are the warrior, the knight, the general, who lives by their mastery of (typically mundane) combat and battle, their strength and steel and their skill and smarts are all they need to achieve great deeds, they have survived a thousand fights and led a thousand charges, their deeds in battle are the stuff of legend.
 


Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top