• Welcome to this new upgrade of the site. We are now on a totally different software platform. Many things will be different, and bugs are expected. Certain areas (like downloads and reviews) will take longer to import. As always, please use the Meta Forum for site queries or bug reports. Note that we (the mods and admins) are also learning the new software.
  • The RSS feed for the news page has changed. Use this link. The old one displays the forums, not the news.

Which of these D&D classes would you take if you had to choose one?

The Lodestar is the one that I think sounds the most interesting; I actually read the Savant, but didn't like it. Just didn't wow me like I'd hoped it would. The Mahout was interesting as well, but not my cup of tea in general.
 

Comments

Eltab

Villager
Fatebender sounds interesting - mess with the dice rolls.

Since last session my d20 rolled '7' five rounds in a row. An extra boost would have been nice. Even a +1more would have been a hit !
 
I

Immortal Sun

Guest
Dedicated pet class sounds nice, assuming that A: the pets aren't dull and squishy and B: the PC isn't likewise dull and squishy.

Don't like the name tho.
 

TwoSix

Lover of things you hate
Geomancer. I have classes already that fill the Savant and Gunfighter niche in a manner I prefer, but the Geomancer has some really different mechanics that I like.
 

Zardnaar

Explorer
Morrus most of those classes are powered. 2 of them at least drastically- lodestar and tinkerer. Mahout was hard to rate the concept was good. Gemini in play was also a lot weaker than a basic fighter/thief in actual play. The PC was retired.

Have you done a survey if people are using these classes?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DMMike

Game Masticator
Hmm. I started thinking Bloodweaver, except that I'd interpret macabre to mean "gruesome." Then the Gemini looked cool, since it might involve playing different personalities on any given day...

...but then the Monster Tamer mentioned slimes. And there's nothing cooler than having a massive booger in your party.
 

Rellott

Registered User
The savant and the fatebender are both classes I’ve already considered playing (but haven’t found the right game for them yet). The gemini seems interesting, and I’d consider it. The lodestar seems interesting but requires way more bookkeeping/tactical mapping than I’m up for. The others range from “meh, not my style” like the mahout and gunslinger to “I don’t think this should exist in D&D” like the tinkerer and the bloodweaver.
 

Brodie

Villager
Mahout or Gunfighter. It would depend on my mood when making the character. If we're allowed to multiclass, then I'd just take both, starting with Mahout.
 

ParanoydStyle

Villager
Okay, first off, the answer is probably Tinkerer, second choice Gemini. It would be 1000% Tinkerer all the way, if it had a cooler name like "Artificier" or "Engineer". Now my thought process:

Hmm...to me Bloodweaver occupies the same conceptual territory as Warlock and Fateweaver occupies the same conceptual territory as Wild Magic Sorcerer, so I wouldn't play either of those as I'd just play a Warlock or Wild Magic Sorcerer instead. (I mean to be clear, looking solely at the content in core, I would never play a Green Knight Paladin either because it is conceptually way too close to Ranger or Druid/Fighter; if concepts overlap, I will always go for the way of executing that concept that's older.) Same with Geomancer and Druid although Geomancer reminds me of the class of the same name in Final Fantasy Tactics and scores some style points there. I'd have to compare the Gunfighter with the (I think) official Gunslinger class that (I think) WotC released, but then again I'm not conceptually a fan of either one cause I am fine with firearms in my D&D fantasy, but I don't like them being as-good-as or better than medieval weaponry.

That leaves Tinkerer which is an artificier a character type I know I've always wanted to play. Gemini, Lodestar, Mahout, and Savant are the class ideas that don't overlap, in my mind, with any of the same conceptual territory as the core classes. Of those, Gemini, Lodestar, and Mahout all seem like cool ideas but Savant I'm not too much of a fan of. It's basically "Sherlock Holmes as Played By Robert Downey Junior" the class, it seems like, which is an archetype I like, just not one I'm sure is well suited for the D&D fantasy setting. Also the Savant description reads too much like "super great at everything" for my tastes: if it's balanced so it actually is as good as it sounds, then it's broken and everyone at the table will hate me if I play one, and if it's not, it seems there's a high chance it will be spread too thin to be much good at anything, like the pre-5E bard.
 

Charlaquin

Explorer
Gemini seems like it has the most intriguing combat style to me, though I’m not a fan of the dual persona narrative element. Bloodweaver is probably the one I’d go with.
 

Saelorn

Explorer
Given these options, I would have to read them more closely in order to say for certain. I consider any class to be a liability if it is utterly incapable of healing anyone, which looks like it would disqualify all of these aside from the Bloodweaver. On the other hand, blood is icky, and I wouldn't be comfortable roleplaying that concept for any great length of time. The geomancer looks like it might have some healing in there, somewhere; or else possibly the Mahout, if they can get a unicorn or something.
 

Istbor

Explorer
Dragon Age really turned me on to Blood Magic, so the Bloodweaver is pretty interesting to me. Aside from that, I could do Mahout as well!
 

Advertisement

Latest threads

Advertisement

Top