Which of these should be coreclasses?

[Agemegos]

I too voted for the four core clases...

Cleric, Fighter, Rogue, Wizard. All the others should be prestige classes or feat chains.

Or skill choices.

 

[Malk]

i voted for the 11 or so phb core classes cause well....the phb rocks....

 

[DragonLancer]

I voted for the ones we already have as core classes plus Noble (Ala SW and DL) and the Knight/Cavalier.

 

[Liquidsabre]

Another Noble vote here, dumped the Bard. Core classes, Paladin should be able to accomodate either LG/LE versions.

 

[Marimmar@Home]

I voted for the four classic classes, all the rest could be done with prestige classes.

~Marimmar

 

[milotha]

I voted for the core classes: Rogue, Fighter, Cleric, Wizard. All of the rst could have been prestige classes, variants on the core, or multiclass combos.

 

[TroyXavier]

I voted for the PHB 11. I am so sick of prestige classes, last thing I need is the 7 to join them.

 

[Starglim]

I voted for Noble, Assassin, most of the PHB classes, but not Paladin, which I believe should be a prestige class.

 

[Buttercup]

Cleric
Fighter
Rogue
Wizard
Noble/Aristocrat

However I see Wizard and Sorcerer as being opposite sides of the same coin. I don't really like the idea of them both existing in the same campaign world. So IMO you could substitute Sorcerer for Wizard in that list and still please me.

All the rest of the classes should be acquired with feats, skills and roleplaying your character into them.

 

[Thanee]

Just a general note. With the (still) highly restrictive class system, it's better to have more core classes.

If the system actually worked the way, like you could build a monk out of cleric, fighter, rogue, wizard or any combination of those, but it simply doesn't. You could make a character that has a similar background, but it still would be a fighter/rogue, not a monk, for example. It would only work that way, if they did away with pretty much all class abilities (i.e. the rogue always has trapfinding and sneak attack, which limits its application, unless you simply ignore those abilities) and make everything modular (i.e. based on feats). There should not be any class abilities beyond BAB, HP, saves, skills, feats and spellcasting abilities then. Classes needed to be generic (and I mean completely generic). But it wouldn't be D&D anymore...

Some of the classes, aren't even classes (i.e. noble? Why is that a class? can clerics, fighters, rogues or wizards not be nobles?).

So, I have voted for like 60% of the above to be core classes!

Some classes (like duelist or knight) really are just 'upgrades' to a core class, but many of those are completely different concepts.

Antipaladin/Blackguard - No, that's something you grow into.
Archer - No, just a fighter
Assassin - No, update for the rogue
Duelist/Swashbuckler - No, update for the fighter
Knight/Cavalier - No, update for the fighter
Noble/Aristocrat - No, pointless class.
Paladin - No, altho I have no problems with this as a core class, it doesn't need to be one.
Spy/Infiltrator - No, update for the rogue.
Witch - Yes, different enough concept-wise, unless you just make it a wizard with a specific spell selection, of course.

Bye
Thanee