D&D (2024) Would you be fine with classes that you can't always play but are better than base classes?

[Neonchameleon]

It worked just fine for like 20 years.

It existed for about 20 years. I don't remember it having many proponents even when AD&D was relevant. All the evidence I've seen (including the alternate character creation rules in Unearthed Arcana) says it did not "work just fine".

 

[Yaarel]

It existed for about 20 years. I don't remember it having many proponents even when AD&D was relevant. All the evidence I've seen (including the alternate character creation rules in Unearthed Arcana) says it did not "work just fine".

Every old school 1e table makes up its own homebrew rules in order to make the game even playable.

When people talk about "1e", they are including all that homebrews that each person is familiar with from ones own tables.

Many old school fans dont really think about how terrible some of the 1e rules actually are.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Had to simply things for ease of use/the masses.

3rd Ed changed a whole lot.

Yes, not having arcane rules that were intended to keep potential players (who you dismiss as "the masses") away changed a lot. For the better. Even for those of us who can handle arbitrary complexity doesn't mean that there is any benefit in doing so.

Of course 3rd Ed then added a whole lot of complexity that tried to add detail to the world (as well as taking out a few good bits). This complexity didn't add much other than makework either.

 

[Corinnguard]

I like "elegant" (simpler options that are versatile and effective for various contexts) and customizable.

The classes in Level Up are like this. They're still simple like the classes in 5e, but more versatile and customizable.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

After thinking about it, this could work. Pathfinder 1e had Mythic rules, where mythic characters were just straight up better, but you only used Mythic rules for mythic campaigns. The Wrath of the Righteous campaign (and video game) feature this where we're imbued with godly power as a 2nd level spud. Its a lever for adjustment other than level.

Early editions of Shadowrun had this (and may still do) where you got an A, B, C, D, and E choice for species, stats, skills, money, and magical affinity. My memory is vague, but Elves were simply better than Dwarves, so cost a B. Full casting cost an A. So an Elf Mage used their A and B pick and thus would have less of something else vs an Orc Mage and even less than an Orc non-magical adept.

So it could work, just probably not with the current framework.

 

[DarkCrisis]

After thinking about it, this could work. Pathfinder 1e had Mythic rules, where mythic characters were just straight up better, but you only used Mythic rules for mythic campaigns. The Wrath of the Righteous campaign (and video game) feature this where we're imbued with godly power as a 2nd level spud. Its a lever for adjustment other than level.

Early editions of Shadowrun had this (and may still do) where you got an A, B, C, D, and E choice for species, stats, skills, money, and magical affinity. My memory is vague, but Elves were simply better than Dwarves, so cost a B. Full casting cost an A. So an Elf Mage used their A and B pick and thus would have less of something else vs an Orc Mage and even less than an Orc non-magical adept.

So it could work, just probably not with the current framework.

I love the old Shadowrun system.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Am I wrong? Is it not good to simplify a product (as everyone agrees 5E is the easiest to play/learn edition) to appeal to more people? Isn’t that one of the reasons 5E is the best selling edition ever that attracted new and old players?

How is not having a "you must roll this high to play" class simplifying anything?

 

[Chaosmancer]

After thinking about it, this could work. Pathfinder 1e had Mythic rules, where mythic characters were just straight up better, but you only used Mythic rules for mythic campaigns. The Wrath of the Righteous campaign (and video game) feature this where we're imbued with godly power as a 2nd level spud. Its a lever for adjustment other than level.

Early editions of Shadowrun had this (and may still do) where you got an A, B, C, D, and E choice for species, stats, skills, money, and magical affinity. My memory is vague, but Elves were simply better than Dwarves, so cost a B. Full casting cost an A. So an Elf Mage used their A and B pick and thus would have less of something else vs an Orc Mage and even less than an Orc non-magical adept.

So it could work, just probably not with the current framework.

Neither of these options are "this better thing exists, only if you randomly unlock it"

The first is "we have better versions of these things for running a higher level campaign" in which case it is a tonal choice for the table and immediately available to all players.

The second is literally a cost. You flat out state that you get the five choices (A,B,C,D,E) and you choose where to spend those choices at. You don't have someone who randomly gets to choose (A,A,B,B,C) because they happened to roll a 95 on the die at character creation.

So neither of these applies at all to the proposed idea in the OP.

 

[Neonchameleon]

How is not having a "you must roll this high to play" class simplifying anything?

It's simplifying because it's getting rid of unnecessary and gatekeepy rules. The fact that those rules add nothing and make the game worse is a bonus.

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

Back in the long long ago, Paladins and Rangers where just better. They were Fighters+.

But you couldn't just pick it. You had to roll stats high enough. And even if your DM let you insert your rolls into any stat still didn't mean you had high enough stats to be a Ranger or Paly. They were special and you wanted one in the party if possible. It was always a pleasant surprise when one got to be in the party. Now-a-days it's just ho hum another Ranger.

Of course, with the standard being Point Buy or whatever now there would have to be an alternate method. Like roll a 6 on a D6 if you want to make a Paladin or Ranger. This is assuming they are Better Class Plus. Could be whole new classes that are a take on the regular balanced class. Not a Sorcerer but a... Witch King! Or whatever.

Do classes need to be balanced anyways? Most people seem to get a character idea and not really worried if they will be A+ tier in combat.

I remember a friend wanted to qualify for psionics or somthing. He wanted to play Yoda. He filled an entire page, on both sides, with stats. He must have rolled 30 or 40 times before he got a set of stats that qualified him. He made his character and then rolled HP. He rolled a 1. He spent most of 1st level unconscious.

When he finally made it to second level, he rolled another 1. So, with 2 HP, he spent most of 2nd level unconscious.