Your ideal class orgainization

[steeldragons]

There are, then, as others have pointed out (and I believe a refent thread dug into) the idea of organizing classes by Ability.

So you begin with 6:
Str: Fighter
Con: Barbarian
Dex: Thief(rogue)
Int: Mage(wizard)
Wis: Cleric
Cha: Bard

Every other class, then, begins combinations of two...and I suppose if you wanted to go on to 3 abilities defining a class there are plenty to shoehorn in as needed. So...
Str + Wis = Paladin
Wis + Con = Druid
Cha + Int = Warlock, and so on.

Others prefer the "Power Source" way of thinking...though I would heartily stay away from defining classes by "roles" and just look a them as: Melee, Caster, Skills, Combo/Support. This gives you, similar to the 4e game grid and depending on how granular you want to get with "Power sources"...I would expect a game to at least begin with something like:

. . . . . . . . . Martial . . . . . Arcane . . . . . Divine . . . . . Nature . . . . . Shadow
Melee:. . . . Fighter . . . . . Artificer?. . . . Paladin . . . . Barbarian . . . . Assassin
Caster: . .Swordcaster?. . . Mage . . . . . . Cleric . . . . . .Druid . . . . . . Warlock
Skills: . . .Swashbuckler . . Alchemist . . . Avenger . . . . Ranger . . . . Thief/Rogue
Support: . Cavalier/Knight . .Witch . . . . . Monk . . . . . . .Bard . . . . . .Illusionist

There are, then, that would just make everything a complete subclass system, with ONLY the big 4 and everything else stemming from those...

Fighter
--Knight
-----Paladin
-----Blackguard
--Barbarian
-----Berserker
-----Totem Warrior
--Eldritch Knight
-----Illusionist-Warrior (gnome subclass)
-----Homebrew Campaign Griffon-Riding Lancer-Conjurer guys or whatever other drilled-down specializations anyone can come up with.

Mage
--Illusionist
----Arcane Trickster
--Necromancer
--Evoker
----Pyro-/Geo-/Areo-/Aqua-mantic Sorcerer
-------Cryomantic Sorcerer
--Enchanter
----Fae Witch
--Diviner
----Soothsayer
----Fortuneteller
----Seer
...and so on and on and on for every title name and fantasy character archetype to the end of time.

There is reverting back...or, rather, incorporating and innovating foreward the race-as-class of BECM AND the class restrictions and level maximums of AD&D. Say, something like, Humans can be any class.
Elves are: Fighters, Mages, Thieves, Druids, Illusionists, Rangers, Eldritch Knights (Ftr/MU), or Arcane Tricksters (Thf/MU). That is what elves are/can be and that's it.
Dwarves are: Fighters, Clerics, Thieves, Paladins (Cle/Ftr), Avengers (Cle/Thf), Barbarians, Assassins.
Halflings are: Fighters, Clerics, Thieves, Illusionists, Rangers, Bards, Assassins.
etc...

 

[Blue]

I was agreeing with what you were saying until:

Finally, most out-of-combat spells already work as rituals, so making allowing it as default is fine. Then add limits to the spells you don't want people to spam. Like diamonds for resurection. Or only having 3 wishes. And I'm not worred about out-of-combat fireballs.

Can you point me to the ritual healing?

Ritual Fly? Ritual Teleport?

Ritual Charm Person? Ritual Comprehend Languages and Tongues? Speak with Animals?

Ritual Foresight?

Locate Object or Creature?

Animate Dead?

Most out-of-combat spells aren't rituals. The ones we see the most are rituals because we can cast them without using the slot, but that's predicated on the current rules.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

My own idea for classes:

Monk, ninja, samurai and sohei as martial adepts with ki maneuvers ("Tome of Battle: book of nine swords" and "Path of War" by Dreamscarred Press)

Warlord = fighter with manevuers from "White Raven" school.

Warlock with game meganic for pact magic with vestiges.

Favoured Soul = Sponteneus divine spellcaster with armour and soumeld powers ("Magic of Incarnum" and "Akashic Mysteries" by Dreamscarred Press), power about monster traits (senses, wings, natural weapons and armour). Something like adding a monster template.

Shaman = mixture of druid, totemist("Magic of Incarnum") and summoner(pathfinder advanced player guide). Incarnum powers to improve a magical monster ally/pet

Warmage = mixture of Sorcerer with armour and martial adept with arcane maneuvers(swordsage).

Soulknife = martial adept with psionic powers.

Assasin = martial adept with shadow magic maneuvers.

Swashbuckler = martial adept.

 

[mellored]

Can you point me to the ritual healing?

That would need limitations, yes. Possibly 4e style, where the limites where per-person. Which was also nice because having high con meant you got more healing.
i.e.

Cure Wounds: The target can spend a number of hit dice equal to half your cleric level. They heal twice the amount they roll.
Heal: The target can spend a number of hit dice equal to half your cleric level. They maximize the roll and heal twice the amount.

Ritual Teleport?

Shadow monks can teleport at-will. It causes no issues.

If you mean long range teleport. Make it an 8 hour casting time. Then it's no different from casting and taking a long rest which is what usually happens right before or after a long range travel.

Ritual Charm Person?

Friends is already a cantrip. Possibly some bonus to saves if they try it repeatedly.
Or better IMO, charm person simply gives you a diplomacy bonus.

Ritual Comprehend Languages and Tongues? Speak with Animals?

Comprehend language is already a ritual.
I don't see an issue with druids or rangers speaking with animals at-will.

Ritual Fly? Ritual Foresight? Animate Dead?

Add a concentration type mechanic, and sure. I imagine something like...

Gather Magic: As a bonus action, you gain magic power equal to half your wizard level (minimum 1). You can hold a maximum amount equal to your wizard level. The more energy you hold, the easier it is for others to sense you.

Concentration: Spells that take concentration drain magic from you each turn. If you do not have enough magic to sustain the spell, it ends. Damage can also disrupt your concentratoin.
Fly: Concentration 4
Animate Dead: Concentration 3+1 for each skeleton.
Foresight: Concentration 7. Damage cannot disrupt your concentration.

Also, there are flying races.

Locate Object or Creature?

Locate animals and plants is already a ritual.
Also, i regularly give out a "mug of locate beer" as a magic item. Never had any issue with it being used at-will. So I don't see any issue with it being a ritual.

 

[Yaarel]

Constitution and Wisdom can be fit in there, too.

Constitution would be the Tough Hero, and would include the sort of characters that coukd be gest described by Timex's slogan - takes a licking, but keeps on ticking. The barbarian fits here, and a magical class could focus on shapeshifting or other body transformations. Plus, some sort of warlord.

Wisdom is the Dedicated Hero, and would obviously include clerics, but it would also be the source of ki for monks. And then of course there'd be some sort of Wise Leader.

The base idea is not mine. I'm stealing from D20 modern.

The ‘real’ abilities are four.
• Strength (melee combat, athletics, acrobatics, finesse)
• Dexterity (ranged combat, stealth, sleight of hand, craft)
• Intelligence (perception, senses, knowledge, deception)
• Charisma (will, empathy, persuasion, intimidation, esthetics)

No Wisdom. Wisdom is strictly redundant. Perception -› Intelligence. Will -› Charisma.



Constitution correlates to size and works as a feature of race. Constitution is tricky. Traditionally Constitution tends to be passive, thus in that sense not an ability. On the other hand, Constitution as hit points correlates with size. Large creatures tend to have more hit points, and smaller creatures tend to have less hit points. Moreover, benefits relating to long life span also correlate with race. Generally, choice of race can determine both size and hit points. Moreover, larger creatures can use heavy weapons with heavy damage, while smaller races cannot. So, Constitution can be responsible as the prerequisite for heavy weapons and heavy armor, and maybe even grant a ‘heavy’ damage bonus to melee attacks. As such, if counted as an ability, the Constitution score determines size, thus whether an elf is tall and muscular or else short and fragile. Average 10 means comparable to an average human. A dwarf is short but extra stout and massive, thus has larger size in that sense of volume. Otherwise, let choice of race completely handle all aspects of toughness as racial features. All the player characters would just have a 12 or 14 Constitution score anyway, without meaningful diversity. So drop Constitution, an make it race features.

 

[delericho]

I am interested in what sort of class organization you think is ideal. If you were organizing classes for a new edition of our favorite game, how would you do it?

For D&D, I would stick with essentially the same class structure as we currently have. I would add three classes: the Assassin, Mageblade, and Warlord, purely so that every class that has been in the (first) PHB of any edition exists as a full class here (where Mageblade is the BECMI Elf). And add the Artificer and one or more Psionic classes in appropriate setting support supplements.

Also, I would remove multiclassing.

For a new D&D-like game, I would instead do something similar to [MENTION=20564]Blue[/MENTION]'s approach - combine the Fighter, Rogue, and Barbarian into a single Hero class; turn all the half-casters into subclasses of Hero (much as Fighter has Eldritch Knight in 5e), and then divide up the casters by party role rather than magic source.

 

[Yaarel]

For D&D, I would stick with essentially the same class structure as we currently have. I would add three classes: the Assassin, Mageblade, and Warlord, purely so that every class that has been in the (first) PHB of any edition exists as a full class here (where Mageblade is the BECMI Elf). And add the Artificer and one or more Psionic classes in appropriate setting support supplements.

Also, I would remove multiclassing.

For a new D&D-like game, I would instead do something similar to [MENTION=20564]Blue[/MENTION]'s approach - combine the Fighter, Rogue, and Barbarian into a single Hero class; turn all the half-casters into subclasses of Hero (much as Fighter has Eldritch Knight in 5e), and then divide up the casters by party role rather than magic source.

Mages can also be a ‘hero’, knightly, courtly, and valiant.

 

[delericho]

Mages can also be a ‘hero’, knightly, courtly, and valiant.

I wouldn't get too hung up on the name - I needed some sort of a label to put on it, but if there's a better one then I'd be happy with that.

 

[steeldragons]

Also, I would remove multiclassing.

Oh gods yes. Iwasn't even thinking this far ahead/into the system. But definitely remove/delete 3e+ style multiclassing. That's a must. Get back to having and developing your classed character...within the confines of their class.

For a new D&D-like game, I would instead do something similar to @Blue's approach - combine the Fighter, Rogue, and Barbarian into a single Hero class; turn all the half-casters into subclasses of Hero (much as Fighter has Eldritch Knight in 5e), and then divide up the casters by party role rather than magic source.

This is interesting...so we'd get something like...

HERO
Fighter
--Knight/Cavalier (ftr w/leadership abilities)
--Slayer (ftr w/specific foe features)
--Swordcaster (ftr/mu half caster)
--Paladin (ftr/cle half caster)

Barbarian
--Warlord (bbn w/ leadership abilities)
--Totem Warrior (bbn w/spirit magic powers)
--Warden (bbn/drd half-caster)

Thief
--Mastermind (thf w/ leadership abilities)
--Assassin (thf w/ killing/spying skills)
--Trickster (thf/ilt half-caster)
--Scout (thf/drd half-caster)

Ranger
--Vanguard (rgr w/ leadership abilities)
--Seeker (rgr w/[nature]spirit magic powers)
--Guardian (rgr/cle half-caster)

MAGUS
Wizard (primary feature: spells, mechanic: traditional spell accumulation/progression, full casters, no armor, limited weapons)
--Mage (arcane full caster)
--Druid (nature full caster)
--Priest (divine full caster)
--Illusionist (psychic & [arcane]illusion/enchantment full caster)

Invoker (primary feature: channel magic effects, mechanic: channeling & at-will magics, partial spell progression, some armor/shields, more weapons)
--Cleric (divine channeler, half-caster)
--Warlock (arcane channeler, half-caster)
--Shaman (spirit channeler, half-caster)
--Bard (nature channeler, half-caster)

Sorcerer (primary feature: use arcane/occult knowledge to enact magical effects, mechanic: spell points & metamagics, mixed magic lists, various armors/weapons)
--Witch (arcane & nature magic maker)
--Thaumaturgist (divine & arcane magic maker)
--Alchemist (potion/elixir maker, effects from any list)
--Seer (psychic & spirit magic maker, effects from a variety of lists)

Yeah. I kinda like this.

 

[delericho]

One other thought about class arrangements: counter-intuitive as it is, I don't think the 'perfect' class arrangement is actually very desirable.

RPGs in general, and D&D-like games in particular, seem to do better if everything isn't neatly systemised and arranged. Despite being more mathematically-elegant, they seem to lose something - 'feels' versus 'systems'.

So I'm somewhat inclined to think that the game actually benefits from having classes of different sizes (some broad and customisable; some tightly focused), from having some gaps between concepts, from having some overlap between classes (is an archer character a wilderness-flavoured Rogue, a ranged Fighter, or a Ranger? Should there even be one right answer?), and indeed from throwing in an 'oddball' class or two to mix things up.

So while a part of me is very attracted by the notion of dropping to about six broad classes (Hero, Cleric, Druid, Wizard, Artificer, and Psion), another part of me kind of wants a huge menu of two hundred, of all shapes and sizes, with the DM being advised to choose 5-9 as PC options for any given campaign (so maybe Dark Sun uses Gladiators, Defilers, and Elemental Priests, but doesn't use Paladins, Clerics, or Wizards; maybe another campaign replaces all the classes with Samurai, Ninja, and the like. And so on.)