I think wizards aren’t actually too OP... considering most statistics showing average players play Fighters, not wizards... Well, the wizards, despite having powerful spells, also don’t get much else. I think the spells are actually fine!
Fighters show up more often because they're easier to play. Wizards and other magic using classes are less popular because the player has to read up on spells etc, so the learning curve to play is harder. Wizards take more "prep time" when you're still getting use to spell system and selecting spells etc. The Fighter class allows easier entry into the game than Wizards, though tools like DDB actually do make spell prep easier than the pencil and paper days.
I would argue that, some of this is correct, however! Fighters (in particular Champion) have many, many options as well. In terms of size, you require more info to play a wizard, but in all fairness, wizards just flow a lot better. Also, this doesn't explain the fact that most fighters in DnD are... wait for it... HUMAN! I think that's mildly hilarious myself.
Um, no, the fact that most fighters are human supports my point. And the fighter options just do not require the amount of deliberation Wizards have to go through after every rest. IN the PHB, there's literally a hundred pages of magic rules (each spell being a rule on how it's used) compared to the few options a Fighter has to choose when leveling up. For some reason you find the number of Fighters baffling, the answer's right in front of you with the race selection. It's the path of least resistance to game entry and the class that requires the least pregaming to play effectively.
Um... The human is literally the most complicated race in the game, due to the "Variant". Also, you are assuming they are starting with the PHB - there is, after all, the Basic Rules, The Starter Kit and the Essentials Kit. But, no matter - we're going off-topic!
No, the variant allows for a one time and relatively quick deliberation over stats. And you're being somehow both pedantic and inaccurate saying Fighters are not easier than Wizards if generated from any of the introductory kits, if that's where you're going with that last line of reasoning.
3) My last thought is basically suggesting a 6e method for classes. I was wondering, couldn't there be 36 different classes with the paring of the stat blocks? One class focuses on each stat - STR (martial), DEX (rogue), CON (unknown), INT (arcane), WIS (divine), CHR (unknown - performer-like class?). For the remaining 30, a class that is a mix of STR/DEX (the 1st stat being the primary, the 2nd the secondary) that could be a fighter good with slight of hand, whereas a DEX/STR character could be a thief good with a martial weapon or something. To mix arcane and divine, that could be a INT/WIS or WIS/INT based character. The classes would be the framework, the sub-classes the body and trim. Based on the conversation I've read thus far, how would you break down the current 13 classes in this structure? What class would be DEX/INT or CHR/STR? For me, a look at what parings are covered would point to where are the gaps in the class building. With 30-36 different options and only 13 classes, not everything is covered, even if it didn't matter DEX/STR or STR/DEX. Could the witch be a CHR/CON character (or a CON/CHR)? Casting spells costs her CON points while the CHR part would be inviting kids in for cookies. Sub-classes could be based around the stats instead of the class. I could play a Rock Gnome bodybuilder that can cast spells - I pick something from the STR/INT or INT/STR classes and the subclass buffs the stats I want.
36 base classes? That seems like too much for a new edition. I want more classes, but not that many.
True - 36 is quite a few for a core set of rules. The thought behind that was thinking of different combinations of stats that could make a new class. With strict one state only, there are six - four are "classic" fighter, thief, mage, cleric, two are open. If it doesn't matter STR/DEX or DEX/STR the number drops to 14 different classes. That is up to 20 different mixes of stats or individual stats to base a class. Again, there are currently 13 so I can see some room to add a few classes that cover those gaps.
Rolemaster, for comparison, has 20 base classes and a grand total of 78 including those from all the companions :)
Is Rolemaster the "Law" books (Spell, Arms, etc.)? If so, I own the books but never played. I'll need to see how they came up with 20 base classes. I don't have the companions. Still, I thought 36 might be too many. How'd they pull of 78?
A spellcaster, but with less focus on spells, but instead creates magical effects like the "Cloak of Flies" invocation, or adds abilities to themselves the "starry form" variant of wild shape, or a barbarian's rage.
A spellcaster, but with less focus on spells, but instead creates magical effects like the "Cloak of Flies" invocation, or adds abilities to themselves the "starry form" variant of wild shape, or a barbarian's rage.
You basically just described a Psionicist the way I have been describing the whole time. A “Magic User” that creates magical effects and/or adds abilities to themselves instead of casting spells.
Purple Dragon Knights are a disgrace, and should not be held up as an example of 'why you don't want a Tactician/Warlord'. Having a subclass consist of nothing but weak also-ran features that only ever activate when you trigger rarely used fighter base features that are supposed to be emergency tools for your own use...it's just bad, and should feel bad.
If we could only ever get one new base class ever again, I'd likely vote for either a proper Psion/Mystic/Sage/What-have-you, or the aforementioned warlord. 5e does not have many options at all for nonmagical heroes, and it seems kinda ridiculously easy to adapt the basic framework of the Battle Master subclass to a Tactician who uses 'Maneuvers' that benefit their allies instead of/in addition to themselves. The Battle master already has a bit of this sort of flavor with a small handful of maneuvers, but it's easily something that could be proliferated out into its own class core.
Gotta say I'd really miss the Spellblade, though...
Purple Dragon Knights are a disgrace, and should not be held up as an example of 'why you don't want a Tactician/Warlord'. Having a subclass consist of nothing but weak also-ran features that only ever activate when you trigger rarely used fighter base features that are supposed to be emergency tools for your own use...it's just bad, and should feel bad.
If we could only ever get one new base class ever again, I'd likely vote for either a proper Psion/Mystic/Sage/What-have-you, or the aforementioned warlord. 5e does not have many options at all for nonmagical heroes, and it seems kinda ridiculously easy to adapt the basic framework of the Battle Master subclass to a Tactician who uses 'Maneuvers' that benefit their allies instead of/in addition to themselves. The Battle master already has a bit of this sort of flavor with a small handful of maneuvers, but it's easily something that could be proliferated out into its own class core.
Gotta say I'd really miss the Spellblade, though...
In addition some mention of people wanting another half caster martial character, and I think an Antipaladin/death knight/ dark knight/what-have-you would work great
Purple Dragon Knights are a disgrace, and should not be held up as an example of 'why you don't want a Tactician/Warlord'. Having a subclass consist of nothing but weak also-ran features that only ever activate when you trigger rarely used fighter base features that are supposed to be emergency tools for your own use...it's just bad, and should feel bad.
Eh, the only way you can give truly strong effects to a subclass is if you make them consume powers of the base class. The problem with the purple dragon knight is that it needs more stuff, not that the stuff it has is particularly poorly designed.
Purple Dragon Knights are a disgrace, and should not be held up as an example of 'why you don't want a Tactician/Warlord'. Having a subclass consist of nothing but weak also-ran features that only ever activate when you trigger rarely used fighter base features that are supposed to be emergency tools for your own use...it's just bad, and should feel bad.
If we could only ever get one new base class ever again, I'd likely vote for either a proper Psion/Mystic/Sage/What-have-you, or the aforementioned warlord. 5e does not have many options at all for nonmagical heroes, and it seems kinda ridiculously easy to adapt the basic framework of the Battle Master subclass to a Tactician who uses 'Maneuvers' that benefit their allies instead of/in addition to themselves. The Battle master already has a bit of this sort of flavor with a small handful of maneuvers, but it's easily something that could be proliferated out into its own class core.
Gotta say I'd really miss the Spellblade, though...
In addition some mention of people wanting another half caster martial character, and I think an Antipaladin/death knight/ dark knight/what-have-you would work great
Depending on where the subclass pick is in the class, the Death Knight/Anti-Paladin could be a subclass of that martial half casting class.
A spellcaster, but with less focus on spells, but instead creates magical effects like the "Cloak of Flies" invocation, or adds abilities to themselves the "starry form" variant of wild shape, or a barbarian's rage.
You basically just described a Psionicist the way I have been describing the whole time. A “Magic User” that creates magical effects and/or adds abilities to themselves instead of casting spells.
As long as such effects are concentration locked, any such concept is very problematic. And such a limit is even more easily defended for a psionicist than for a magic user, since the former is using their own mental power to sustain the effects rather than invoking or evoking some outside (magical) force, which could theoretically sustain itself.
Sure, of course they would need Concentration for duration effects. I agree 100%.
I believe there are a sufficient number of classes. The artificer was an interesting recent addition, but I think at this point, it's going to become harder to make a new class that isn't a major overlap of existing classes.
That being said, I would love for WOTC to come up with new ones, but at this point, I'm happy with what we have.
I just realized what I want, but I dont think it will ever happen, cause it is an integral piece of 5e. I dont want more classes. I want more choices. Past your race, class, archetype and spells, the only choice you get are feats. Everything else is just......there. Obviously there are exceptions, but in general.....Maybe it is an problem with class based games, but I have heard people raving about PF2's system.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“I will take responsibility for what I have done. [...] If must fall, I will rise each time a better man.” ― Brandon Sanderson, Oathbringer.
I just realized what I want, but I dont think it will ever happen, cause it is an integral piece of 5e. I dont want more classes. I want more choices. Past your race, class, archetype and spells, the only choice you get are feats. Everything else is just......there. Obviously there are exceptions, but in general.....Maybe it is an problem with class based games, but I have heard people raving about PF2's system.
Exactly this!
More classes is just one way of solving the problem, but there are many ways to give the players more choice. DnD 5e essentially fails on all of them. New classes, subclasses which do more than provide a veneer of paint, or multiple class feature variants all work as options to provide player choice.
6 years in 5e is getting one set of feature variants, while pathfinder blows it out the water in layer choice from day 1.
If you want an arcane/elemental character who uses spellstrike and is a half caster. Tough. Pick paladin and be a holy warrior with an oath, radant damage, and healing or nothing.
If you want to be a mystic/psion, too bad. Go pick a wizard with some mind related spells and desperately try to ignore that the mechanics don't even remotely suit.
You want to be a witch? Suck it up and deal with a patron despite it not suiting the character you had in mind at all.
Shaman? I hope you enjoy wildshape, because all primal casters have to be built around that right?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
That was not where I was going, but thank you!
Frequent Eladrin || They/Them, but accept all pronouns
Luz Noceda would like to remind you that you're worth loving!
Back to new classes again, If you HAD to add another class, what would it be?
this is like herding cats lol.
“I will take responsibility for what I have done. [...] If must fall, I will rise each time a better man.” ― Brandon Sanderson, Oathbringer.
Psionicist
Yes, it is.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Warlord feels like a meaningful gap in playable character types (martial support), though it can probably be made to work as a fighter subclass.
Is Rolemaster the "Law" books (Spell, Arms, etc.)? If so, I own the books but never played. I'll need to see how they came up with 20 base classes. I don't have the companions. Still, I thought 36 might be too many. How'd they pull of 78?
A spellcaster, but with less focus on spells, but instead creates magical effects like the "Cloak of Flies" invocation, or adds abilities to themselves the "starry form" variant of wild shape, or a barbarian's rage.
I think they tried to do that with Purple Dragon Knight....*shudders*.....There is a reason no-one plays that subclass.
“I will take responsibility for what I have done. [...] If must fall, I will rise each time a better man.” ― Brandon Sanderson, Oathbringer.
I have a player playing that subclass, and they seem to be enjoying it so far
You basically just described a Psionicist the way I have been describing the whole time. A “Magic User” that creates magical effects and/or adds abilities to themselves instead of casting spells.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Purple Dragon Knights are a disgrace, and should not be held up as an example of 'why you don't want a Tactician/Warlord'. Having a subclass consist of nothing but weak also-ran features that only ever activate when you trigger rarely used fighter base features that are supposed to be emergency tools for your own use...it's just bad, and should feel bad.
If we could only ever get one new base class ever again, I'd likely vote for either a proper Psion/Mystic/Sage/What-have-you, or the aforementioned warlord. 5e does not have many options at all for nonmagical heroes, and it seems kinda ridiculously easy to adapt the basic framework of the Battle Master subclass to a Tactician who uses 'Maneuvers' that benefit their allies instead of/in addition to themselves. The Battle master already has a bit of this sort of flavor with a small handful of maneuvers, but it's easily something that could be proliferated out into its own class core.
Gotta say I'd really miss the Spellblade, though...
Please do not contact or message me.
In addition some mention of people wanting another half caster martial character, and I think an Antipaladin/death knight/ dark knight/what-have-you would work great
Eh, the only way you can give truly strong effects to a subclass is if you make them consume powers of the base class. The problem with the purple dragon knight is that it needs more stuff, not that the stuff it has is particularly poorly designed.
Depending on where the subclass pick is in the class, the Death Knight/Anti-Paladin could be a subclass of that martial half casting class.
Psion/Mystic
It's not a class I care about or want myself, but it seems to be the most wanted when I see discussions so should have priority.
Sure, of course they would need Concentration for duration effects. I agree 100%.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
List of classes I'd like to see added, in order of priority:
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
I believe there are a sufficient number of classes. The artificer was an interesting recent addition, but I think at this point, it's going to become harder to make a new class that isn't a major overlap of existing classes.
That being said, I would love for WOTC to come up with new ones, but at this point, I'm happy with what we have.
I mean there are already classes which fill the same role in a party and overlap, so that isn't an issue imo.
You can have a class which fills an identical role, but does it through a completely different set of both mechanics and themes.
I just realized what I want, but I dont think it will ever happen, cause it is an integral piece of 5e. I dont want more classes. I want more choices. Past your race, class, archetype and spells, the only choice you get are feats. Everything else is just......there. Obviously there are exceptions, but in general.....Maybe it is an problem with class based games, but I have heard people raving about PF2's system.
“I will take responsibility for what I have done. [...] If must fall, I will rise each time a better man.” ― Brandon Sanderson, Oathbringer.
Exactly this!
More classes is just one way of solving the problem, but there are many ways to give the players more choice. DnD 5e essentially fails on all of them. New classes, subclasses which do more than provide a veneer of paint, or multiple class feature variants all work as options to provide player choice.
6 years in 5e is getting one set of feature variants, while pathfinder blows it out the water in layer choice from day 1.
If you want an arcane/elemental character who uses spellstrike and is a half caster. Tough. Pick paladin and be a holy warrior with an oath, radant damage, and healing or nothing.
If you want to be a mystic/psion, too bad. Go pick a wizard with some mind related spells and desperately try to ignore that the mechanics don't even remotely suit.
You want to be a witch? Suck it up and deal with a patron despite it not suiting the character you had in mind at all.
Shaman? I hope you enjoy wildshape, because all primal casters have to be built around that right?