You have to remove one of these classes from the core list.

>>50527547
Wait what game is this i thought d&d at first but then i saw warlock.

File: 13799643.jpg (44KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 400x300px

>>50527547
That's not the picture I chose.

>>50527559
Those are the D&D 5e core classes.

Fighter. 'Guy that fights' is not a good basis for a class.

I love martial characters, but you'd be a lot better off scrapping the generic fighter and giving all the other core martial classes more options to how they play.

>>50527564
>5e
Well in that case i axe the wizard
If it was 3e i would sacrificed the monk

Probably either sorcerer or warlock. There really doesn't need to be four arcane full casters in the core.

>>50527547
5E? Warlock. It has (kinda') nonstandard spellcasting.

>>50527547
-Fighter
Before you jump to conclusions hear me out, d&d is most suited to higher fantasy games and in those games a human using nothing but muscle just doesn't gel compared to a divine champion and a spiritual rage machine.

>>50527559
D&D 5e m8t.

>>50527608
Fighter is one of the best classes in 5e, what the hell are you talking about?

>>50527547
Pretty sure it's normally barbarians that get axes.

>>50527608

I hate this dumb double standard.

In a high fantasy setting, someone using raw muscle power and martial training should be bale to equal those blessed by the gods, empowered by the elements or drawing on the forces of nature. Because why the fuck not? Imposing realistic limits on them makes literally no sense given everything else that's going on, but they keep doing it anyway.

I'm >>50527567 btw, I agree with scrapping fighter but for very different reasons.

>>50527608
>implying that herculean feats of athleticism aren't somehow high fantasy

I give the barbarian the axe because I feel he can use it most efficiently

File: DeathSquad.png (1MB, 1400x1286px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1400x1286px

>>50527547
Warlock. There's literally no reason for it to be a class instead of a wizard / sorcerer variation.

>>50527547
Monk.
Or sorcerer. There's already a charisma caster

>>50527547
Monk because I literally never ever felt inspired to creating a monk character.

Barbarian. They feel like an after thought in 5e and conceptually a Fighter could fill the same niche (and better) with an additional Archetype

>>50527621
Yeah it's a good class in 5e, as I said though the concept of the regular human using just muscle doesn't gel for me compared to divine hero and spiritual hulk

>>50527625
Thedifference is that everything else is drawing on some external power. It makes zero sense that a regular human could without assistance achieve levels of strength that are by definition inhuman without help

>>50527631
>herculean
People do realise that Hercules wasn't human right, like he was the son of a God that at least puts him into divine hero Territory.

>>50527547
Removing them from D&D 5 E?

Well the order in which i'd remove them from the ones that must go on top to the ones that have to stay as last:

1.) Bard - The jack off all trades who's a better mage than GMO mages AKA Sorcerrers. Everything it was supposed to do can be done by a Rogue archetype.

2.) Barbarian - Me smash... Really the dumbest class concept out there with no logic to justify it with any sort of logic. If you want to be a strongman just play a fighter.

3.)Paladin - should be a background not a class.

4.)Druid - Either rename it to Sage to keep it setting agnostic or if you want to force the nature aspect then it's already covered by Nature/Life cleric.

5.)Ranger - Fighter who uses nature magic... Can be reduced to a Wis based EK.

6.)Monk - Gish class where the developers are wishywashy wherter the class should be a mundane Wuxia fighter or a Xianxia wizard. Either way should be an Fighter archetype.

7.) Warlock - nothing against the class really but it attracts the worst crowd.

The ones i have nothing against are:

Fighter
Rogue
Wizard
Sorcerrer
Cleric

>>50527641
Best reply so far

>>50527625
>In a high fantasy setting, someone using raw muscle power and martial training should be bale to equal those blessed by the gods, empowered by the elements or drawing on the forces of nature. Because why the fuck not? Imposing realistic limits on them makes literally no sense given everything else that's going on, but they keep doing it anyway.

Literally this
Why bring realism into a game thats not about fucking realism? You shouldn't limit someone because "you can't do that in real life", unless you limit every character by that option, at which point you shouldn't be fucking playing a High Fantasy game. If I want to rip a door off the hinges or have a boulder fight with giants, and you say I can't because it isn't realistic, meanwhile the Wizard allowed to do this shit "because magic", then you don't fucking understand what fantasy means, outside of this retarded logic spewed by bad game design (3.PF).

And to the point of getting rid of fighters, I understand where you're coming from, but by that logic Wizards and Rogues should be removed as well. Both classes are generic for a reason, as unlike the other casters and martials, they get their abilities through pure discipline, training, and study. They don't get it through divine worship, or bloodlines, or fate, or anything like that. Unlike every other class out there, they got to where they are because they worked their way to get there, and there needs to be a versatile generic option like that, because no other option has your source of power actually be hard work, its shit like "he was just born with his powers" or "he was granted them from his god because he believed really hard" or some bullshit like that, not through actually working to get to where they are.

>>50527702
>People do realise that Hercules wasn't human right, like he was the son of a God that at least puts him into divine hero Territory.
And just about every wizard and sorcerer in mythology is either divine in origin or half-demon or shit like that.

>>50527547
Remove the Monk from the core book, but include it in the psionic class book.
I trust I don't need to explain why.

>>50527702
Rogues aren't drawing on any external power, nor are Wizards actually.

Wizards don't just get their magic, rogues just don't become sneaky, fighters don't just become fighty, they actually have to work for their shit.

>>50527625
>empowered by the elements or drawing on the forces of nature.
Its high fantasy, not soft scifi

>>50527702

>The difference is that everything else is drawing on some external power. It makes zero sense that a regular human could without assistance achieve levels of strength that are by definition inhuman without help

Why? This is a pointless, baseless assertion. It's purely something you've imported without thinking from the real world which has no real reason to apply.

>>50527729
>Monks
>Psionics

No you double nigger they are a magic based class.
They should be at least an archetype for either Fighters or Wizards.

>>50527625
>Imposing realistic limits on them makes literally no sense given everything else that's going on, but they keep doing it anyway.
By your logic christians think moving faster than light is possible, since god can do so.

>>50527751

What?

>>50527685
This. Barbarian and Ranger should be Fighter archetypes, they're not distinct enough to be classes of their own. Possibly Monk too.

>>50527761
If people normal people on a fantasy setting should be able to do magical things because magic exist, by the same logic we should be able to move faster tan light since go can do it

These are the classes I keep:
Fighter
Magic User
Cleric
Thief

I also keep the following subclasses:
Paladin, Ranger, Illusionist, Druid, Assassin

>>50527710
Otherwise agree, but Sorcerer could easily be a Wizard variant.

>>50527775

That makes literally no sense what the fuck are you even talking about? That has nothing to do with the prior logic, argument or point.

I would remove everything and use point buy system

>>50527775
>Go can do it
How fast have you been throwing your Go board, anon?

>>50527547
Monk. It's always either OP or complete garbage and never in-between. Even in casual hands it's really polarizing.

Wizard, but really only the Generalist wizard. Make specialists the norm, and restrict access to other spell schools.

>>50527784
>>50527710

The problem with stripping things down that much is that unless you allow archetypes and subclasses to operate very, very differently from their main class you end up with a real lack of variety.

>>50527740
>they are a magic based class
Is that why they have no spell slots at all in every edition?

>>50527547
Sorcerer or Warlock. Both are just a variation of Wizard and axing either would be no big loss.

>>50527547
Sorcerer. Nothing against them, but thematically they overlap so much with wizard that they could easily be relegated to a variant wizard for some splatbook, and for that reason they would be the easiest to remove. The other choises differ enough from each other that they're more unique, but (in DnD at least; and given the classes listed are the core classes from DnD 5th edition, I assume we're talking about DnD) sorcrer is another clothe-wearing arcane spellcaster with almost the same spell list as wizard, who mostly differs by having a different casting stat and being less versatile due to not being able to alter the spells they've got prepared every time they rest.

Warlocks are also another arcane caster like the wizard, but they're actually quite different from wizards. They get better armour and are less shit at fighting (although while a melee warlock is possible in 5th edition it kind of sucks), and while less powerul also need less downtime (wizard and sorcerer will be mostly useless after expending their spell slots, but warlocks can still do decent damage with cantrips, and in 5th edion also recover their spells after a short rest instead of a long one). In 5th edition in particular they also have lots of unique mechanics with the different pacts, patrons, and invocations.

>>50527740

I like defining Monks as Psionic. It's one of the many things 4e did right.

>>50527793

His way of arguing it is retarded, but I understand the principle to be he has a distinction in his head between "magical people" in fantasy and "normal people" in fantasy.

So he's saying that just because a magical person can do magical things doesn't mean it follows that a normal person can do magical things.

I'd still say PCs in a high fantasy game wouldn't qualify as "normal people" and that his argument is moot.

>>50527793
You said:
"Imposing realistic limits on them makes literally no sense given everything else that's going on, but they keep doing it anyway."

So you are telling that since magic exist, non magical normal people should be able to do magical stuff too, so it would be logical to allow it.


According to christians, god exist on real life and he can as some example move faster than light.
By your logic we can move faster than light and etc... since, magical beings (god) exist (at least according to christians) and can do it.

I am telling that is having realistic limits together with magical things is not an double standart, it occurs on real life (at least according to christians)

>>50527547
Druid

5E Druids are pointless. They aren't bad or anything, but there isn't any incentive to play one, and they don't get any features, literally its just casting. They have 8 fucking dead levels, more than any other class, land druid adds almost nothing at all, besides a few spells, and moon druid is useless after level 4.

Its boring, and you're better off playing a Nature Cleric, Transmutation Wizard, or a Ranger.

>>50527547
So many choices.

You could axe Druid if you had a Nature clerical domain.

You could remove Wizard or Sorcerer or Warlock. Do you need three variants on arcane magic user? With the book Warlock and the Wizard you have two different characters that weaponize being a nerd. The same fluff could be applied to either of them.

Monk is easy to drop. They never fit into any pseudo-European medieval fantasy setting with any sort of comfort.

My personal choice would be for the Bard, because I personally do not like Bards. I don't get them. Where does the Bard come from out of classic fantasy novels? Magical music and emotion manipulation is stuff that the bad guys, typically faeries, use against children in parables on the virtues of not complaining about your chores. I love the concept of a sword-fighting illusionist mage, but the part where they're required to sing at the enemy is the part where I leave the room. (Seriously, I've jumped through so many character building hoops to play what is essentially a Bard without the musical component.)

Bards are silly, is what I'm saying.

>>50527547
Bard/Monk/Sorcerer

Bard ain't exactly very heroic and could have his support rolled into Rogue. Most Fantasy bards are more rogueish than wandering musician. Monks are because they don't bring anything good to the table. Don't get wrong, I love the idea of killing shit barehanded, but they're mechanically unsound and thematically off base.
Sorcerer because there's not too much of an appreciable difference with Wizards.

>>50527723
>>50527727
≥≥50522733
-Wizards are using magic, they are literally drawing on an outside force and shaping it.
- Rogues I see as different to fighters, they are using cunning and intellect to find weaknesses rather than facing the threat head on, it's not saying humans are equal to the threat, they just managed to leverage it's weaknesses and outshink it.

As for keeping regular humans at human limitations being arbitrary or stupid. It really isn't because those limitations are what makes humans be humans. Without them you're not human, you're something else best way I can put it is if you don't have those limitations you're a superhuman, superman is an alien, hulk has radioactive powers and Hercules is a demi-god. None of them are pure human, batman is human and he needs to leverage every trick in the book to keep up (kinda like what I meant with the rogue).

>>50527830

Not him, but the point is that saying fighters are your average joe and that it's "unrealistic" for a guy to say, go full Greek hero style is a little silly in a setting where all this unrealistic shit happens regularly.

Having a martial character be exceptionally strong or skilled to put them on par with other unnatural elements shouldn't be considered bizarre.

>>50527547
Monks. Just make them specialized fighters or something like that.

>>50527867
Forgot to finish that thought, a fighter when there are paladins and barbs is like batman fighting Hercules and Hulk head on with his fists.

Barbarian or Sorcerer, as thematically they could be rolled into the Fighter or Wizard classes.

>>50527898

A fighter isn't Batman, he's Captain America. And he does that shit all the time.

>>50527547
Sorcerer, easily. It's just a worse wizard that casts from Charisma, and it does absolutely nothing really unique and of value. Metamagic is a gimmick they gave it for the class to be distinct.

On the other end, sorcerer also contributes to the most broken builds in the game. It's just a bad class.

>>50527876
The Greek heroes that were superb fighters were all related to gods.

If you change humans to be able to keep up with the supernatural then they cease being human, you have humans in a fantasy world for a point of reference, noticeevery race is described in relation to humans, if you move that point, they cease being human.

>>50527933

You're playing in a fantasy setting where humans are considered equal to races with natural magical abilities. Fantasy humanity is not the same as mundane modern earth humanity in high fantasy RPGs and it never is.

>>50527933
See >>50527724

By the same logic, wizards and sorcerers shouldn't be classes either.

>>50527710
I think both druid and paladin are effectively a speialization of the cleric archetype that's different enough to be treated as their own class. Effectively, they do something similar to a cleric with particular domain, but are much more focused on that one thing.

Paladin is a holy warrior, which overlaps with martial clerics, but a martial cleric is still primarily a spellcaster, while a paladin sacrifices some casting to focus into the martial stuff.

Druid and nature/life cleric share thematic similarities, but druids go more fully into the nature stufff. They get a whole different spell list instead of a few extra spells, lose the ability to wear metal armour, but gain the ability to tranform into animals and other stuff like that.
Basically, a nature domain cleric is a cleric who worships a god connected to nature. He probably still lives in a town and works at a temple, though, and generally does all the standard cleric stuff, just with different prayers and holy symbols than the cleric of Pelor next door. While a druid is is the weird guy who lives in a cave in the middle of the forest, talks to animals, and runs around naked under the full moon.

Though the argument can be made that they could be removed from core and included in some book with a bunch of variants of the core class themes, along with barbarian (berzerk fighter), ranger (innawoods fighter), and other similar variant archetypes like "mage-knight" and "sneaky mage".

>>50527957
What are you talking about,Wizards are using an outside force, and sorcerers aren't fully human, they are literally manipulating magic in their being from gods, dragons, elementals etc.

>>50527977
Because, since we're apparently drawing comparisons to mythology, they should be demigods and gods, not humans. Therefore, human wizard should not be an available choice.

>>50527950
I'd argue that it is the same as actual humanity, there's a reason that humans are the adaptable race, where as everything else is locked into particular stats and features.

Monk or warlock

I always find it amazing how many logical leaps people who support the martial/magic double standard capable of. They have an explanation for literally everything else no matter how much it violates their core point, yet they still can't acknowledge that superhuman martial characters are just find and are essentially a core assumption of the heroic fantasy genre.

Barbarians should be a fighter archetype, and rangers should as well. The nature of their core concepts are so ambiguous that in every edition they have changed thoroughly in terms of fluff and mechanics. Thematically, there is nothing you can do with a barbarian/ranger you can't pull off with a fighter.

>>50528000
Nice goal post shifting, while mythological Wizards were mostly related to outsider beings, magic in D&D is a separate beast. In other words merlin isn't necessarily a D&D wizard. Where as people referencing Hercules are treating him like a human fighter when he wasn't even human.

Magic isn't the same so how mythological Wizards/warlocks/sorcs acted, achieved their powers or what they were is irrelevant.

File: Stating your opinion on the internet.jpg (98KB, 800x571px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 800x571px

>>50527702
5e Fighters could actually be demigods like Hercules, it says specifically that Fighters are the -most- elite fighters ever, it's like comparing some fat guy with a gun to a Navy SEAL

Okay I really don't think anyone understands Warlocks at all.

You aren't a generic caster, far from it. You are quite literally the Devil's Advocate, just look at how its designed. Charisma-based, outside of Eldritch Blast almost no combat options, tons of illusion magic and debuffs, spells like Disguise Self or Silent Image as a cantrips, the recommended background being Charlatan, Darkvision, ability to understand all languages, invisibility in darkness, getting spells back after a short rest. I hear a lot of people shit on this stuff like "oh you can just cast comprehend languages" or something, however the difference with Warlocks is that they aren't wasting a spell slot on it, you don't have to worry about someone realizing you just casted a spell when you're disguised and potentially getting found out.

Its why I hate Bladelocks, because they lose out on all of the benefits of extra cantrips (more spells to abuse), or an upgraded familiar.

Warlocks are amazing and nobody fucking understands how the class works, and assumes its just Eldritch Blast spam and a blaster.

>>50528064
So since human can accomplish one kind of superhuman feat, there's no reason they shouldn't be able to accomplish another kind of superhuman feat.

>>50528071

I agree. Warlocks are a really cool class both thematically and in terms of utility. It's just a shame that some of the really awesome pact based stuff from the playtest packet didn't make it in.

>>50528088
Within the context of the world being able to manipulate magic isn't superhuman.

Why I'm arguing that doesn't change humanity is because it's manipulating an outside force rather than any sort of biological change.

>>50527547
Wizard.

Don't just clump all the magic in one class and have it be a ground for minmaxing the best spell combos. I want to play D&D not MTG

>>50528064

Then let's plant the goalposts firmly in one position.

If humans are capable of superhuman feats, martial characters should have no problem keeping up with spellcasters.

If humans aren't capable of superhuman feats, then spellcasters shouldn't be significantly more powerful than martial characters.

>>50528127

Because you say so. And what the hell does biology have to do with anything?

>>50527547
Monk.

I love my monks, but they don't fit in with DnD's western fantasy theme.

>>50528068
Then you're changing the class to basically be the fighter is to paladin as sorcerer is to wizard at which time the argument is moot as they are no longer humans without an outside influence.

Monk, honestly it feels like it should be a PBP2 or similar early-splatbook class.

It just seems so out of place to have a lord of the rings moment, "You have my sword." "And my bow." "And I dun' wan' any trabble!"

>>50528127
>Why I'm arguing that doesn't change humanity is because it's manipulating an outside force rather than any sort of biological change.
And my point is that being able to manipulate that outside force would require a biological change.

>>50528101
"It's a shame the awesome playtest stiff didn't make it into the final game" sums up 5e pretty well.

>>50528194

Yeah... I still miss that awesome dragon sorcerer.

>>50527547
Warlock.

I liked the idea that 3.5 had in that it didn't operate on the spell slot system, but rather a limited pool of free-to-use stuff. In 5e it's kind of like some bastard child of martial, caster, and skill monkey. It's a like a jack of all trades kind of class that's vastly overshadowed by the Bard.

>>50528127
>Within the context of the world being able to manipulate magic isn't superhuman.
You could as well say that being able to lift elephants isn't superhuman. Since you get to define what humans can do when making the game. If a specific class of humans can cast Fireball, then another class of humans can perform herculean feats of strength. Or shout broken ribs back together.

>>50527547
Paladin.
Not because I hate them: au contraire, I love them. I want to see paladin removed from the core list because I think it's unworthy of them. A paladin is (assuming we're talking about the legendary figures of the Matter of France) a shining example of knighthood and virtue that goes above and beyond. It should not be a base class but something that is earned, as a prestige class or a fighter path or something among those lines.

>>50528194
All second tier classes, like Monk, Warlock, and Sorcerer got nerfed for some reason and now their all pretty sub-par or one trick ponies. Monk is stun spam and GOTTA GO FAST, Sorcerer is blaster and shittier wizard, warlock is blaster and MASTER OF DISGUISE

>>50527547

Monk, monk and once more monk.

I fucking love the class myself but i never played a game with 'classical' classes that wasn't kind of western medieval fantasy and monks always did hit me somewhat asian or eastern at least.

>>50528149
Motherfucker are you a backhole because you are dense?

Biology is my entire argument. Literally no other class on the list fights straight out toe to toe with monstrosities and outsiders without magic of some form, whether that be arcane, divine or primal.

People try to say the rogue does but no, it leverage weakness, not fighting head on.

The disagreement is purely that some people think that just because magic exists that humans are somehow able to be stronger without magic.

I get the need to balance magic and martial, I like the fighter in 5e but as the original post I made said, from the perspective of a high fantasy world, it makes no sense for a regular human without magic even if supremely skilled to go up against divine champion and primal rager head on.

>>50527547
Druids
they're gay and the people who play them are gay

How about I remove dragonborn and tiefling from the core list instead? It seems like a much better deal.

File: 1480807764457.jpg (420KB, 900x1164px) Image search: [Google]

420KB, 900x1164px

>>50527547
So many people voting for not monk. Seriously, whats wrong with you all? Monk didn't fit in earlier editions, and it's only gotten worse with 5e. They've just become rip off's of every shonen jump anime ever.

>>50528313

Biology is irrelevant. It's a fantasy world. You're dragging in IRL details that are utterly pointless and acting as if it's an argument.

>>50527547
Druid. The only reason is I get tired of players dipping into Druid. Druidic magic shouldn't be a path a player can casually take a level in, or leave. They are supposedly devoted to life and nature; they're generally old and wise. PCs are far from it, and every time they meet a Druid they kinda disregard the seriousness of meeting one because "LOL I can shapeshift too."

>>50528282
Again the difference is that one is using magic, one is not.

Why is this difference so hard for people to understand. If you make the alteration so that fighters, say absorb magic to increase their strength beyond human limitations then my argument goes away.

>>50527608
Nah man, keep Fighter for cross-classing. Only fucktards go for pure Fighter; smart players cross-class that shit.

>>50528376

You have not once made anything more than an assertion as to why that has any relevance. You're just talking in circles at this point.

>>50528346
You'd at least have a point if the setting didn't include humans, our species the thing that we have the parameters for and judge everything else in comparison to.

>>50528425
I'm making the statement that humans should have the abilities of humans. Rather than abilities that are superhuman.

Magic is the outside influence here, so if a human uses magic they should be able to surpass human limitation. Meanwhile some people have made the nonsensical statement that a fighter, a human not using magic, should be able to keep up with one using magic.

>>50528516

And yet, as stated above, humans- a 'mundane' race- are classed as equal to races who have built in magical abilities, some of them significant amounts.

If a mundane race can compete with a magical one, a mundane fighter can compete with a magic user.

I have literally played as every one of the core classes up to level 10. If you asked me to get rid of one of them the easy winner would be the Ranger class.

He is outstripped in damage be all the martials, he is outstipped in magic by everyone else who can cast spells, his favored enemy is super shitty all in all, the beast master class is fucked and needs a desperate reworking, and all in all he is just a worse fighter (which can go eldritch knight and be a better spell caster AND fighter than the ranger).

Monks, as off putting as their are in terms of flavor (up their with tieflings and dragonborns) they are actually really fun to play as if you like doing whacky shit like running up walls for your movement, making a leaping attack to somersault onto an opponents shoulders, make your second unarmed attack to flip him over and bust his head onto the ground, and final unarmed attack (by spending a ki point) to stomp his dick so hard you literally break his balls. Using the Way of the Elements path to cause damage dealing flair to your attacks and play an over the top luchadore. Is it proper D&D fantasy? No, but if you want to run a silly game to break away from the serious stuff for a bit, it is a great choice.

>>50528516

A large portion of the time human fighters will be using magical gear to help give them an edge.

That and magic is pretty damn slow. People seem to forget you can only cast one spell per turn no matter what. A fighter with Great Weapon fighting and an action surge at level 6 is almost always going to be doing more direct damage to individual opponents each round of combat. The only thing really outstripping him is a Paladin (which are incredibly nasty in 5e if you go full knight's templar, smite everything non-good with them).

>>50528313
The fact that its just a plan, regular human is WHY it makes absolute perfect fucking sense.

Humanity as a whole has a MASSIVE inferiority complex. The story of something to nothing, an underdog achieving great success, its something beautiful to say that we can achieve anything if we work hard enough.

Theres a fulfilment in it, that we see these regular humans, able to stand toe-to-toe with immortal beings and gods, despite just being a regular man. They weren't blessed by god, they don't have the blood of a powerful being, they don't harness the magical energies of the universe, or the raw primal force of rage. Its just a regular guy, who through blood, sweat, and hard work, who has managed to rise above the circumstance and achieve what is deemed the impossible. Thats what to be human is, overcoming impossible odds, when everything is stacked against you, and still being to push through it and come out as victorious.

The only fantasy here is you saying that regular people can't achieve great things.

>>50528584
Can you please not project your own insecurities onto all of humanity? You sound almost as bad as those HFY guys.

>>50528584
>The fact that its just a plan, regular human is WHY it makes absolute perfect fucking sense
See, your mistake is assuming human PCs are as average and mundane as real life humans.

>>50528606

He was talking about inspiring and awesome thematic tropes. You're bitching about them. I think it's clear which one is insecure.

>>50528643
Not even the same guy.

>>50528584
They really can't when it's a fight between generic soldier #352 and

*time stop
*teleports behind you
>Pssh, nothing personal
*Gate to plane of positive energy realm

Besides, name three stories where the protagonist was 100% mundane w/ no bloodline bullshit, had no assistance from a powerful ally, and didn't wield a macguffin that allowed him to take on the ultimate evil without being immediately shit-canned by turn 0.

People don't read stories about background characters, they read stories about heroes of might and magic.

>>50528668

A martial character isn't generic soldier #352. He's a hero.

Generic soldier is more comparable to the random hedge wizard who knows three spells and spends most of his time enchanting tools or calling rain on the fields.

>>50527641
Motherfuckin' WORD

>>50528643
Yeah, the guy going on about how humanity has a massive inferiority complex that aren't even relevant since D&D doesn't emulate those types of stories well.

If they did then I could actually play Conan the Barbarian, not a Barbarian who happens to be named "Conan" who dies in two turns because magic.

>>50527547

Wizard. Nearly full overlap with Sorcerer, and Sorcerer is a little less broken.

>>50528534
The same argument could be made that take magic away from those races and they are weaker than humans. So of those races need magic to be equal to a non-magical human, a magical human is logically better.

>>50527710
Why stop there?

Sorcerers and Clerics are basically an Archtype of Wizards, casting spells.

Rogues are just an Archtype of Fighters, they fight and use physical actions.

Clearly we just need Fighter and Caster as classes.

>>50528668
Conan fought wizards and giants and terrible monsters, and he was just a clever human at the peak of athleticism.

Parn likewise fought against all sorts of things as a central figure, and while he and the rest of the Lodoss War fighters came after D&D and did have magical allies supporting them, they're just really brave and strong humans (and the occasional dwarf).

And I think Cthulu got knocked out by a guy in a boat.

File: cszF2NaOQT8.jpg (67KB, 293x604px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 293x604px

>>50527641
I'm partial to big ass swords myself actually.

>>50527547
I remove the Ranger.

The Barbarian gets the axe.

>>50528064
Just to chime in here.

Hercules didn't get his strength from being a Demi-God.

Being a Demi-god doesn't give you inately anything but the attention of the gods, who are fickle and easily displeased.

>>50528682
>He's a hero.
If he's a hero then he should be able to perform superhuman feats without getting cockblocked because it's not realistic enough.
>>50528737
Conan I'll allow but I'm going to have to discount the other two

>Reasons?
By your own admission, Parn received help from magical allies and Cthulhu didn't get knocked out by anyone, he willingly decided to go back to sleep because some dude rammed him with a boat and he was like "eh, I'm too sleepy for this so I'll just lie down"

Try again

>>50528313
Biologically, Humans can get 20 strength.

That's equal to a Giant in strength.

Ergo, Humans in DND are biologically different to real life humans.

Deal with it autist.

>>50528668
>name three underdog story where someone with literally nothing somehow manages to overcome the odds and win with nothing special about him

The entirety of fucking human history, this isn't something that needs to be fucking proved, its common knowledge, its like asking me evidence that the sky is blue.

The underdog story is possible the most overused plot in existence.

>>50528668
Beowulf
Sigurd
Cú Chulainn

All of them Wielded Magical weapons/Artifacts and performed feats to gain an edge, but none of them have God-like bloodlines or Gods directly giving them boons outside of said Weapons/Artifacts.

However, this just brings up on how utterly pointless the Paladin is.

If it's a Warrior with the attention of the Gods, it's just a fighter

If it's a Knight or crusader in service of the faith of the gods, then it's a cleric.

>>50528888

Paladin makes more sense as a hybrid class option, letting you blend elements of Cleric and Fighter IMO.

>>50528797
Well if it isn't a pot.

I've been arguing outside of crunch quite deliberately. Because a) within the crunch the fighter is fine, my issue was more thematic and b) the D&D rules are pretty poor at accurately portraying basically anything that isn't I hit it or I cast x. You're giant str being low enough a fighter can reach being a good example especially when combined with the fact that a fighter with the same or higher strength as a giant can't actually lift, grapple or throw the same things and leads people with poor comprehension thinking a huge creature and a medium creature with the same strength score are actually equal strength.

>>50528941

So the system doesn't actually support your argument and you're just bullshitting, got it.

>>50528888
The problem isn't really that Paladins are pointless, it's that Clerics are too close to their niche. Clerics should be lightly (or even un-)armoured casters similar to wizards with martial ability as a tertiary focus, not hybrids who can smash faces and cast spells with equal ease.

>>50527547
>Bard
Shitty support wizard/rogue

>Monk
pointless nippon exotisism

>Sorcerer
With the advent of warlocks there's no need for a stepping stone class between "worked for their magic" and "did not work for their magic"

>>50528880
Y'know how most of those underdogs actually won their wars?

By being lucky enough to have a top dog throw them a bone that's how.

Actually take a look at most of those historical events you go on about and realize how most wars that were fought were won because one side had the help of a really powerful ally who was willing to supply resources to see them succeed.

America wouldn't be a country without France's assistance, black people wouldn't even be free without the aid of the north, women wouldn't be able to vote either if there weren't men in congress who felt sympathetic to their cause, etc.

The fact of the matter is, an underdog will never succeed without 3rd party support. If they could then they obviously aren't underdogs now are they?

>>50528984

You are an incredibly boring person

>>50528888
Discounted by your own admission that they wielded magical bullshit to help them gain an edge.

Try again

>>50529002
In D&D it's rare to see a fighter above third level who DOESN'T have some sort of magical bullshit that grants him an edge.

>>50528953
My argument was thematic from the get go. People arguing crunch is on them. Although you seem to be the only person to miss that point so have fun trying validate your goalpost shifting.

>>50528997
No, I'm giving you some fucking perspective on what truly makes an underdog and why an underdog class doesn't work within the context of this game.

If we're talking about a game that assumes that every PC is some form of hero or whatever, then logic dictates that each PC should be powerful enough to perform heroic bullshit that peasants would only be able to dream of.

Otherwise, what's the point of playing an underdog class that's by definition underequipped and ill prepared for whatever the game throws at them in favor of a hero that can stand up to the bad guys and do awesome cool guy shit?

File: 1427932823021.gif (925KB, 367x309px) Image search: [Google]

925KB, 367x309px

>>50527547
Bard

>>50529022
Then stop trying to hamstring him anytime he tries to utilize his abilities in a superhuman way.

If he has max STR, he wants to pick up a boulder, and it doesn't go over his maximum lift capacity, just let him pick up the fucking boulder already.

If the mage can toss a boulder with telekinesis without rolling, the martial should have the same benefits since he's just that fucking strong.

File: 1440616005370.jpg (22KB, 255x255px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 255x255px

>>50529079
C H I M
H
I
M

>>50528793
The help from the magical allies was little different from support fire for the most part.

But, moving along, John Carpenter was just a normal human fighting against giant aliens, albeit the low gravity of Mars made him like 10x stronger than everyone else.

In Tenjho Tenge, Masataka Takayanagi, while not the central protagonist and coming from an ancient bloodline of warriors, is an ordinary human who fights against mystically powered opponents and even stands off against a false god. He even takes it a step further, because not only does he fight against supernatural opponents, he also fights against armed opponents while unarmed and is actually an anti-weapons specialist.

Fafhrd has no magical talent, and while often the recipient of magical/divine aid, fights against many magical/monstrous opponents without any assistance outside of perhaps some non-magical help from a friend.

>>50527933
Every last peasant and his mother were related to gods in Greece. That's just how greek gods do.

>>50528449
Do you really not see how purposely obtuse you're being? Humans are capable of tons of fantastic things in DnD, things no human in the real world can do. Why can't they also be super strong when they train to become so? Other than it triggers your incredibly specific autism.

>>50527729
So 4e, right?

>>50529135
Masataka Takayanagi is disqualified because not only is he from an anime but he also manipulates ki, which let's face it, is pretty much magic in the sense that it's an otherworldly force that allows anyone to do practically fucking anything.

And Fafhrd is discounted because, by your own admission, he received magical/divine aid.

John Carpenter is fine however but I'm going to have to ask you to try again.

>>50529117
Or just don't include the fighter class.

>>50529249
>And Fafhrd is discounted because, by your own admission, he received magical/divine aid.

So your concept of fighter is someone who can never receive any kind of buffs from his allies or use magic weapons or anything? Just how retarded are you?

>>50528142
This.

>>50529249
Not him, but mind giving an example of what you're looking for exactly? So far I just keep seeing you inventing reasons to discount anything they come up with.

>>50529274
or you could eat your tendies and cool your autism so that the fantasy game can have characters with fantastic powers.

>>50529300
>>50529351
My question to you was to name three stories in which the protagonist was 100% mundane, with no bloodline bullshit, no aid from a powerful ally, and didn't wield a macguffin that allowed him to take on the big bad without being killed within the first two turns.

This exercise was to show that there is no such thing as a hero in fiction that didn't have something supernatural about him that allowed him to become a superhero. Even characters like John Carpenter had something that gave him an edge, even if it came down to him being super strong thanks to Mars' lower gravity.

So now that we've acknowledged that heroes aren't mundane, now we can put this stupid argument behind us and acknowledge that martials are superhumans that shouldn't operate on the rules of reality.

>>50529249
>anime is grounds for disqualification

What about Tetsuo in Akira, who fights against a psychic pseudo-god with nothing more than a laser rifle and shouting?

Or Guts, who up until he got the berserker armor was just a really, really, really, stupidly strong guy who had been training daily with oversized swords since he was a small child?

But, if we can't talk anime, what about good old Abraham Van Helsing, who fought Dracula with nothing more than an iron will, deep knowledge of folklore, and a few able-bodied youngsters to help out with the eventual physical beatdown?

>>50528668

Fucking Beowful nigger
He de-armed Grendel while unarmed.

>>50529397
First off, that was Kaneda, not Tetsuo.

Second off, doesn't the movie basically end with the psychics causing a nuclear explosion that sends Tetsuo into another direction?

Also, Dragon Slayer becomes a magical weapon after spending years bathe in the blood of several apostles. That and Guts was literally born from the womb of a corpse, I wouldn't really call Guts 100% mundane, especially when he was able to one-hand a broadsword when he was only like 8 years old.

I'll allow Abraham Van Helsing however.

>>50529397
>>50529439
see >>50529388

>>50529508
>no such thing as a hero in fiction that didn't have something supernatural about him that allowed him to become a superhero.

Except, there's plenty of examples already.

Stuff like Rokka no Yuusha are specifically about a "normal" person (ie., within the limits of human athletics/knowledge) competing against supernatural opponents. It's actually a somewhat common theme in anime/manga, though it's usually reserved for characters that fight alongside the main protagonist, like Yajirō Kojima in Grenadier.

>>50527547
Wizard

>>50529388
And this exercise is supposed to prove....what exactly?

>>50529508

Beowulf didn't have any of that shit. No magical bloodline, no magic sword, no help. He took on Grendel by himself and ripped his goddamn arm off, which led to Grendel bleeding out and dying as he ran in fear from Beowulf.


He DID gain a magical 'giant's sword' during his battle with Grendel's mother, which lasted for days while underwater, but that sword only helped him pierce her impenetrable skin.

Beo vs. Grendel was as 1v1 me fgt as you can get.

>>50527586
>>50527603
I'd remove Sorcerer and Warlock. They just feel a bit too quirky to be right there in core. In a supplement it'd be fine, but not in core.

>>50528213
>Dragon Sorcerer, with implications that other bloodline Sorcerers would have their own neat gimmicks
>Martial Dice, probably the most flexible system Fighters have ever gotten that lets the player decide how much flexibility and complication they want the Fighter to have without changing his mechanics in the slightest.

Fuck I'm still pissed about those getting removed.

>>50529613
That it's fucking stupid to cite realism for why the martials never get to have any fun when they were never meant to be realistic people in the first place.

In short, stop with the double standard already.

>>50529613
That some people have immense Autism and think a person with a magic weapon suddenly stops being the fighter class.

>>50529671
>Missing_the_point.jpg

>>50529718
That point being....

>>50529920
see>>50529669

>>50530041
Who was arguing for martials to be realistic? They've always been fantastic and over the top when you consider they can take hits from a lizard the size of a warehouse with no lasting damage, and kill it with a sword that it shouldn't even register as anything more than a splinter.

File: 1476284131426.png (401KB, 859x594px) Image search: [Google]

401KB, 859x594px

>>50527641

>>50529249

Ki isn't unnatural. It's the opposite of that.. Ki is fundamentally the energy of life, innate to all living things, and making use of it is explicitly as natural as breathing.

>>50527547
Monk.

I just don't like Asian themes. So sue me.

>>50530065
The people ITT, as well as /tg/ as a whole, who will still use realism to explain why martial characters can never have any nice things even though most heroes in fiction were never meant to be mundane in any way, shape, or form.

>>50530111
I understand that but Ki would still fall under the same umbrella as mana would, being a supernatural form of energy that allows the user to basically do fucking anything they fucking want.

Which kinda makes the monk's status as one of the weaker classes kinda questionable since Ki should function similarly to power points that psionics use.

>>50530194

But it isn't supernatural. Calling ki supernatural shows a fundamental lack of understanding of the concept.

>>50530258
It's supernatural in the sense that mana and psychic powers are supernatural anon.

Even if we both understand the subtle differences between magic, psychic, and ki, the average plebian won't be able to see a difference between a fire mage, a pyrokinetic, and a dude who uses ki to ignite his fists before impact.

If it makes you feel any better, I meant supernatural as in "extraordinary" or "non-mundane." I wasn't implying that ki was the exact same thing as magic.

>>50527547
Bard.

Bard does not work thematically. 'Doot-doot-doot-my-shitty-rhymes-are-magic' is not...well, bardic at all.

>>50530194
>The people ITT, as well as /tg/ as a whole, who will still use realism to explain why martial characters can never have any nice things even though most heroes in fiction were never meant to be mundane in any way, shape, or form.


We're not talking martials, but a single class, largely defined by it being mundane.

>>50527775
This is the worst comparison you could have used

File: Living spellbok.jpg (401KB, 1736x1474px) Image search: [Google]

401KB, 1736x1474px

>>50527547
>all these people that haven't played 5e
Ranger.
Ranger Forever.
It's the worst class, half of it's abilities are completely worthless, and an entire archetype makes it statistically /worse/ than not having an archetype at all.
if you allow UA, that changes.
Thematically though? Monk, tied with warlock. they never go well.
Second place to remove would be druid.

File: bait.png (82KB, 594x595px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 594x595px

>>50527608
>I have never read Beowulf

>>50527547
For me? Druid, instantly. Druids have always felt overloaded and yet without sufficient background to justify their own existence. They're essentially a hamfisted mash-up of a shapeshifting "naturey" wizard and a nature priest, and never given any real fluff reasons to explain just why they're supposed to be somehow different to the existing clerics of nature deities.

Hell, I'd rather rework the Cleric from its "warrior-priest" nature into a proper "white mage" style caster and instead leave the armored divine champion bit to fighter/clerics and paladins, at least they make the blend of abilities seem sensible.

>>50530362
No martial character, even the Fighter, is mundane so long as they're a player class.

The sooner we move past this mentality, the sooner we can bury these arguments in a trash bin where they belong.

>>50530362
>We're not talking martials, but a single class, largely defined by it being mundane.
>Fighters SHOULD be mundane

I think we found the root of the problem here, guys.

>>50527547
>Barbarian, Bard, Druid, Monk, Paladin, Ranger, Sorceror and Warlock.

Then I'd make everything that's left into archetypes.

>>50530466
>>50530472
You guys are weird, because even when fighters are not limited and have options of being capable of magic, for some reason you still don't want to entertain the idea of allowing someone to play a mundane fighter if that's their preference.

For fucks sake, just back off. Some people don't want to play in the same way you do, and your attempted eradication of a character concept is going to be met with hostility forever.

>>50530531

The issue is that D&D is essentially a game about superheroes at this point, and the fighter is like Batman or Green Arrow without being billionaires.

Mostly, the issue is one of flavor and how GMs react to it.

But it would be better to simply cut the fighter out and explore it from different angles. Hell, the fighter and rogue could both benefit from that, really.

>>50530531
No. Legend axed the Fighter and it was a million times better off for it.

>>50530531
Fact of the matter is, there is no such thing as a truly mundane protagonist in fiction, because if they were 100% mundane, they wouldn't be the main character in the first place.

Nobody would cry if the Fighter was axed entirely from the game since, let's face it here, dude who fights good doesn't really carry much weight when everyone can fight to an extent.

>>50527547
One Class, fighter with different archetypes.

Yes, get rid of everything except fighter.

File: 1423881696788.gif (950KB, 294x233px) Image search: [Google]

950KB, 294x233px

>>50530703
>dude who fights good doesn't really carry much weight when everyone can fight to an extent.
Explain the appeal of Conan the Barbarian, then.

>>50530805
Conan is a thief, a pirate, and a warlord on top of fighting gud.

>>50530820
But his main schtick is that he's a martial-oriented guy fucking up evil sorcerers with strength and wit.

>>50528793
>If he's a hero, he should be able to do [Thing]!

Yes, you fucking mong, that's the entire point people are trying to get across. That's how it SHOULD be, but it isn't, because D&D 3e shat all over that and it's been carried forward.

>>50530835
>>50530805
Which, within the context of D&D, can very well be fucking any martial class, are you understanding me?

"Fights good" is the bare minimum of what a martial should do, it's the "I showed up to work on time" of martial classes.

>>50531053
In D&D, the Fighter is "I showed up drunk, half-dressed, and I puked in the donut box"

>>50531074
No, that would be the monk.

>>50531053
Instead of axing the Fighter then, why not give him abilities that other martials don't have?

Sorcerer, easily.

Barring that? Monk. It's just a bare-fisted cleric.

>>50531130
Because the Fighter's entire concept is being a blank slate while everyone else has a defined goal, even if the effectiveness is dodgy.

Barbarians are heavy hitters who get stronger from their rage, Rangers are expert trackers who excel at ranged weaponry, Paladins are great at defense and can support their allies with heals and support, Monks are designed to be unarmed fighters who excel at combat maneuvers, and rogues are designed to be experts in the art of subterfuge and dungeoneering.

Before all these guys were concepts, the Fighter's niche was being the toughest dude in the party who soaked up attacks that would've killed lesser classes in one hit. Nowadays though, they're only really there because of they're a sacred cow, whose purpose has been rendered obsolete due to other martial classes (and some mages) gaining abilities that allow them to take on the same job without being a blank slate that's effectively a jack of all trades and a master of none.

>>50531130
They did that in 3.5 and retards bitched because weeaboo fightan magic not mundane not muh fighter bawwwww.

They did that in 4E and retards bitched because sword wizards hurr spellcasting shit twinkie not muh fighter.

They sort of did that in 5E by giving them a single archetype that rips off the two classes above but it was dozens of times shittier than either of them individually.

I would love to see 5e get a Tome of Battle equivalent.

And only half to see all the grogs bitching furiously about it.

>>50531620
That's what the Battlemaster was supposed to be.

Instead it just made me unbelievably angry that that piece of shit was not only supposed to be the thing that was pandering to me, but it's the gimped runoff from a playtest idea that I loved.

>>50527547
Personally I think that you don't need any more classes than Fightingman, Mage, Priest and Thief.

File: IMG_8180.png (138KB, 350x350px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 350x350px

>>50527622

Only tangent related, but:

I literally(as in Friday) played a table top RPG for the first time. It's Pathfinder and I rolled a Druid... Is there really that much Druid hate?

>>50527547
If we're talking about 5e, monk

Eastern kung fu man :DDD just is fucking stupid standing next to a holy crusader, a grizzled merc veteran, a stealthy assassin, and a warden of nature.

On top of that, monks suck. Next to PHB ranger they are probably the most worthless class to have on your team. Only useful thing about them is a shadow monk spamming PWAT on the party for stealth cheese

>>50528668
the problem is magic is too accessible, and mere mortals can pull off god level shenanigans

>>50531854

Druids are fine, people are just bitching about almost everything in this thread.

Kill monk warlock and sorc and you would lose literally nothing of value

>>50531854
Druids were OP as fuck for the entirety of 3.5 and Pathfinder, so yes.

>>50531919
Alrighty, and I personally subscribe to the rule that if it exists, someone is out there that will bitch about it. I do see, from my limited knowledge on the subject, some of the complaints though. Based on what I read, it seems like my options are really damn broad at what I want to do.

I created him as a mix between the druids on Skellige in the Witcher 3, Adam One(minus the vegetarian shit) and Mad Adam from the Year of the Flood, and Dr. Kynes from Dune.

>>50531854
>It's Pathfinder and I rolled a Druid

Fucking min/maxing munchkins like you are why Pathfinder gets such a bad rap.

>>50531995
I just want to be an ecologist hanging out with my forest friends man. I didn't know much about it before I picked it.

>>50527547
Paladin. We already have clerics and fighters for that, even moreso with multiclassing. It's not like there's a core arcane gish class, just some archetypes that provide the building blocks, so why shouldn't we just do the same for divine melee magic users?

>>50527547
Monk. It's the worst core class in 3e, Pathfinder, 5e and probably every other edition they've appeared in. It doesn't fit the genre - I'm okay with Asian-influenced stuff in D&D, but characters who don't use armor or weapons only work in kung-fu movies where no one uses armor or weapons. Those things exist for a reason. Plus, the existence of an Asian-influenced class called Monk results in the lack of European-style monks in D&Dland, and those are something a medieval setting needs a lot more.

>>50527821
I'd personally axe Wizard and keep Sorcerer and Warlock. Along with Druid, you get a fair amount of magical variation, without all the cheese that is constantly complained about.

>b-but they don't have to be OP!

If a class has to go out of its way to avoid just ripping apart every encounter, then it's an overpowered class by default.

>>50528584
I believe that's what Greek tragedies would refer to as catharsis.

>>50530150
Same. I always reflavor them.

>>50531330
Fighter class should just be a more rewarding class to dip into instead of devoting to. Like instead of an Ability Improvement, or a regular Feat, you get a level of Fighter. Or something like that.

>>50533477

If a class exists purely to be dipped into it shouldn't be designed or presented as a full class.

Legend had some cool stuff along those lines. Each class was three or more 'tracks', sets of abilities you could choose from. But there were also class-free 'tracks' which were a single specific set of abilities you could sub into another class in exchange for a track, representing more niche and specific things. Including 'Being a Kamen Rider'.

>>50527608
>spiritual barbarians
Fuck that noise

>>50533562
Yeah that's what I mean. This is just off the top of my head, so all I mean is reworking Fighter class into more of a "Fighter option". Like a warrior wizard, sneaky tank, etc. I feel the Fighter class should be more of a training option than a way of life. But that's just me, I'm not explaining it well.

Warlock

>>50527547
Sorcerer

>>50527547
Fighter. Every class is capable of fighting now as well as do a bunch of other things, except for the fighter which can only fight and nothing else, and it doesn't even fight better than the other classes because every class needs to be "balanced" and 5e is balanced purely around combat.

>>50528313
Since when does a barbarian get its power from an outside force

>>50529508
>Who is Saint George
>Who is Cuchullain
>Who is Hou Yi

>>50534723
Wait what the fuck am I doing, Hou Yi is literally the god of archery.

Disregard my retardation please.

>>50531654
Battlemaster has the highest DPR in the game

>>50534997

That doesn't make it at all interesting to play or well designed.

>>50534281
In 5e only barbs that are actually used from core are the totemic barbarians.

>>50529366
The entire thread is based on opinion.

Resorting to ad hominids and memes without actually adding substance. Are you 12.

Also not that guy but how is wanting a reason for the fantastic powers problem.

>>50533577
I get that I'm not exactly representative of the whole but across consistent play with different groups I have never seen anytging but totemic barbs. The other class is pretty bad what with exhaustion.

>>50528142
Shifted the posts then deciding that's where they should be is still shifting the goal posts.

In terms of game balance you're right but I've never argued from crunch in this thread.

Magic is an outside force separate from humans, it's I agree that martials like the barb leveraging totems and spiritual magic should be on par but the purely human fighter shouldn't be or rather it makes no logical sense for them to be.

>>50535434

Nope. Everything you say is purely based on assertions which have no reason to be true, as has been said multiple times. You're just endlessly spouting the same bullshit.

>>50527547
Remove all of them, except Paladin, Barbarian, Ranger and Rogue.

>>50534281
Totems and animal spirits and shit.

>>50527547
Weaboo Monk gets kicked.

>>50527547
>Magic User
>Thief
>Fighting Man
>No Items
>Final Destination

>>50535445
Because people are making the same arguments based on their assertions.

Humans should be able to be superhuman without outside help. That's the positive claim that needs to be justified.

>>50535270
>ad hominids

>>50535588

Why does it need to be justified? Everything else in the setting obviously works that way, you just keep trying to create a stupid exception which doesn't really fit or help in any way.

>>50528797
Pointing out here that a giant is still stronger because they are Large to Huge size, and that gains bonuses on lift.

>>50535634
Even in my first post I said that's stupid and actually no it doesn't work that way. Pretty sure even in what is now basically the flagship setting fr the heroes always have some form of magic on their side and don't just fight the big bad head on.

File: 1472922320417.png (324KB, 414x459px) Image search: [Google]

324KB, 414x459px

Wizards.
No fun or definition in their fluff. Just "Guy who casts spells real good" but is still defined by very narrow creation options. Axe them and toss some of their actually useful mechanics to the sorcerer (like learning spells, in this case those observed rather than just transcribed) and what little fluff they have (magic via learning and interaction with the multiverse in certain patterns) to bards, warlocks, and psions.

>>50527547
>Monk

Purely for thematic/aesthetic reasons.

It just seems like the odd-asian-out in a roster full of specifically western classes and characters.

>>50527547
Ranger, Rogue, or Bard

>>50535623
> I pointed out a typo, most likely from auto-correct.

Nice shitpost

>>50527603
>hey, Warlock is pretty unique and interesting, lets get rid of it

>>50535963

Well, that was the kind of logic which created 5e by stripping all the cool and interesting things out of the playtest document.

>>50527547
If I have to choose just one class it would have to be Ranger. If just feels like the most unnecessary class, a hybrid of Fighter and Druid that lacks anything really strongly iconic about it. Favoured Enemy just isn't as impressive as Rage, Flurry of Blows/Ki, Smite, or Bardic Music, the core class features of the other 'hybrid' classes.

If I could remove more than one class I would remove everything but the Cleric, Fighter, Rogue, and Wizard. Every other class feels like a multi-class or a subclass of those four classes. They're iconic to D&D and if I wanted to appeal to grogs I would stick to those four. You could even make a reasonable case that the Cleric is just a Wizard subclass with an alternate power source and different spell list, just like a Warlock.

You can also reasonably break down Fighter and Rogue into one class, but that feels like one sacred cow too many.

>>50527547
monk, it's broken and doesn't fit anyway

following that, I'd go for paladin and ranger, then barbarian

>>50527603
Different things scare me too sempai.

>>50536248
and yeah, warlock shouldn't be on there at all

>>50536013
Don't I know it. 3.pf grogs ruined 5e before it even had a chance.

>>50536165
Mercenary McBeatstick and Chanty Adeptus, the chocolate and vanilla of murderhobo. Merc comes in two flavors: skipped leg day fudge; and mom made him take ballet caramel. Chanty also comes in two flavors: bully shoved mints down his throat; and tutti "stone the gays" frutti. AAA game design.

>>50527547
Wizard.

Also Druid, Monk, Paladin, and Ranger if I can trim multiple.

>>50527547
Wizard. Every class studies for their shit.

>>50527547

For me I'd say Wizard. It's just to broad a concept to work in a class based system so it ends up being capable of almost anything.

It's an easy one for me.
The Monk. For the simplest reason: it doesen't suit the others. It's the only eastern class in a western setting, and it's the one usually gets cut when you try to build a coherent setting of your own.

>>50536352
Well you give them silly names but the premise is solid. Warriors come in Strength (balanced), Dexterity (fast but fragile), and Constitution (slow but tanky) flavours. Mages come in Intelligence (debuffs, control, and utility), Wisdom (healing, buffs, and debuff removal), and Charisma (damage and flashier effects) styles.

You could probably make a rock-paper-scissors with martial styles to reflect this setup. STR gives armour piercing, DEX gives more accurate attacks and evasion, and CON gives damage reduction. STR beats CON because it breaks through their armour, DEX beats STR because it relies on evasion instead of tanking, and CON beats DEX because it vastly reduces the damage it takes.

>>50529002
the thing about an edge is that it's just an edge

>>50536791
I don't see why it's so hard to include people doing martial arts with a vague chi-like magic worked in. So what if it's Asian? Fantasy doesn't even have to be European; just mix everything you like together in a pot and there you go. Even if your setting is not!Russia, you can probably find some form of hand-to-hand to stretch into the proper thing, or just make something up - it doesn't have to be that close to Russia, as long as you have the Russian feel.

It's more correct to say that you don't like monks and their eastern connotations, and you don't want to try and include them.

>>50537311
Russian setting is actually more likely to have a justification for a Monk class, something like Nikita Kozhemyaka, who wrestled a Slavic dragon and won.

>>50527547
Ideally none, actively removing choice for no reason is retarded. That being said I would say Warlock, I don't see much use behind it and I don't feel like they thematically are as integral to the game as any of the other classes except perhaps monks.

>>50530258
Can you use your ki to fire lasers from your hand? How does one scientifically measure ki? What forces act upon it and what forces does it act upon?

Monk, because mechanically it doesn't really do the things it advertises.

I also agree with the sentiment that the monk concept should be folded into psionic supplements, it's a much better fit flavorwise.

Monk folded into psionics, wizard split up among sorcerer, warlock and other casters, fighter split up among other martials.

I'm all for variety, but if there's going to be a class that's never picked unless you want to be underpowered, or a class that will outshine all the nearest options, that shit needs to be fixed.

>>50527625
Here we go again...

Mundane classes will never be as strong or as versatile as magical or divine ones. Deal with it.

On topic: I'd get rid of the warlock or the sorcerer. Do we really need 3 offensive casters?

>>50539451
> Mundane classes will never be as strong or as versatile as magical or divine ones. Deal with it.
Depends on the system.
If your magic makes your brain pop out of the head after about a year (like psykers in 40k), giving you life expectancy of zero, you'll think twice about being a magic user.

>>50539479
We're talking about d&d though.

>>50539499
Depends on the edition/setting/whatever.

>>50529070
Holy shit you're possibly one of the most retarded people I've ever seen on /tg/, but I'll humor you

You're holding humans to real-world biological standards for some reason even though it's completely nonsensical to do so. You're talking about a game where you can conjure and throw balls of fire or magically mend wounds. The game is not bound by your concept of "realism" because it never aimed to be realistic in the first place. It's heroic fantasy, a la LOTR, Conan, etc. If you want realism, go play a different RPG that actually aims to be so.

It's a fucking game you're meant to play and have fun with a few friends. I've never seen such an intense level of autism, and I bet you're ZERO fun to play with. I bet you don't even have a D&D group, because nobody wants to put up with a limp-dicked retard bitching about a non-issue while everybody else is trying to have fun.

>>50539510
Casters reign supreme in d&d except at low levels in my experience.

>>50539066
It's the body's natural manipulation of the weave that suffuses all of reality

>>50528741
underrated

File: metzen_corruption.gif (1MB, 232x201px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 232x201px

>>50527547
>merge barb and fighter
>merge ranger and rogue

>>50527559
M8 hace you been under a rock? Warlock is in a 3e splatbook, and is a core class favoured by tieflings in 4e and 5e. Their gimmick in 4e/5e is that they get their powers from a pact with either an incomprehensible star god or cthulhu, an archfey or something devillish.

>>50537169
This is literally "people die when they are killed" levels of retardation and obviousness.

>>50539520
I'm going to assume that you have the reading comprehension of a chimpanzee rather than be full blown sub-70 IQ retarded.

I'm literally saying the exact same bullshit that you're saying, that martials should be treated as just as superhuman as a mage by merit of being a player character.

>>50541184
So sorcery?

>>50541643

Sorcerers are literally special snowflakes who can use the weave so easily they often discover it in their childhood, or without any study.

Monks Train, Meditate and in some cases spar for years to attain the ability to use Ki to their advantage.

>>50541629
You say "martials", when you mean "all martials, no exceptions", and that's dumb.

There's really no reason that a sufficiently skilled person who never exceeds human limits of strength and speed should not have a place in a party. None. Mechanically, they can be balanced with the rest of the party (and even exceed them in many regards), and thematically it doesn't particularly stretch the imagination to consider weak points, experience-honed reflexes, luck, allies and assistance, and the like.

Every reason provided thus far against them has simply been a matter of preference and taste and a measure of inflexibility, a conscious decision to say "I refuse to accept the explanations that support the concept."

If that's you, then go ahead and not have the fraction of a class that can call itself a purely mundane martial in your games. But don't get so upset when other people enjoy and allow the idea.

>>50541914
So Monks are the guys who work hard for their entire lives yet live in obscurity as they accomplish nothing of worth while Sorcerers are the guys who are naturally talented so they actually get accolades for their accomplishments even when they barely had to work at it?

Sounds about right.

>>50527547
Wizard, because gaining magic by studying it does not appeal to me and I think I can remove it most easily from the fluff by expressing the seemingly nebulous nature of magic in the setting. As a class which studies such nebulousness, I am not sure that I can justify their ability to tap in to whatever causes magic to occur simply through studious effort. The other magic classes gain their arcane or extraordinary powers through some other means of exploitation but the wizard does not, he lacks that font.

>>50542036
>There's really no reason that a sufficiently skilled person who never exceeds human limits of strength and speed should not have a place in a party.
There is when mages are so powerful that the sufficiently skilled person never gets a chance to shine.

Every martial should be Batman on the basis of being playable classes, not Jimmy Olsen.

Nobody wants to play Jimmy Olsen because Jimmy Olsen is a nobody. He stands to the sidelines watching Superman achieve great things while all he gets to do is snap pictures and go home to a dumpy apartment. He gets KO'd from a stiff breeze wafting off of Doomsday's fist and he's the butt of every joke because his pain is played for laughs.

If you want to have martials who are mundane then play a peasant, but don't drag martials down to peasant's level just because you can't accept that a martial is beyond human capacity by default.

>>50541184
Ki actually has no connection to the weave and is independent of it, in a similar fashion to psionics. But, while psionics stems from the mind and is independent of outside forces, ki is incredibly reliant on attunement with outside rhythms and the flow of energy, with the practitioner more of a conduit and manipulator than an originator and controller.

They rely heavily on ideas like wave amplification and resonance, and require precise control of the bodies own rhythms, starting with breathing, followed by precise muscle control, and ultimately even the subtle rhythms of the heart and mind.

Attacks like Quivering Palm actually use the opponent's rhythms against themselves, with a subtle disturbance offsetting the creatures energy.

>>50542152
>There is when mages are so powerful that the sufficiently skilled person never gets a chance to shine.

That's a balance issue that is easily remedied.

In 5e, mundane fighters are not simply good, but great, and can "shine" even in a superpowered party.

Overall, your mental issue seems to be simply a matter of definitions. "Mundane" in the context of D&D does not mean "ordinary", but simply "non-magical." A mundane fighter is not a skill-less peasant, and never was.

>>50527625
>Because why the fuck not?
Because if he can then all of the fantasy powers aren't fantastic enough.

>>50542231

In 5e, fighters are not mundane. They are explicitly superhuman out of the box and you are a blithering idiot if you can't see that.

>>50542231
The issue has more to do with the fact that idiots like you associate "martial" with "mundane" when martials were never meant to be mundane in the first place.

That's where all these problems come from and the balance issues are a product of this line of thinking.

A game designers thinks "well martials are mundane," so he designs martials around the limits of an ordinary IRL human when in actuality he should be basing them around what the peak of humanity can achieve and then doubling that output.

King Arthur had a scabbard that made him practically invulnerable, Robin Hood had enough accuracy to split an arrow in half while getting a bullseye, Batman is one of the most intelligent superheroes in the DC universe, and Gilgemesh tore the arm off a monster while unarmed.

There isn't a martial in the whole of civilization that is truly mundane and if more people recognized this then every single balance issue associated with caster supremacy would disappear overnight.

>>50527547
Definitely Paladin, because most Paladins are not even proper characters, they are walking tropes
Warlock, Sorcerer and Wizard, replace all of them with Mage with diffrent backstories

>>50542306
>>50542325


>They are explicitly superhuman

Except that they're not, and you need to work against the concept in order to make them so.

I'm going to repeat the obvious. It is YOUR CHOICE to say that only a magical person can do what a fighter does, while other people are free to say that a nonmagical person can replicate what a fighter does.

The accuracy of Robin Hood is not beyond the human limit. Yes, they are quite exceptional, but at no point does magic come into play in the Robin Hood story.

More importantly, King Arthur having a magic sword and scabbard does not change that he was a mortal human.

You REALLY need to stop with this whole "I can't accept that they're not magical, so no one else can!" lunacy.

>>50542429

We're acknowledging the facts of the game, you're perpetuating a delusion which is the root of so much fucking bad game design it makes me sick.

>>50527547
Well, Brad gets the axe, obviously. Fuck Brad.

But if I didn't have to pick just one, I'd kill Barbarian, Bard, Paladin, Ranger, Sorcerer, and Warlock. Ain't nobody need that many classes. The Monk really should get cut too, but I have a soft spot.

>>50542452
I just explained to you the facts of the game, you lunatic.

>>50542429
You're confused about what "magical" means.

"Superhuman" and "magical" are not the same thing.

Heracles was superhuman, but he wasn't magical, because in the tradition of his mythology magic was the province of oracles and the like. Heracles was powerful because he was partially divine.

>>50542429
>>50542475
If magic can take the form of spells, power points, ki, etc. then why is it so hard for you to accept that martials draw upon the same supernatural energy but use it to exceed the limits of humanity and that's why they're playable classes?

I mean, they're already supernaturally tough and strong, otherwise they wouldn't be able to take a ballista to the chest and keep fighting or cleave through a group of bandits with one swing.

>>50542429
>More importantly, King Arthur having a magic sword and scabbard does not change that he was a mortal human.

Actually in most iterations of the myth/folklore Arthur is blessed by God (or, at the earliest, some Celtic deity).

>>50542530
>Heracles was superhuman, but he wasn't magical, because in the tradition of his mythology magic was the province of oracles and the like

D&D is pretty weird in how it throws magic and divine gifts and the power of nature all into one big pot and makes them all the same when they really shouldn't work anything alike.

>>50541643
Not quite.

Qi is more like a sort of life energy in the same sense that "breath" is life energy (yes yes, I know, breath is just the process of respiring air, but the ancient Chinese didn't know that). Fundamentally, having mastered one's Qi is effectively the same as having mastered one's body, because QI flows through everything, primarily living beings.

Which is why I also would remove Monk personally, because DnD already has a "I have masterd my body" Class, we call this Class a fighter. I think personally that Monk is more suited as a specialized subclass of fighter, and that the different Monastic Schools in Fifth easily could be folded under the umbrellas of the other classes.

I mean, Way of Shadow is basically a Rogue anyways.

>>50542576
That's what some martials do, but not all.
I really can't even comprehend why you guys can't accept a nonmagic/non-"superhuman" fighter.

You're probably those "meat points" guys.

>>50542530
Yes, Heracles was magical. There's no question about that, since he was a demigod who could hold the sky on his shoulders. Divine magic is still magic.

>>50542595
He wasn't even the strongest knight. Look at Lancelot, who had neither magic sword nor scabbard.

Player characters in D&D are superhuman by default. No matter what class they are, they are capable of things no real human is or has ever been capable of. This is the default state of things in D&D.

I don't think this needs justification. You don't need to make everything magic or try to explain it away. It's a heroic fantasy setting, and the player characters are heroes. Mundane limits are utterly irrelevant and bringing them up shows you don't understand the game.

>>50542806
The ones that aren't superhuman are the exception, not the rule.

Paladins and Rangers can cast spells, Monks use Ki to improve their abilities, Barbarians use rage to achieve superhuman prowess, and Rogues have an innate talent for detecting traps and avoiding danger.

So out of 6 core classes, the Fighter is the only one that isn't magical and ends up suffering because of it due to "fights good" being the bare minimum for what a class is capable of doing.

Hell, even in 5e, most of their bullshit is stuff that could easily be applied to other martial classes.

>>50542870

>Barbarians use rage to achieve superhuman prowess

Getting angry is inherently magical now?

>>50542876
Considering it gives them massive bonuses to their STR and CON, DR, and comes with powers in PF and 5e, I'd say yes.

FFS, one of their abilities in 5e is literally becoming so angry that they gain a fly speed. If that ain't magical then I don't know what is.

>>50542909

It's heroic. Because it's heroic fantasy. Defining things in comparison to the mundane is pointless, because the characters are not mundane. They're heroes and they do heroic things. The why or how is irrelevant. It's what they do.

>>50542866
You're making stupid assumptions, especially where low-level characters are considered.

Look, I get it. Non-superpowered guys are not your taste. But, let the guy who wants to play a non-magical fighter do his thing.

>>50542870
One of the stronger classes in the game hardly seems to be "suffering" for it.

If you want a martial with magic, YOU HAVE THAT OPTION. Stop imposing that it should be the ONLY option.

>>50542926

I'm not saying someone can't play a non-magical fighter. I'm saying a non-magical fighter, by default, is still superhuman. Nothing makes sense otherwise.

>>50542929
No, they are not. The class, especially at low levels, is within the limits of human ability.

I'm sure you want to try and distort some gamist oversight and demand that your interpretation is the only permissable one, but everything a fighter does can be rationally explained without magic, even if for you it stretched the duspension of disbelief.

>>50542926
There's two things wrong with your post.

1) You're assuming that the Fighter is 100% mundane just because he doesn't use magic
2) You're assuming that anything that the Fighter does is so special that it cannot ever be given to another martial.

If anything, it's you who has trouble accepting that there aren't any non-superhuman martial classes in D&D. Nobody is going to object to a class gaining more power, and if they do then it's because they're going in with the wrong expectation of what a martial in D&D truly represents.

>>50542973
1) The assumption is they CAN be. And that is correct.
2) Multiclassing exists for a reason.

>>50542958
Explain how a Fighter (or martials in general for that matter) is able to fall off a cliff without so much as breaking a pinky bone.

Or how they're able to take a longsword slash and still operate along the same level of proficiency.

Or even how they're capable of killing a dragon at all when they're wielding the proportional equivalent to a toothpick.

>>50527547
>Barbarian is now a Fighter Path
>Bard is now a Rogue Path
>Druid is now a Cleric Path
>Monk is now a Fighter Path
>Paladin is now a Fighter Path
>Ranger is now a Fighter Path
>Sorcerer is now a Wizard Path
>Warlock is now a Wizard Path

Done.

>>50542995
1) No they cannot, otherwise they'd be warrior peasants instead of Fighters.
2) Then what good is the Fighter as a class when its best features would serve better classes?

>>50543005

Well, the middle one is part of the meatpoint fallacy, but the others apply.

>>50527547
bard i hate that class with a passion

>>50542821
>Divine magic is still magic.

This is the kind of shit that lends credence to the theory that D&D causes brain damage.

Heracles was not a magician. He did not do magic. He was never described as magical.

Greek myth did, in fact, include many magic users. They were masters of potions and herbs. One featured prominently in the Odyssey, her name was Circe. There was even a goddess of magic, Hecate. The powers of magic were different than the normal powers of the gods. Different enough that magicians like Circe were specifically called out as such, and different enough to get their own specific deity.

I hope this was simple enough for you to understand.

File: niggacmon.jpg (9KB, 126x126px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 126x126px

>>50527547
Rogue.

>>50542851
>He wasn't even the strongest knight. Look at Lancelot, who had neither magic sword nor scabbard.

Arthur wasn't really a knight, and his role was never concerned with being the strongest.

Also Launcelot was garbage-tier French fanfiction.

>>50543069
Agreed, Gareth is the far better Frenchfiction.

>>50543042
Well put.

I think the problem is that he's confusing Theurgy with Blessings. Heracles had divine strength, but he never called on Zeus to use it. Nor did he have to be in Zeus' good graces to use it; he murdered his family in madness and had to perform labors to atone, but at no point did the power go away. It's simply a fundamental part of his being.

>>50543005
>meatpoints

And, lah dee dah, here you go with this same old shit.

Falling damage is a gamism. If it upsets you for a fighter to brush themselves off after falling from a cliff, just imagine a combination of a fortunate crosswind, parkour, use of their armor and clothes, luck, and soft ground. If you have a naked, bound fighter and are dropping him from a cliff onto some spikes, the DM can rule that as instant death.

And, dragons have weak points, and more often than not a fighter needs at least a magic sword to fight a dragon.

>>50527547
Goodbye, Bard. Go fuck yourself off a cliff, you redundancy.

>>50543132
>Falling damage is a gamism.
Not enough words in the English dictionary to explain how stupid you sound right here.
>If it upsets you for a fighter to brush themselves off after falling from a cliff, just imagine a combination of a fortunate crosswind, parkour, use of their armor and clothes, luck, and soft ground.
Which still wouldn't explain how they're able to survive, let alone survive while suffering no long term injuries, when ordinary people break their twist their ankles just by falling off a skateboard the wrong way.
>And, dragons have weak points, and more often than not a fighter needs at least a magic sword to fight a dragon.
I don't know any creature, real or ephemeral, that would die to the equivalent of a splinter stabbing them in the big toe, whether it was magical or not.

"But it's fantasy" I hear you typing in response, well to that I say "then the Fighter shouldn't be entirely mundane."

You can't have it both ways mate.

>>50543314
>Which still wouldn't explain how they're able to survive, let alone survive while suffering no long term injuries, when ordinary people break their twist their ankles just by falling off a skateboard the wrong way.

He fell in the right way. Ta dah.

>>50543314
>I don't know any creature, real or ephemeral, that would die to the equivalent of a splinter stabbing them in the big toe, whether it was magical or not.

Probably because it's more of the equivalent of someone with a tiny sword slicing your jugular.

This is, like I said earlier, a case of you saying "YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO IMAGINE ANYTHING EXCEPT WHAT I DECREE," when it doesn't really take that much of a stretch of imagination to come up with how a non-magical person could fight a dragon.

This is a very old argument, and your demands that the only way people are allowed to imagine things are unreasonable and, frankly, stupid.

>>50543403
>He fell in the right way. Ta dah.
I don't understand how "he fell the right way. Ta dah." is a good explanation to explain a fantastical occurence but "he's superhuman" is not.

>Probably because it's more of the equivalent of someone with a tiny sword slicing your jugular.
1)The jugular is a major vein in the neck, not the foot.
2)Major arteries located in the lower body would be in the thighs or the top of the foot, again, not the toes.

I learned this in five seconds using google, yet you call me stupid.

>"YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO IMAGINE ANYTHING EXCEPT WHAT I DECREE,"
Which is ironic when this entire argument is you claiming that martials are mundane when all evidence points to the contrary.

Welp, I don't know whether you're a troll, autistic, retarded, or a combination thereof but I've wasted enough time and energy on you.

Here's a (You) for the road, don't bother replying.

>>50543069
>>50542851
also, Lancelot may have had a magical sword and possibly armor as they were both given to him by the Lady of the Lake who pretty much handed out such trinkets as candy to the best knights in King Arthur's court.

>>50528984
Spot on
Gotta make money to make money

File: Weapon of Choice.jpg (12KB, 300x261px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 300x261px

>>50528740
I'm partial to fist weapons.

Please tell me push daggers count as fist weapons.

>>50543545
>I don't understand how "he fell the right way. Ta dah." is a good explanation to explain a fantastical occurence but "he's superhuman" is not.

Because you ignored the earlier explanations, and instead demanded that the only way to fall is the "wrong way."

>1)The jugular is a major vein in the neck, not the foot.

Why do you think the only place he can strike is the toes? That's the wrong way. Stop demanding that the only way to do things is in the wrong ways in order to try and make your point.

>when all evidence points

You mean only the evidence you, you personally, are willing to accept, which only highlights that you are stubborn and close-minded.

>>50528071
I have a problem with Warlocks, thematically speaking. They kind of have to be evil in at least some capacity because they literally sold their soul to either LITERAL DEVILS, fairies, or Cthulu. I wouldn't mind seeing some kind of good-aligned patrons/pacts or even more neutral ones, because of the three right now, we have one L/E, one C/N, and one C/E. Meanwhile, the Paladin has the Antipaladin variant in the DMG and the Oath of Vengeance and can legitimately claim any alignment he wants, whereas Good (or even well-meaning) warlocks have to really stretch the bounds of alignments to justify selling their soul to the fair folk.

File: 1449953132319.jpg (69KB, 900x736px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 900x736px

>>50544572
>Literally sold their soul
Not necessarily.
There are no hard rules on what the pact entails, that is left entirely to the DM and players to decide. A devil or demon might simply call upon a favor in a time of need, or have planned ahead to either have the warlock help with something that waterfalls into their benefit (such as joining your standard protagonist Justice League going off and killing a big bad who happens to owe a debt or rival the patron) or plan for them to lust for their power and wind up corrupting themselves.
A fey lord might require a brief favor, or do it simply on whimsy or because they'd like a good show to watch and choose a cute looking mortal to give it to them.
Great old ones are unknowable and typically beyond the standard metaphysical affairs of "souls", and some don't care or know that mortals exist and can tap into them.
A warlock of any patron (mechanically, though undoubtedly some specific specimens would be more selective) can be good. As for the patrons themselves, fiends can fall anywhere on the evil spectrum, fey can fall anywhere across the board, and GOOs can fall anywhere or be unaligned.
Oh, and there's Undying pact, which can be just about anywhere depending on the specific fluff example (right in their own examples they describe several variously aligned patrons)
There's the UA Undying Light patron, but the Plane of Positive Energy isn't necessarily "good" persay.

>>50527547
Bard. There isn't enough there for it to be an entire class unto itself. At best, it's a feat chain.