Barbarians, Rogues, Bards, Monks, Rangers, Paladins, Clerics,

File: 1476808995837.gif (273KB, 288x200px) Image search: [Google]

273KB, 288x200px

>>50670016
Just make the game classless you mongoloid.

>because who doesn't want a swordsman who can turn into a bear?
So you argue that having so many classes is arbitrary and there's no need to make that division, and then you shoot yourself in the foot here by further breaking down the division between Warrior and Mage to being arbitrary.

Don't pussy out, just play a classless system.

You could try to create a branching system where people start as a recruit or an adept. Then they choose talents and and advance to other classes based on their choices. Adept splinters to priest and mage. Priest splinters to druid and cleric. Druid splinters to Fanged Fury and Ancient One. And so on and so forth.

Remove Fighters, Wizards, and Rogues. Leave the specialised roles.

>>50670016
Classless system.
Allocate stats and pick higher Hit point or Spell point die.
Basically one die is a 1d6 and the other is a 1d10.
Or you can make both a 1d8.

Use spell points on magic and magical features.

All other features come from lists with preqisites (needed stat and all that jizz) and you use pouintbuy to get them..

File: 234627345.jpg (46KB, 480x320px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 480x320px

I'd honestly go the route of >>50672814 as well. One of the things I liked about the original Final Fantasy is how they almost had sort of a prestige class system partway through the game. You started out with your Fighter doing their fighter things and your Thief pretty much being a quicker Fighter, and it's kind of dull because they just hit things. But eventually the Fighter got white magic and became a Paladin while the Thief got black magic and turned into a Ninja. There's no straight "martial" class anymore, except the Monk/Master (who could frankly just be folded into what the Ninja does, or remain a martial that uses ki as a pseudo-magic).

>>50670016
What are you talking about?

Barbarians serve as a conduit to primal forces, granting them supernatural abilities while raging, while also being masters of heavy weapons.
Rogues are very skilled and have great movement and some single target debuff options.
Bards have many unique buffs and repositioning powers probably second only to the warlord on top of being incredible skillmonkeys.
Rangers are the absolute masters of single target damage with bows and dual weapons, and having some mundane utility based around survival, plus the optional (though not that great) beast mastery.
Paladins enforce and spread their divine marks around like crazy, protecting allies from multiple enemies at once, and have Lay on Hands for a sort of retro-active tanking.
Clerics are the best healers/buffers in the game, and also have many, many alternate builds because they are so well supported. And they also have ritual casting for religious rites.
Druids have a unique niche in being mobile switch hitters with their beast form, and having a lot of summon options for covering basically any kind of secondary role. And of course can use primal rites. There's also the more summon-y variant and the beastmaster type which is, again, less good but hybrids well.

Sure, Fighter and Wizard could try to emulate some of those and do decently well (as they are, quite frankly, waaaay over supported), but saying that you could just up and replace them is quite a hyperbole.

>Basically what I'm getting at is shit like Rage, Favored enemy, etc, don't deserve an entire class built around it...
... oh. That explains it. You are playing a shit edition with no defined roles or role protection, and assuming it's the only class system that exists. A rookie mistake that's easy to remedy, thankfully.

File: drow rogue.jpg (40KB, 736x556px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 736x556px

Rolled 5, 3, 1, 6, 5, 6, 6, 5, 1, 3 = 41 (10d6)

>>50670016
>I purposefully excluded the "skilled" class because frankly, either one of them could be "skillful" and doesn't deserve an archetype of it's own.

Fuck you too! Take some sneak attack damage, asshole.

>>50670046
This

>>50670016
>and there's no reason a mage character couldn't take those

Yes, there is. It's called: YOU STILL NEED TO SLEEP, DUMBASS.

By this logic there's no reason why a top-tier lawyer couldn't also be a mixed martial arts master. There are only so many hours in a day, in which you can spend only so much time learning to do things. A mage can't learn to Rage, or take time off to learn everything there is to know about dragons, without sacrificing time that he would spend learning new spells.

Now, a classless system represents this fairly well since you can stop progressing in Magic to learn Fighting or Tracking or whatever, but the idea (if not necessarily the execution) of classes is supposed to be a pre-packaged set of abilities that allow you to become the best at a given set of skills.

That is, you can have a classless system, decide you want to become the best at disarming traps and sneaking around, and take various abilities to enable that...or you can just have a class system and take the Rogue class. And then if you want some magic on the side, that's what multi-classing is for.

In either case your basic premise of "lol mages should be able to Rage like barbarians without losing their magic ability" is fundamentally flawed because there just are not enough hours in the day to master two wildly different skills sets at the same time, to the point of becoming a notable exemplar of both skill sets (again, at the same time).

Note that in real life, for example, Arnold Schwarzenegger is an incredibly fit and intelligent man, but he didn't try to become Mr. Universe AND a major Hollywood actor AND pursue politics simultaneously, and his time spent in one field necessarily cut into his time in other fields.

>>50674160
>YOU STILL NEED TO SLEEP, DUMBASS.
Unless you're an Elf.

>>50670016
You know, I was going to write a few paragraphs about why I think you're wrong, but I'm 100% sure I've seen this exact idea several times.
Just fucking play classless.
If you actually do want to play a branching class system, look up some video game ability charts, hopefully from an actually good game.

>>50674188
Well, they still need to trance for 4 hours. The problem is somewhat mitigated, but by no means negated entirely.

>I don't like redundant classes
>therefore I can't have any classes

Nice meme /tg/

There is literally nothing wrong with having a few tight, refined and well crafted balanced classes. How can you tell me there is anything wrong with Warrior, Thief, and Mage?

>>50674510
>How can you tell me there is anything wrong with Warrior, Thief, and Mage?
Just because you spend most of your time practicing the art of chopping people's heads off doesn't mean you can achieve proficiency in hiding your bulky body behind a tree.
Just because you have spell slots doesn't mean you need to waste one on Knock instead of also carrying a few lock pick in one of your many pockets next to the bat guano.

>>50674802

Nobody said those classes can't have alternate skills, universal stats and simple GM fiat.

So I repeat, why is it wrong to keep your game tight, focused, and creative by enforcing a simple class structure for players to whittle and play with?