>>3847652
Yeah, a bard

>>3847652
Lmao, dude forgor Priest.

>>3847653
derived from rogue
>>3847657
derived from mage

>>3847667
Mage is a godless bitch or a witch unless it's some hybrid. You might as well bash rogue into warrior since both are about killing enemies with weapons following your logic.
>b-but he can sneak
And Warrior can just run around tanking incoming damage and ignoring enemies, Wizard could turn invisible, fly, phase through walls and teleport (depends on how generous the author with that, I think in Wizardry it was basically limitless and you just had to set the coordinates). In fact, nothing stops them from being able to sneak too except devs' arbitrary rules.
>l-lockpicking
Destroying the lock or opening it with magic.
>s-stealing
You can just pick that stuff off the corpse or the dev can stop being lazy bitch and give Warrior Take Away skill and Mage Empty Enemy's Bag spell.

>>3847671
In fact, if you dislike arbitrary division into classes, you might as well make the player's class "Hero"/"Battle Philosopher" (philosophy is the mother of all science and learning it was arbitrarily divided into in order to dumb down the thinken men who'd want to learn stuff by tunnel-visionning them into dumb shit like biologists/chemists/psychologists/etc). If you want to balance this you just set some caps on how much stuff the player character(s) can learn.

Yeah, a cleric.

>>3847652
Let me guess, you like the most boring basic archetypes

>>3847683
Boring is good. Boring is reliable. If it doesn't work, you can always hit him with it.

>>3847652
>needing classes at all

>>3847652
Even DAO has multiple specializations per class.

Tried playing this again recently and I just couldn't. Fucking terrible.

>>3847653
meme class, one of the worst things to ever happen to RPGs

>>3847652
I need less, rogue is unnecessary

You only need martial and magic. Any class is just some variation of these.

File: KnightMM3.png (185 KB, 407x501)

185 KB PNG

>>3847652
Yes.
>Knight
>Barbarian
>Robber
>Ninja
>Archer
>Sorcerer
>Paladin
>Cleric
>Ranger
>Druid

>>3847706
Kind of same here, just restarted it a week ago. The origin and everything up until you leave Lothering was great, but I couldn't play it for long afterwards. I think it's the combat. It's a perfectly serviceable rtwp system, but the enemy variety is very bad and itemization is mediocre and doesn't give the melee classes much to play with compared to what the mages can do. It's a shame that criticisms of the combat system made them turn every other game in the series into le ebin ARPG meme instead of just addressing the issues at hand.

>>3847652
For me it's POE2's class system

>>3847763
All superfluous. Nothing but different flavours of warrior, rogue and mage.
>Cleric
Priests are noncombatants.

File: Yu Mo Gui Gwai Fai Di Zao.jpg (692 KB, 1075x1600)

692 KB JPG

>>3847774
Not when the living dead require dispelling, anon.

>>3847652
I get warrior and mage since they embody the duality of matter and mind, but a rogue never really fit nearly into the triangle. My main problem with it is that they're a sort of specialist that specializes in doing only 2 things well (subterfuge and sneak attacking). Rogue should just be a skill expert.

>>3847784
*neatly

>>3847784
Aren't they? They get the Deft Hands tree, not to mention they get skill points every two levels instead of three.

>>3847683
>I need my RPG class to be a synonym derived from a thesaurus in order to be interested in it.

File: classe.gif (46 KB, 472x352)

46 KB GIF

>>3847652
>Fighter
>Thief
>Mage
>Priest
>Samurai
>Lord
>Bishop
>Ninja
Just the basics.

>>3847737
Only for modern, WoW-inspired slop where rogues are just combat units that have their own little gimmick.

>>3847784
>stealth
>steal/pickpocket/plant
>lockpick
>set/disarm traps
>use poisons
>detect illusions
Where are martials or casters going to even get any of these skills? The fucken thieves guild, mate. If anything is missing from RPGs, it's builders/craftsmen.

>>3847652
Modern RPGs just give lipservice to classes. It's just "damage with big weapon, damage with fast weapon, damage with magic poof" flavors now.

Originally, classes were defined by actual function. A Bard was the face and heart of the adventuring party. A cleric was a conduit of godly protection while in dark places. A fighter was literally that- a fighter; your primary means of facing and fending off threats with violence. A "rogue" was not a rogue but a thief; Bilbo the burglar. A mage wasn't the slinger of spells, but the expert of the esoteric invisible.

RPGs *should* have more classes. Going for parity between classes was the greatest mistake.

I don't understand why people want tons of classes. Just write it into your background
Honestly id prefer
>Martial
>magic user
>elf
>dwarf

For playable classes. I think that's way more interesting. Not enough is done to make these decisions feel impactful. Playing a different race is just a coat of paint. Its boring. It should be a class and color everything about you and your capabilities. Completely unique spells and abilities that show how you deal with the world.
RPGs should not have more classes at all. Classes should give you enough to base your character on. Not try to provide a backstop in and of themselves. I'm not a grognsrd but even as a kid I thought it was plain weird that paladin was a base class.
Why can't a rogue just be a martial that you made a specific way? I don't get it. Why does your character sheet have to say rogue or wizard or cleric.

>>3847805
I agree with everything except,
>RPGs *should* have more classes.
More classes doesn't really solve the issue because you can brainstorm a bajillion flavors for something. What you need in a practical sense is distinct class playstyle within the context of the game engine, ruleset, campaign, etc.

>>3847787
>>3847804
I meant skill experts in the sense they can focus on specializing in certain skills that aren't just limited to skullduggery. Also yes I'm aware that rogues in D&D aren't actually limited to just stealth, but their kit revolves primarily around disengaging in combat and performing fancy dual wield sneak attack maneuvers for big damage.
>builder/craftsmen
That's the thing, the skeletal framework for the obligatory "skill monkey" role could easily fit the specialist role the rogue technically is, they just don't because it's not what you think when you seed a hooded assassin.

I don't understand a why people love the pathfinder video games classes. None of the hair splitting classes feels all that different

>>3847808
What you want is more AD&D, bit that's literally the opposite direction that things are going.

>>3847811
*see a hooded assassin

>>3847652
>Rogue
Fake newfag class. It's a fucking thief.

>>3847811
Anon, pls. Skills are the foundation for any profession and all can be reduced to "skill monkey" with a different flavor. What you can't do is lump the square blocks with the circle blocks and call it a day. Rogues are nothing like craftsmen.

>>3847814
I've never played table top so i wouldn't know.

But developers seem to miss so much that Legolas wasn't just Aragorn but an elf, he was completely unique. I'd want to go more in that direction.

>>3847816
>It's a fucking thief.
For real.

>>3847820
Nah he's right. Be a bit more flexible and less pedantic

>>3847816
Thief was such a better name for it

>>3847820
>Skills are the foundation for any profession and all can be reduced to "skill monkey" with a different flavor.
I'm not disputing that, but if we're being extremely reductive here, then the 3 main pillars of RPG class design boils down to "combat/magic/skills". Stealth is a skill.
>What you can't do is lump the square blocks with the circle blocks and call it a day. Rogues are nothing like craftsmen.
It's a square hole because the original designers for D&D made it so. What I'm actually saying is the rogue shouldn't even be a rogue, but an "expert". This isn't to say we shouldn't have D&D styled thieves, but that they should be an expert that specializes in stealth and dungeoneering instead of being a stealth guy that happens to have polymathic capabilities.

By the way, I'm actually directly ripping this idea off from TTRPGs that attempted this novel spin on the RPG trinity formula in the past, such as Stars/Worlds Without Number by Kevin Crawford. It just makes perfect sense.

The "clerics are actually just spellswords" retard hasn't made a thread in a while. What's up, bro?

>>3847816
>>3847824
>>3847829
Why? Thief means just stealing things. Rogue implies a criminal with a wider general skillset like being good at combat like fucking Zorro or Grey Mouser or all the lovable rogues from fiction. You barely ever pickpocket in most RPGs compared to unlocking chests or stabbing enemies from the back, let's be real.

>>3847835
But rogue still comes with a bunch of baggage heavily associated with thieves anyways.

>>3847835
>Zorro
Fighter
>Grey Mouser
Fighter/Mage/Thief

DAO cheats because it doesn't have 3 classes, it has like 20. It just has 3 base starting points to go from before you specialize.

>>3847804
>Where are martials or casters going to even get any of these skills?
Does anyone actually lockpick in games where a mage can learn Knock?

>>3847652
A Warlock, a Chained Summoner and a Shapeshifter would be nice.

>>3847867
Knock is a waste of a spell slot. All the best loot is on bodies usually anyway, because why wouldn't the enemy be using their powerful gear in the first place rather than locking it away.

>>3847867
Knock doesn't work on warded locks, and in later iterations creates so much noise it effectively fails the campaign.

>>3847872
>knock knock
>who’s there
>orange
>orange who
>orange you glad you rolled a paladin instead of this shit

>>3847652
rogue is just a shittier warrior

you only need warrior and mage

>>3847652
>You "need" more?
Yes. All my favourite RPGs are ones with tons of classes and/or abilities to choose from, like FF5, Crystal Project, and Dragon's Dogma.

I really, really hope other games shamelessly steal Dragon's Dogma's Magick Archer class. One of my favourite non-standard RPG classes.

>>3847867
>Does anyone actually lockpick in games where a mage can learn Knock?


>Does anyone actually lockpick in games where a warrior can just break down a door with his axe?

Rogues are trash. Sub-par fighters with skills that anyone with two braincells should be able to learn.

Mage and Rogue are also too much desu.
Im a lazy piece of shit so i always role warrior cause its the easiest to play (exception confirming the rule)

>>3847865
Every character gets two specializations, though. Unless you're Sten, in which case, fuck you, or you're Dog or Shale, in which case it doesn't even matter.

>>3847652
>no class with a combination of melee and magic
errrmmm yes I do need more

>>3847808
>Honestly id prefer
>Martial
>magic user
>elf
>dwarf
Those are all classes too though.

File: b0037836_1229235.jpg (642 KB, 2000x2640)

642 KB JPG

>>3848680
That's called an Elf, anon.

>>3847774
>Priests are noncombatants.
And this confirms what we all suspected, you want to be a sissy gay healslut.

>>3848730
??? Weird projecting fag

>>3848678
I didn't mean the specializations, though they also count as classes. I meant the weapon/spell focus trees

>>3847652
I need even less. Classes are for faggots. Classless or get the fuck out.

>>3847652
Cleric.

All other classes are derived from Fighter, Rogue, Wizard, Cleric.

>>3847652
Yup, LORD

>>3847652
>Warrior
You mean Fighter?

>Mage
You mean Magic User?

>Rogue
You mean Thief?

>Let me guess. You "need" more?
Yeah, where is Elf?

For me, it’s cavalier

>>3848890
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>race as class
Shiggy diggy

>>3848891
Based

Swashbuckler, Emissary, Pimp, Marshall, and Apothecary are also acceptable.

>>3847681
that's just a warrior with magic

>>3848869
Clerics in classic RPGs are fighters who wear heavy armor and wield maces.

>>3848895
Hello zoomzoom.

>>3848998
Race and class were separate, as they should be, in AD&D, Mr. Grognard.

physical character -> fighter
magical character -> magic user
hybrid -> cleric

everything else neatly fits into those three, and branching out classes more than this dilutes the potential of all them

>>3849009
Go back further than that…

>>3849092
This guy Hexens

>>3847686
Unappreciated Snatch

You only need mage. Magic can do anything.

You only need warrior. The indomitable human spirit can do anything.

>>3849169
>>3849170
You only need bard. Conning mages and warriors into working for you can do anything.

>>3848890
You have to admit, Mage is better than Magic User. There's arguments to be had over whether Thief or Rogue is the better name, but Magic User is undeniably shit.

>>3849181
Magician or Magus is better, Mage sounds like lazy slang.

File: 1Z.jpg (588 KB, 3154x2493)

588 KB JPG

this while thread is kinda pointless, warrior, mage and thief are the main pillars from all other classes, having a game with just those three is fine and having a game with any variation (or new additions) of picrel is also fine

>>3849246
>warrior, mage and thief are the main pillars from all other classes
why

>>3849161
your mom's overappreciated snatch

File: psQ1Tbr.jpg (370 KB, 707x1024)

370 KB JPG

>>3847652
>might
>mind
>technique

>>3847652
I don't need. I want.

>>3849257
nta but because it represents the 3 kinds of playstyles
>skill-focused (thief)
>magic-focused (mage/wizard)
>physical-focused (fighter)
People will bring up Bard but they forget that Bards are really just thief/mage hybrids, they're skill-focused characters that have some limited spells.

>>3849246
>battle-priest is closer to mage than cleric
>battlemage is closer to fighter than cleric
Immediately discarded.

>>3849310
how are those the three distinct playstyles?
a fighter wouldn't use skills, and a thief wouldn't be physical?
It really doesn't seem applicable to video games.

>>3847652
What are the best RPGs where you can actually get away with running a simple party like that?

>>3847652
To add to this very powerful post, the warrior is red, the mage is blue, and the rogue is green.

Average Pathfinder character, having 15 classes, all of them broken: "3 classes? Pathetic"

>>3849383
All shall know the glory of Gundolon.

>>3847652
Yeah, a Cleric, for the healing and turning of undead, and to be a backup fighter. The traditional DnD party had this setup for a reason.

It feels like I do, because I don’t like how the fighter always has to be slow. Every god damn time there’s a fighter, he’s the slowest and the dumbest and therefore the most useless. They’re pretty much depicted as dumb cavemen that only know how to hit enemies in one single way.

>>3849414
Depends of the campaign. Casters are pretty useless on lowlevel. If party isn't going to progress to levels 10+, team of fighters and thieves is totally viable. On high levels - yes. Mages wipe entire rooms, buffed cleric becomes melee rapetrain, while warrior and thief look pale.

>>3849418
That's why in early DND nobody used pure fighter (and pretty much pure thief too). Either multiclasses, or other combat classes like paladin or ranger

>>3848722
classic odnd elf was mage OR warrior not mage AND warrior

>>3847652
Yes I want more classes. I grew up with FF5 so the first time i saw a PHB i was like ' where are ninja, mystic knight and blue mage?' where is the cool shit?

>>3849181
Magic User just sounds as if it was a lazy translation of 魔法使い.

>>3847652
Yessir!

>>3849445
Wrong. Pure fighter was awesome in early D&D, you got a castle and everything.

>>3849340
In the sense of classic RPGs, thieves/rogues can technically fight (poorly) but they're primarily a utility class brought for dealing with things like locked chests and doors.

>>3849463
He wasn't. Fighter was just a little bit better than paladin in bonking things, but missed all the stuff that paladin have, like saves or holy avenger.

>>3849487
yeah I play dnd, by referencing it you're not answering the question
Why those three, and those three only(example, why not a tetrahedron with priest in one of the corners), and why it is relevant for structuring video games.

To put it bluntly, the triangle is shit, and doesn't bring it down to any real sense of 3 core attributes we use in video games.
I think healing is often implemented poorly as a mechanic, but it would be more honest to make triangle with Tank-DD-Healer as main pillars and placing classes between them if you were to make class triangle(you probably shouldn't)

>but you don't only solve problems through fighting
then where is charisma, it's very different to solve a problem through sneaking/lock picking, and manipulating people.

>>3849490
>but it would be more honest to make triangle with Tank-DD-Healer as main pillars and placing classes between them if you were to make class triangle
It sounds like you're just thinking of MMOs, and in that example there's no room for utility classes like thieves and bards. Mage is broad enough that priests can be slotted into that section (as they are in that image). Magicians in many real cultures and systems of magic are just high level priests.
>then where is charisma
That's part of the utility end, labelled rogue. Think about a spy, they're rogues who use charisma. You could call the rogue corner 'grifter' or something instead if you wanted but it would be the same result.

>>3849494
No I'm not just thinking of MMOs, I am also thinking of MMOs and games that also have that trichotomy, I'm showing how the triangle is limited by pointing to a trichotomy that exists in some rpgs like MMOs, which means it is enough to disprove the original claim.
>and in that example there's no room for utility classes like thieves and bards
Sure you could, wouldn't be great, but wouldn't be any worse than the triangle already is.
It wouldn't cover every nuance those classes may have, but neither does this existing triangle.
>Mage is broad enough that priests can be slotted into that section
>(as they are in that image).
As they are not, there's a cleric, there's battle-priest, but not priest.

A half step between mage and warrior forming battle-mage makes great sense.
Little else does.
Thief taking one step towards mage, and you land at cat-burglar?
That's nonsense, that's just another type of thief, not any more or less magical.
It's arbitrary, you can as easily claim that Thief is unnecessary, and make your 3 base points be Martial-Priest-Mage and say Thief is just a martial that's a bit further to the mage side since they use their intelligence more.

>>3849494
CRPG's are halfway between tabletop and MMO. Because in tabletop any class is utility class - you just look for creative ways to utilize stats, background, etc. In crpg you get much more fighting and less interaction.

>>3849340
Generally, a fighter who's really good at fightng would be kinda dumb as bricks and mainly useful for making monster-based threats go away via death. As the other guy said, it's not that a thief CAN'T fight, but the entire reason Sneak Attacks exist is to give them a bonus because they're so bad at fighting otherwise.

>>3849490
>why not a tetrahedron with priest in one of the corners
Because clerics are bullshit.
>they can buff and debuff
>can nuke
>can can heal
>can absolutely body enemies in melee
>are arguably the best "solo" class in the tabletop
>can wear heavy armor while still having full casting and get some of the best weapons in the game while buffing themselves to hell and back
War cleric is literally a better paladin than paladins if built right

File: BECMI Elf.png (482 KB, 670x852)

482 KB PNG

>>3849447
BECMI Elf was both.

File: 8e2127ef-8464-4de5-b629-6(...).gif (265 KB, 400x217)

265 KB GIF

>>3849288

File: classes.jpg (424 KB, 640x1652)

424 KB JPG

What good is it if a class system doesn't let me be the Pope?

>>3847652
For me, it's warrior/mage/thief

>>3847652
Cleric.

File: Spoiler Image (382 KB, 960x720)

382 KB JPG

>>3850014
I'll make the honorable choice.

>>3849488
>He wasn't. Fighter was just a little bit better than paladin in bonking things, but missed all the stuff that paladin have, like saves or holy avenger.
No, in early D&D fighters were awesome. You have no idea what you are talking about.

>>3847652
Cute healer girl(male)

>>3847652
>Warrior
>Cleric
>Mage
>Rogue

>>3847652
You can cut away Rogue, most of Rogue's skills are either about fighting in melee (albeit using sneakynigger, dirty tactics) or should be generic and bounded more to background than anything.

I need a minimum of 50 classes with edgy names like Spelldexter and the game should contain a minimum of 69 waifus.

>>3850694
Unironically this. There's no beating something like an "Urban" subset of archetypes on rage-based 2/3 spellcasters in Pathfinder. So what if it's a "Warrior"? That "Warrior" can do Tenser while making everyone better at reflex saves and ranged combat.

Also, who cares that Kinetic Knight is just another "Warrior"? No classic "Warrior" can ignore armor and magnetize enemies.

File: luscious lucius.jpg (141 KB, 600x915)

141 KB JPG

>>3850155
Based

>>3850003
this image is extremely based.
I have a hobbit pope in my long term DnD game

>>3847652
Everyone in the world needs more, that's why they added so many specializations to fill in the gaps.

>>3847652
who heals in that party bruv? The mage? xD :D

My campaign has like 52 class options


Fighter
Wizard
Cleric
Thief
Paladin
Ranger
Barbarian
Sorcerer

Druid
Monk
Commander
Bard
Necromancer
Chaos Mage
Occultist
Demonologist

Pact Mage
Swordmage
Psion
Soulknife
Abomination
Fateweaver
Savage
Summoner

Slayer
Daemonhost
Tinkerer
Alchemist
Artificer
Scholar
Illusionist
Brewmaster
Avenger
Swordsage
Binder


Medic
Lord
Marine
Heavy
Sniper
Gunslinger
Battler

Rebel
Marauder
Voudoun
Shaman
Thane
Brute
Swordmaster
Berzerker
Templar

>>3847652
Yes, a Noble or a Diplomat class.

>>3852561
play a dancer you obvious whore

>>3852557
Oh yeah? My campaign has all of those plus Arithmetician. Your move.

>>3852609
>Arithmetician
>didn’t sum up the classes in anons post to realize that he only had 51 classes, not 52
Shameful display, both of you.

>>3852609
Considering my shitposts have gotten some of the classes onto muh fantasy game's system refrence document I would say you are lying and I am not. The pathfinder final fantasy fd20 game has a badass calculator class though. Fucking zany prestige classes in that game. Dming pathfinder is a nightmare and i find DMing my game smooth as butter. Tiny monster statblocks with built in ai is a breeze to over-prep for so its easy to populate an expansive sandbox .

all of muh classes are real.

S Rogue+Rebel, Cleric, Swordmage, Savage, Illusionist, Swordsage, Marine, Wizard
A Fighter+Thane, Sorcerer, Commander , Fatewaver, Slayer , Gunslinger, Lord , Heavy, Occultist, Chaos Mage
B Ranger , Monk , Pact Mage, Abomination ,Medic, Necromancer, Swordmaster , Brute, Bezerker , Shaman, Sniper, Bard
C Scholar, Demonologist, Psion , Soulknife , Tinkerer, Alchemist, Brewmaster , Fury , Battler , Voudoun , Avenger
D Druid, Barbarian, Paladin, Daemonhost, Binder, Templar, Summoner,
E Marauder, Artificer

File: DF dancer class.png (629 KB, 1600x3298)

629 KB PNG

>>3847652
>Let me guess. You "need" more?
Y E S

>>3852568
way ahead of ya

>>3849181
Magic user and fighter are the best precisely because they are so open ended. You can call yourself a sorcerer or a magus or a witch, that's the beauty of it. Once you start defining every single one of those words it gets very confusing for outsiders trying out the hobby.

>>3852870
Its okay to have different gimmicks in each class though. Wizards have their spellbook. Sorcerers have their bloodlines and gather power. Witches have the most important familiar , get more support magic including healing but trade blasting for curses because women like to heal

When I'm talking to someone new to the genre I just ask them what kind of character they envision themselves as. Sometimes they know they want to be a barbarian or just have a vauge idea like ' i want spells' or 'i want a rapier' So then I'll ask them a few questions and list a few relevant options

>>3847667
Clerics came before thieves you retard.

>>3848994
Clerics came out at the same time in tabletop you fucking maroon. They're both fundamental classes.

>>3852964
there have been several games that try to crush cleric back into magic user. It can be a good way to make the game feel 1/3rd magical instead of half magical.

Starting with Fighter, Cleric and Wizard is the birth of the class system because right from the gate you have Function 1 and Function 2a and 2b with squishy offensive caster and support caster who gets targeted and thus needs defense ( though allegedly the cleric prototype was more of a vampire hunter- this is where turn undead came from) Thief is definitely function 3 and there is rarely a real function 4 in dungeon game.

More games should do fun religions like dungeon crawl stone soup.

>>3853569
>though allegedly the cleric prototype was more of a vampire hunter- this is where turn undead came from
This is precisely where the DnD cleric came from. Someone wanted to play Van Helsing and so the DM rolled up vampire hunter homebrew. It was at either Gygax’s table or another one of the big name real early DnD guys, can’t remember his name off the top of my head.

>>3847698
classes should be factions dependent on attributes
skills should be gatekept by your attributes
perhaps you can learn some skills from your faction, and that's an incentive for joining, but you can also learn skills by yourself

>>3849257
>fighter
Has all combat skills. ONLY combat skills and feats.
>rogue
Same as above but stealth and such.
>mage
Same as the two above except magic/arcane.

All derived classes are a mix of the three. Some have 50% of combat skills, 30% of stealth, and 20% of magic. Some are 90% magic and just 5% combat and stealth each. Shit like that.

And why three? Because three distinct archetypes, which beget multitude of other classes due to pattern formation.

>>3853773
what about classes that gain their magic from other sources, not arcane?
>but... but... that's still a mage
then every class is a mage
fighter strength and skill are supernatural therefore "magic"
rogue stealth and such are supernatural, therefore "magic"

there is only one class
the mage
strength mage, vs dex mage, vs int mage etc...

>>3853569
Clerics in modern tabletop are more like function x, in that they can blend roles together and serve as a flex slot depending on their god, domain, etc. Even clerics in the real old stuff felt more like function 1.5, and while they can still serve that role, that's pretty much what paladins are designed for now.

>>3853773
This is simply incorrect and shows you don't know the history of how tabletop classes were created.

>>3847652
>Rogue
I need it called a thief

>>3853868
For me, it’s rouge

>>3847652
I don't want to be restricted by class. If I find cool shit I should be able to use it

>>3853818
>what about classes that gain their magic from other sources, not arcane?
First you have to define what magic is. Then you have to specify sources. Point is no matter how you try to twist it a guy who uses divinations from entrails of some not-so-giant bugs is still a mage - he may not be able to cast a fireball, but sure does know how to read portents, brew some potions, place a hex, or ward off some spirits. Mage as a concept is not an issue. The issue is how many sources of magic are there and just how many different skills are there that allow use/manipulation of magic and fundamental forces of nature. You can even make an argument that a scientist is just a mage with no magic source and so does things that are considered magic by those who dont know what chemistry or physics are.

>>3853880
If you are not trained in use of the cool shit you found, you should not be able to use it, because if you do, you will have some VERY hefty penalties, and managing those is something you will bitch and moan about endlessly.

>>3853827
I dont care about how tabletop classes were created. There has to be a defined logic to the system, and from what i have seen, in tabletop there is barely any.

>>3853911
If you're going to view magic so broadly then there is no meaningful distinction between fighter and thief either; they're both just relying on physical prowess, just as mages and clerics are relying upon magic.

File: Spoiler Image (81 KB, 399x819)

81 KB JPG

>>3853876
>i larp men plowing me

>>3853826
yeah I personally think we should split holy cleric and pagan clerics into seperate classes

>>3853935
Is this what we've come to, how dare you assume my deity gender pronouns? It's a healslut. Don't complicate it.

>>3853938
I think healing is a christian thing that few other major religions center on

>>3853826
That's not even a modern tabletop thing, clerics have always been a "whatever the fuck you need them to be" class because they can really do basically anything, they're so flexible, to the point that I still have a hard time believing Mordenkainen was a wizard with how much favoritism clerics got.

>>3853938
>cleric
>healslut
No, this is a concept born out of WoW's Priest class being a robes-wearing healer, not a dude in full plate who nukes half the field because divine magic can't be resisted

>>3853956
Nah. It's a concept born of your or your mates gf hassling you to join your college or highschool group but being too dumb to actually participate.

>>3853952
You should double check that anon since it's absolute nonsense. First what are christians and why do you feel the need to insert rl shit into a fantasy setting? And second mudslimes had houses of healing and medical schools, injins had medicine man, celts had druids... Wise men and herbalists and so and so go hand to hand with religion organized or otherwise. If anything west moved away from medicine and religion during the enlightenment with corpse autopsies in universities and such.

>>3847667
rogue is derived from warrior

>>3853956
Not to mention to specialization against undead. Deus Vult Miracle using Van Helsings are a better way to think of OG clerics.

File: tif9xaefv6gd1.jpg (252 KB, 1290x1367)

252 KB JPG

>cope intensifies

>>3853956
what nuke spell are u casting, laser preists werent a thing for a long time

healsluts started with rosa in ff2, not in anaheim

>>3853964
the fantasy genre has good and evil, good and evil is a christian concept. This is true both in gygax's game and in tolkein

>>3853989
>newfag tries to relate

>>3853995
*tips fedora*

>>3853995
>good and evil is a christian concept
zoroastrian ackshually

>>3853995
gygax and tolkein were not Zoroastrians dumbass

>>3853994
>what nuke spell are u casting,
Priests in the beginning, and I mean very beginning, Original D&D that followed from Chainmail, had the hilariously overpowered Flamestrike. Which granted is not a divine spell but being a divine caster, the priest gets to cast spells with no penalty while in full armor with a shield.

>>3853911
you never answered my point
a fighter is a mage, cause his physical strength is supernatural therefore magic
and a thief is a mage because his dexterity is supernatural therefore magic
their skills do not exist in our non-magic Earth, therefore the only conclusion is that they are "magic"

like I said the only sensible conclusion if you go down this route is that "everyone is a mage"

>>3854011
Genuine question. Are you a retard?

The idea of what tabletop thief / rogue classes are is just as fantastical as a fucking wizard. Solo operators sneaking into a heavily guarded castle at night by weaving through the shadows and blackjacking patrols in order to steal the princess's golden dildo is not something that ever happened. In reality thieves are just thugs who ambush you on the road, pickpockets, or confidence men who weasel their way into an organization in order to rob it. This grappling up European style castle walls to break into the royal vault shit is retarded and contrived by historically illiterate mongoloids.

>>3848887
>>3849246
Seeing my first reply with your pic made me think of a game... and I'm a Trickster so yeah, I lied about a Lord being a fourth class, the real 4th is indeed Bard. Sing songs to boost spirits and win battles!

>>3847921
>I really, really hope other games shamelessly steal Dragon's Dogma's Magick Archer class. One of my favourite non-standard RPG classes.
You could just go back to all other pre-dd games featuring it, the class concept has been a thing at the very least since dnd 3.5, likely way earlier.

>>3854341
Those are usually actual magical archers, using arrows and enchanting them with spells. DD Magick Archer basically fires mini spells without using physical arrows. If anything it'd be closer to psions and kineticists in tabletop, classes that can fire offensive magic quickly, reliably and without buring resources, but their abilities are more specific/restricted than traditional spells. They also have cool non-bow abilities, like the ability to instantly set themselves on fire, which damages any enemy that holds onto them or that they climb.

>>3854675
It's kinda stupid when you think about it, why have a bow at all? Like what physical use is it? It could easily just be a magic wand.

>>3854697
>why have a bow at all?
Multiple reasons
>looks cool
>it's aimed like a bow and fires projectiles that mimic the motion of physical projectiles rather than travelling like spells. Which includes things like firing shots upwards so they arc downwards and hit enemies from above, firing shots one at a time, and having them ricochet off surfaces
>emphasises the 'martial' nature of their magic usage vs actual spellcasters
>it's not the focus of their magic, only their magic shots. They can use magic with/through their daggers too
>game mechanics
The last one is the most important. In Dragon's Dogma your abilities are associated with your weapon type; every class gets unique skills + skills shared with all classes with that weapon. A wand would look quite similar to the staves and archistaves used by Mages and Sorcerers, whose skills are very different. Having it be an entirely different weapon type increases visual distinction between them, and helps reflect the fact the class represents a cross between magic and archery. You want archery to be visible in that from an aesthetic standpoint. Oh and
>it looks cool

>>3847921
4e has the seeker class as a base class arcane archer

>>3847652
Well, there were advanced classes within those 3 archetypes. I especially loved the Arcane Warrior that was a mage that used their willpower stat as a strength replacement so they could equip armor and weapons.

>>3854743
That's my point, it's arbitrary and dumb. A class built on an aesthetic with no logic, a wizard larping as an archer. You don't have to reinforce it.

>>3854935
>it's arbitrary
Most classes are. Arguably all classes are.
>dumb
Subjective.
> A class built on an aesthetic with no logic
But it's not built in aesthetic with no logic, it has a cohesive gameplay loop and is one of the most fun classes in the entire game.
>wizard larping
The game has 2 classes which are actually wizards and play extremely differently, hence there being notable separation from them. Their magic works differently, they use different armour, they have different complementary weapons, different primary weapons, different skills, and different playstyles.

>>3854974
>Most classes are. Arguably all classes are.
I disagree, but feel free to try.
>Subjective.
No shit. Do I have to preface every post with "In my humble opinion".
>But it's not built in aesthetic with no logic
It is. There's no function to the bow being a bow since the bow is a tool with physical properties. Enchanting arrows and using a bow makes sense, shooting homing energy balls does not.
>The game has 2 classes which are actually wizards and play extremely differently
I'm talking about the essence of the class, anon.

>>3854998
>disagree, but feel free to try.
How do you decide what constitutes a core class and what those classes can do? You don't really need a "skill guy" class, nor do you actually need to make magic users actually accessible to players (sword and sorcery games even tend not to). There's a billion things magic can do because it's magic, the choice of what it actually means to be a spellcaster (after you've decided you want to include them) is also arbitrary, as is the decision of the specifics on how much magic works.
>There's no function to the bow being a bow
How does that relate to the actual building of the class design? You can say the aesthetics are arbitrary, sure whatever, but why would you then assume there was no vision behind how it actually plays when it actually plays quite well?
>physical properties
They use explicitly magical bows, though. They can't just pick up any old longbow because their bows are enchanted for use with their skills.
>There's no function to the bow being a bow
You aim and fire it more like a bow than a staff. It could be a magic gun, energy fired from your hands, energy fired from your eyes, projected from an enchanted skull, the projectiles of a summon, mini portals opened to a plane of a magic, or a million other things. It's an aesthetic choice, and not a particularly outlandish one either.
>Enchanting arrows and using a bow makes sense, shooting homing energy balls does not.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>makes sense
Are you fucking with me right now? Which natural laws are violated by saying "I fire my magic bolt from my magic bow" but are conserved when you say "I fire my physical bolt from my magic bow, and then it becomes magical"?
>talking about the essence of the class, anon.
So the essence of the class, that doesn't play like traditional wizards OR the game's implementation of wizards, is actually a wizard because... they both shoot magic? Thieves and fighters both swing melee weapons, which of them is larping?

>>3855030
>Which natural laws are violated by saying "I fire my magic bolt from my magic bow" but are conserved when you say "I fire my physical bolt from my magic bow, and then it becomes magical"?
I'm really having trouble understanding how this is confusing you.

The bow serves no purpose when it isn't a physical tool, a bow isn't a like a sword where a blade made of pure force would still allow the properties of a sword to function, it's a machine where the body and string project a physical arrow, it's not an especially useful tool for aiming, you have to learn to shoot it and that's a full skill in itself. With an enchanted arrow, the bow and arrow are used as they are designed, an archer using magic to enhance their archery. With the DD magick archer, the bow is merely a form of staff, which wouldn't help you aim at anything compared to holding your arms in front of you and pointing at something with a wand or such.

It's simply a "this would be cool" hybrid class and is dumb when you think about it. No need to be upset, I like the class.

>>3855055
Oh, I understand what you're saying now. In the game magic arrows are still drawn and loosed, and the animations imply there is still force involved/necessary for the firing process to actually work. Official artwork and animations show magical arrows coalescing before firing too. The implication is these are legitimate projectiles, and you need one of these magick bows (which are a distinct weapon in-universe and not just regular bows with an enchantment) to create one.

>>3855084
I think the magick bows, what I'm talking about, don't even have strings on them.
This is why I said it's a mage larping as an archer. :)

D&D classes are mostly inspired by nerds who read a fantasy novel, loved a particularly character, and wanted to play it in D&D.

File: IMG_20251007_073208_216.jpg (210 KB, 720x960)

210 KB JPG

>>3847652
I need less, actually

Mage should be a trait (rare) that opens a shitton of options

The rest are just skills. I find it weird that rogue and warrior would use a sword differently.

File: demonstier_art_plus_nologo.jpg (700 KB, 2176x2176)

700 KB JPG

>>3847652
just five.
three melee types, two magic, one ranged
rogue is the light melee class, with small weapons and things that improve them like poisons or tools that allow them to do their stuff
sword and board is the medium melee class, standard one handed weapons with a shield for typical knight stuff that isn't too "much"
giga nigga macho knight for heavy melee class, think two handed weapons or oversized fantasy weapons along with big heavy armor
one healing magic user and one damaging magic user. these cover every magic type. evil and good magic? damager gets evil, healer gets good. buffs and debuffs? healing gets good buffs, damager gets debuffs. utility magic? moving stuff around or changing things into other things goes to damager, slow fall or invisibility goes to healer. every type of magic can be condensed into heal/damage even if they don't heal or damage.
ranged bitch for ranged stuff, I don't think bows and bombs fit melee classes and the light/rogue class would be too much with ranged so you need an oddball for that.
typical group would be generic sword and board guy, sexy rogue, kindhearted healer priest chick, sick ass wizard fireball guy, pansy shithead ranged dude, and crazy 7 foot black knight guy with a giant sword.

>>3850003
what does battle fucker do?

>>3855997
>"just five"
>describes six
Huh?

>>3847652
yes very poor build variety was pretty biggest issue with DAO

>>3856003
oh poop I forgot to change that
I added the ranged thing at the last second because I remembered bows existed

File: Screenshot 2025-10-09 at (...).png (1.94 MB, 1278x1020)

1.94 MB PNG

>>3847763
>>3847798
>>3847804
>>3847808
>>3848701
>>3848890
>>3850269


>Mystic Knight/Gish/Magus/Spellsword
FTFY

Why do bows need a dedicated class, anyway? I mean, rather than just being a normal weapon.
Give bows to rogues, crossbows to fighters and wands to wizards.

>>3856265
>Give crossbows to rogues, bows to fighters
FIFY

>>3856265
Some people want being a bow or ranged weapon user to be their primary class fantasy. There are some TTRPGs where bows are better than 2h weapons for classes where the case should be otherwise, notably fighter monk and paladin in pathfinder or fighter and thief in 13th age. If you are doing a class system you need something like a scout, ranger, sniper or hunter with dedicated bow options and you have to limit bows on other characters appropriately

>>3856608
>you have to limit bows on other characters
Dumb.

>>3847653
>Rogue+Mage
>>3847681
>Warrior+Mage
>>3847698
This.

>>3847667
Historically, a mage is just a priest from a non-Abrahamic religion. Every historical magic system involves summoning and enlisting the help of spirits or deities, which Abrahamic religions call demons. The magi, from where the word magic comes from, were priests of the Zoroastrian religion.

Therefore --actually-- mage = a subclass of priest.

>>3856661
>Rogue+Mage
It's alchemist. Sauce: >>3849246

>>3849246
How do I use this? Am I supposed to roll dice to determine my class or do the numbers represent how much of each base class is contained in the subclass?

>>3849246
>humans are just str-dex and int
why 2 physical stats and just one mental stat?
at the end of the day stats are the pillars of the classes

and giving humans just 2 physical stats and 1 mental stat is absurd
we are an intellectual species not a physical one

clerics are separate from wizards cause they don't get their magic from intelligence but wisdom (faith)

cha is another mental stat that neither wizards nor priests posses
etc etc

classes are just based on attributes which are defined semi-arbitrarily

you can have as many classes as there are attributes and then the combinations as well

File: 08f58011a3626954618ca9d06(...).jpg (41 KB, 564x764)

41 KB JPG

>>3856265

Realistically, swords and anything pointy should be a dext-based finesse weapon, yes, even huge swords. Bow should strength-based.

>>3847652
>Rogue
There real rpg triangle is
>Fighting Man
>Magic Man
>Cleric Man
as Gygax intended

>>3853989
WTF is this shit?

>>3847652
No, I need less.
Classes are retarded. Real people don't have classes FFS.

>>3857496
yeah makes sense a 4channer never heard about jobs

>>3857499
You mean a character's job has to coincide with his class?
Who gets the task of sweeping the streets - the fighters, the wizards or the thieves?

>>3847681
>>3847657
That's a mage.
>>3847653
That's a rogue.
>>3847736
Correct.

>>3847770
Only if you mean gestalt.

>>3857503
A commoner, dumbass. A class isn't a job, it's a vocation, like a priest IRL.

>>3857522
>A class isn't a job
Try telling this retard: >>3857499