Person_Man
2013-05-24, 02:44 PM
I've been playing D&D for around 23ish years. I've played every edition and many third party variants (Pathfinder, Iron Kingdoms, etc). D&D Next has given me some strong feelings of nostalgia, so I took some time to go back through all of my old books, re-read the classes, and think about the playing experiences that they helped create. Here are some things I've found to be the elements of excellent class design:
Strong Core Concept: A succinct and interesting description of the class that gives players a reason to play it and provides an in-game justification for it's class abilities. I know that it's hard for min-maxers (like myself) to believe, but the fluff is one of the main reasons why some people choose to play a class. The core concept should also be unique enough that it's interesting to people who read it and sufficiently different from other classes, but not so detailed that it can only be played in a specific campaign setting.
Signature Mechanic: Something that class does that defines it as a class and is really fun to use in the game. When someone asks you what a Rogue does, you can say Backstab or Sneak Attack, and for some people, that's one of the main reasons people choose to play a Rogue.
Capstone Ability: A really cool 20th level ability. It's the ultimate reward to a player for making it to that level, an incentive to not multi-class (or prestige class or kit or whatever), and it sets truly high level characters and NPCs apart from their lower level brethren.
No Dead Levels: It is beyond frustrating for some players when they gain nothing (apart from hit dice and other similar things that every class gains) when they gain a level. No one likes gaining a dead level, and many hate it.
Meaningful Class Abilities: This is highly related to the dead levels issue. All class abilities should do something meaningful. Giving a class a +1 bonus to Whatever or one additional use of an ability they should have been able to use at-will or repeatedly through some sort of refresh mechanic is a major cop out. It smacks of lazy and/or uncreative writing, and is a boring addition to a class.
Never Useless: Everyone should have a meaningful option to contribute something during combat, exploration, and interaction. This means having a variety of different meaningful class features. In addition, well designed classes should never completely "run out" of class abilities, or be basically forced to make mundane highly repetitive melee or ranged attacks. This was a HUGE problem with low level magic in earlier editions. But it's also a big problem for many martial classes who have a more limited set of class abilities.
Customization: Not everyone wants to play a class in the exact same way. Class customization can allow classes to do a wider variety of things, cuts down on the need for multiple slightly different classes that fill the same basic archetype and/or design space, and giving players choices allows them to become more invested in their character.
Is aware of the larger rules ecosystem: Given the entirety of the rules, would most reasonable players who like the core concept and signature mechanic of a class choose to play it and take an additional level of the class each time they gain a level? Are there other existing classes that already do something similar, but better? Are there "break points" in the class (usually caused by dead levels or lack of meaningful class abilities) where you basically lose nothing by multi-classing or entering a prestige class or kit instead of taking more levels of the base class? For example, gaining an additional spell (or power, or maneuver, or whatever) is useful and meaningful class ability because there are many different useful spells to choose from. But if the class exists in a system where prestige classes fully progress spells while also granting additional abilities, almost all players are going to enter a prestige class.
Verisimilitude: Does the fluff of the class convincingly explain how and why the crunch of occurs within the narrative construct of the fictional D&D world. If so, it's easier to roleplay and image yourself as character of this class within a believable story. If not, it can cause some players metagame dissonance.
So, did I miss anything, or do you think I'm wrong on anything?
And how do people think that individual D&D classes from various editions stack up to this rubric, especially D&D Next classes?
Strong Core Concept: A succinct and interesting description of the class that gives players a reason to play it and provides an in-game justification for it's class abilities. I know that it's hard for min-maxers (like myself) to believe, but the fluff is one of the main reasons why some people choose to play a class. The core concept should also be unique enough that it's interesting to people who read it and sufficiently different from other classes, but not so detailed that it can only be played in a specific campaign setting.
Signature Mechanic: Something that class does that defines it as a class and is really fun to use in the game. When someone asks you what a Rogue does, you can say Backstab or Sneak Attack, and for some people, that's one of the main reasons people choose to play a Rogue.
Capstone Ability: A really cool 20th level ability. It's the ultimate reward to a player for making it to that level, an incentive to not multi-class (or prestige class or kit or whatever), and it sets truly high level characters and NPCs apart from their lower level brethren.
No Dead Levels: It is beyond frustrating for some players when they gain nothing (apart from hit dice and other similar things that every class gains) when they gain a level. No one likes gaining a dead level, and many hate it.
Meaningful Class Abilities: This is highly related to the dead levels issue. All class abilities should do something meaningful. Giving a class a +1 bonus to Whatever or one additional use of an ability they should have been able to use at-will or repeatedly through some sort of refresh mechanic is a major cop out. It smacks of lazy and/or uncreative writing, and is a boring addition to a class.
Never Useless: Everyone should have a meaningful option to contribute something during combat, exploration, and interaction. This means having a variety of different meaningful class features. In addition, well designed classes should never completely "run out" of class abilities, or be basically forced to make mundane highly repetitive melee or ranged attacks. This was a HUGE problem with low level magic in earlier editions. But it's also a big problem for many martial classes who have a more limited set of class abilities.
Customization: Not everyone wants to play a class in the exact same way. Class customization can allow classes to do a wider variety of things, cuts down on the need for multiple slightly different classes that fill the same basic archetype and/or design space, and giving players choices allows them to become more invested in their character.
Is aware of the larger rules ecosystem: Given the entirety of the rules, would most reasonable players who like the core concept and signature mechanic of a class choose to play it and take an additional level of the class each time they gain a level? Are there other existing classes that already do something similar, but better? Are there "break points" in the class (usually caused by dead levels or lack of meaningful class abilities) where you basically lose nothing by multi-classing or entering a prestige class or kit instead of taking more levels of the base class? For example, gaining an additional spell (or power, or maneuver, or whatever) is useful and meaningful class ability because there are many different useful spells to choose from. But if the class exists in a system where prestige classes fully progress spells while also granting additional abilities, almost all players are going to enter a prestige class.
Verisimilitude: Does the fluff of the class convincingly explain how and why the crunch of occurs within the narrative construct of the fictional D&D world. If so, it's easier to roleplay and image yourself as character of this class within a believable story. If not, it can cause some players metagame dissonance.
So, did I miss anything, or do you think I'm wrong on anything?
And how do people think that individual D&D classes from various editions stack up to this rubric, especially D&D Next classes?