Favored Classes in 5e

[Arkhios]

DISCLAIMER: This is a thought experiment, nothing else. If reasonably good ideas come up from it, feel free to use them in your games, I'm not trying to homebrew here.

OK. Probably a dead beaten horse already, but what if!

What if each 5th edition race species had favored classes, what would they be for each race species, and how should it function to take levels in ones favored class?

To provide context: a favored class was a concept in the 3rd edition D&D (based on earlier editions) that made certain classes more ideal for certain character races. For example, it was more ideal to make a fighter from a dwarf, a rogue from a halfling, a wizard from an elf, or a barbarian from a half-orc. Humans and half-elves were more adaptable and could excel in basically any one class.

The idea is that a certain race species would be better at being a member of a certain class.

Edit: It turns out that tying favored classes to race species comes with a lot of unwanted baggage. Because of this, I'm beginning to agree that Favored Classes in 5e should be tied to a character's Background, or based on the character's Cultural and/or Regional origins (setting by setting).

[Dualight]

Question that those of us who started with 5e will want answered: what is a 'favoured class' to begin with?
I also assume it would be best to answer this for sub-races when applicable?

To try to answer the question in the OP: The archetypical (high-) elf wizard, (hill-)dwarf cleric, (lightfoot-)halfling rogue, and human fighter come to mind first.
IF specifying subclasses as well tiefling Fiend warlock, dragonborn Dragon sorcerer.

As for what it should do: no clue, but it should be a very minor boost to not excessively discourage all other combinations.

[Skrum]

There should be a complex formula for how fast each race and class combination gains XP that brings in background, feat selection, and Int score. A comprehensive chart at the back of the book will tell players how much XP they need to advance a level if, for example, they're an orc druid with the alert feat and sage background.

Picking a races' favored class will provide a small XP boost (well, a slight reduction in how much XP one needs to gain a level).

[KorvinStarmast]

Wood Elf for Monk.

Half Elf for Bard.

[Millstone85]

Thematically, I would say:


Dragonborn
Sorcerer


Dwarf, Hill
Cleric


Dwarf, Mountain
Paladin


Elf, Dark
Warlock


Elf, High
Wizard


Elf, Wood
Ranger


Gnome, Forest
Druid


Gnome, Rock
Artificer


Half-elf
Bard


Half-orc
Barbarian


Halfling, Lightfoot
Rogue


Halfling, Stout
Monk


Human
Fighter


Tiefling
Warlock

[Witty Username]

Question that those of us who started with 5e will want answered: what is a 'favoured class' to begin with?
I also assume it would be best to answer this for sub-races when applicable?


So it was only a specific thing in 3rd/.5 edition.
But back in the day multiclassing came with an XP penalty if you didn't obey some rules.
Either
1. You had to keep all your classes within 1 level of eath other.
2. You were multiclassed with a "favored class"

The idea being that a species was strongly associated with a class enough that it was easier for them to pick up/maintain skills with.

So like elf had the favored class wizard, because their aptitude for magic is so great.

Meanwhile humans had favored class any because being adaptive is the human hat in D&D.

How 5e would probably port the idea would be if particular species could ignore stat restrictions of a class when multiclassing.

[JNAProductions]

Question that those of us who started with 5e will want answered: what is a 'favoured class' to begin with?
I also assume it would be best to answer this for sub-races when applicable?

To try to answer the question in the OP: The archetypical (high-) elf wizard, (hill-)dwarf cleric, (lightfoot-)halfling rogue, and human fighter come to mind first.
IF specifying subclasses as well tiefling Fiend warlock, dragonborn Dragon sorcerer.

As for what it should do: no clue, but it should be a very minor boost to not excessively discourage all other combinations.

Agreed on a very minor thing.
I like “Can ignore multiclass stat requirements” as a small boost.

[Millstone85]

So it was only a specific thing in 3rd/.5 edition.
But back in the day multiclassing came with an XP penalty if you didn't obey some rules.
[...]
How 5e would probably port the idea would be if particular species could ignore stat restrictions of a class when multiclassing.Thank you for the explanation and yes that would make sense.

[grarrrg]

Thematically, I would say:


Some of those are a lot more likely than others.



Overall I like how Pathfinder took an often ignored, weak, 'negate a penalty' feature and turned it into an all around useful minor bonus instead (at least early on, before all the splat books went nuts with it).

On the other hand, Pathfinder more rewarded Single Classing with it's Favored bonuses, so skewing back to Multiclass relevance would be nice.

[Arkhios]

Some of those are a lot more likely than others.



Overall I like how Pathfinder took an often ignored, weak, 'negate a penalty' feature and turned it into an all around useful minor bonus instead (at least early on, before all the splat books went nuts with it).

On the other hand, Pathfinder more rewarded Single Classing with it's Favored bonuses, so skewing back to Multiclass relevance would be nice.

I definitely agree that Pathfinder's approach would be better than ideal, especially because multiclassing doesn't impose EXP penalties.

A simple bonus would be +1 max. hit point per level in favored class and maybe a bonus skill proficiency from the class list when you take the first level of your favored class.

A bit more situational bonuses could potentially affect your class features. For example, if you have levels in your favored class:
- Sorcerer: gain +1 extra Sorcery Point
- Paladin: for Lay on Hands purposes, +1 Paladin level
- Druid: for Wild Shape purposes, +1 Druid level

Alternatively, as suggested, favored class could extend to subclasses:
- Ranger (Beast Master): You count your Ranger level as one higher when determining the hit points of your Beast Companion

[Snowbluff]

I definitely agree that Pathfinder's approach would be better than ideal, especially because multiclassing doesn't impose EXP penalties.

A simple bonus would be +1 max. hit point per level in favored class and maybe a bonus skill proficiency from the class list when you take the first level of your favored class.

A bit more situational bonuses could potentially affect your class features. For example, if you have levels in your favored class:
- Sorcerer: gain +1 extra Sorcery Point
- Paladin: for Lay on Hands purposes, +1 Paladin level
- Druid: for Wild Shape purposes, +1 Druid level

Alternatively, as suggested, favored class could extend to subclasses:
- Ranger (Beast Master): You count your Ranger level as one higher when determining the hit points of your Beast Companion

Oh yeah I like Pathfinder 1's options a lot better for favor classes, especially 3.5 rules is so often niche and complicated that it doesn't even come into effect. However, I think full levels of abilities is often not the right choice. It might be better to have like 1/4 sorcery point or 1/5 of a spell known rather than entire individual spells or points.


This is probably less of a problem for pet HP or Lay on Hands pool, but I think that can be stated with just "+x" HP rather than a whole level's worth of calculation.

[Arkhios]

Oh yeah I like Pathfinder 1's options a lot better for favor classes, especially 3.5 rules is so often niche and complicated that it doesn't even come into effect. However, I think full levels of abilities is often not the right choice. It might be better to have like 1/4 sorcery point or 1/5 of a spell known rather than entire individual spells or points.


This is probably less of a problem for pet HP or Lay on Hands pool, but I think that can be stated with just "+x" HP rather than a whole level's worth of calculation.

I realize now that I clicked "submit reply" a bit hastily. My intention was to make it clear that the additional level in a calculation of a class feature would take effect only once, if you had any levels in your favored class. Essentially making the chosen species only marginally better at something related to the class in general.

In contrast, the +1 hp/level in favored class would be the only favored class benefit that would increase depending on your level in the class (which is alone perhaps a bit boring).

With that said, it could be nice if the extra level for a class feature would increase at the same intervals as your proficiency bonus would increase, for example. In a way making your favored (sub-)class progress a bit higher whether you multiclass or not.

[Psyren]

While I'm glad this doesn't exist in the base game (I can already see it reinforcing stereotypes/cliches like Half-Orc Barbarian that the game needs to move away from), I like the approach of relaxing the attribute requirements for multiclassing as the 5e version of this. I wouldn't remove them completely, but only needing, say, 10 instead of 13 in your primary stat would be pretty impactful and enable some interesting builds we haven't seen before.

[Arkhios]

While I'm glad this doesn't exist in the base game (I can already see it reinforcing stereotypes/cliches like Half-Orc Barbarian that the game needs to move away from), I like the approach of relaxing the attribute requirements for multiclassing as the 5e version of this. I wouldn't remove them completely, but only needing, say, 10 instead of 13 in your primary stat would be pretty impactful and enable some interesting builds we haven't seen before.

Relaxed requirements seem fair and could certainly be an elegant solution, but I think it still needs to be better spelled out what it actually means. Which requirements are relaxed? All requirements, just the ones related to your favored class, or just the ones other than your favored class?


Disclaimer: The following is only my opinion, and everyone are free to disagree. I do not wish to cause friction, only to give food for thought.

I can't help thinking that there may be a bit too much "butt-hurt" in the air lately about species-related stereotypes. These are fantastical species we are talking about. Even the humans depicted in the game are nowhere near actual humans in real life, and in all honesty I feel this issue has taken somewhat ridiculous turn once or twice already.

I don't see why we can't allow certain things to remain iconic for certain species.

Besides, per the example given (and implicated?), being a half-orc barbarian doesn't necessarily mean you're dumb and savage brute, or whatever.

[Psyren]

Relaxed requirements seem fair and could certainly be an elegant solution, but I think it still needs to be better spelled out what it actually means. Which requirements are relaxed? All requirements, just the ones related to your favored class, or just the ones other than your favored class?


Disclaimer: The following is only my opinion, and everyone are free to disagree. I do not wish to cause friction, only to give food for thought.

I can't help thinking that there may be a bit too much "butt-hurt" in the air lately about species-related stereotypes. These are fantastical species we are talking about. Even the humans depicted in the game are nowhere near actual humans in real life, and in all honesty I feel this issue has taken somewhat ridiculous turn once or twice already.

I don't see why we can't allow certain things to remain iconic for certain species.

Besides, per the example given (and implicated?), being a half-orc barbarian doesn't necessarily mean you're dumb and savage brute, or whatever.

1) I don't want to derail the thread into the stereotypes debate too far - I'll just say that if this rule were to make a comeback, it should be cultural (and therefore setting-specific, maybe even regional within a setting) rather than universal. For example, Halflings favoring Rogues and Monks would be more commonly a Forgotten Realms conceit, whereas Eberron and Dark Sun Halflings would probably be more inclined to be Barbarians. If favored class has to exist at all, it wouldn't make sense for every halfling etc in every setting to all have the same one.

2) Ideally, the ability score relaxation would only be for the favored class itself. So using the example of a Tiefling Warlock/Wizard, they would only need 10 Cha but still need 13 Int. But I could certainly see the other approach whereby as long as one of the classes in the mix is the favored class, all bets are off.

[Arkhios]

1) I don't want to derail the thread into the stereotypes debate too far - I'll just say that if this rule were to make a comeback, it should be cultural (and therefore setting-specific, maybe even regional within a setting) rather than universal. For example, Halflings favoring Rogues and Monks would be more commonly a Forgotten Realms conceit, whereas Eberron and Dark Sun Halflings would probably be more inclined to be Barbarians. If favored class has to exist at all, it wouldn't make sense for every halfling etc in every setting to all have the same one.

2) Ideally, the ability score relaxation would only be for the favored class itself. So using the example of a Tiefling Warlock/Wizard, they would only need 10 Cha but still need 13 Int. But I could certainly see the other approach whereby as long as one of the classes in the mix is the favored class, all bets are off.

1) Appreciated. I don't want to start/derail into another debate either, and I've said my piece on the matter.

Definitely! A setting-related and/or regional favored classes are the most ideal approach on this matter, and it certainly would be how I'd implement this in any given game, if necessary or requested (perhaps as an Optional Rule?)

2) I certainly think that it would make the most sense if each species' favored class "comes naturally to them", and is shown by not needing to qualify for their favored class' minimum requirements.

(Actually, it does seem like the minimum requirements are kind of the "penalty" in 5th edition multiclassing, in the sense that you need to "pay a tax" for being able to multiclass.)

[Theodoxus]

I totally get where you're coming from Arkhios. It's like 'omg, you're racist!' for stating "elves can always see better in the dark than humans."

Safest way to do this favored class idea, IMO, would be to either (ideally) let any PC choose their favored class. You get 1, pick appropriately ;) or B) each race has a small group, probably 3 or 4 thematically similar classes - so high elves might get Artificer, Ranger, or Wizard; rock gnomes might get Artificer, Monk, Wizard; (half)Orcs might get Barbarian, Fighter, or Warlock. etc.

I definitely think if going the multiclass reduction route, that the minimum is either waved or reduced only for the favored class. A Human that picks 'Warlock as their favored class, still need Str/Cha 13 to MC into Paladin, for instance.

[Psyren]

I totally get where you're coming from Arkhios. It's like 'omg, you're racist!' for stating "elves can always see better in the dark than humans."

Except this is clearly biological and therefore has nothing to do with class :smallconfused: bad analogy is bad. (...Ugh, step away Psyren, step away...)


Safest way to do this favored class idea, IMO, would be to either (ideally) let any PC choose their favored class. You get 1, pick appropriately ;) or B) each race has a small group, probably 3 or 4 thematically similar classes - so high elves might get Artificer, Ranger, or Wizard; rock gnomes might get Artificer, Monk, Wizard; (half)Orcs might get Barbarian, Fighter, or Warlock. etc.

I'd be fine with FC groups too. That heads off any arguments about whether Wizard or Artificer fits better for Rock Gnomes, Ranger or Monk for Wood Elves, Paladin or Sorcerer for Dragonborn etc etc.

[Arkhios]

Thematically, I would say:


Dragonborn
Sorcerer


Dwarf, Hill
Cleric


Dwarf, Mountain
Paladin


Elf, Dark
Warlock


Elf, High
Wizard


Elf, Wood
Ranger


Gnome, Forest
Druid


Gnome, Rock
Artificer


Half-elf
Bard


Half-orc
Barbarian


Halfling, Lightfoot
Rogue


Halfling, Stout
Monk


Human
Fighter


Tiefling
Warlock



Been meaning to reply to this. This is a good Default list, but I think there is no real merit for humans being "fighters", since they are the most versatile and adaptive species by default. 'Any one chosen at character creation' would befit them better.

Other than a Default list, Favored Class groupings could work as well.

[Theodoxus]

Except this is clearly biological and therefore has nothing to do with class :smallconfused: bad analogy is bad. (...Ugh, step away Psyren, step away...)

Class? Not sure where that's coming from... but in the end, aren't all stereotypes biological? I mean, I'm not going to list real life stereotypes by race, but just doing a quick list in my head, there isn't anything that isn't biological in their nature.

Food preferences, athletic (in)ability, intelligence, hoarding

[Psyren]

Class? Not sure where that's coming from...

You mean besides the thread's topic?

[Millstone85]

I think that you can present a species as having a particular affinity for a class without locking it into a specific culture.

Bilbo Baggins did not come from a culture of thieves. Gandalf convinced the dwarves that he would fit that role by virtue of being even smaller than them and naturally hairy soft-footed. Also something about drawing a symbol on his door, I don't remember. The same logic could be applied to D&D halflings to say that, yes, those adventurers among halflings generally find it easiest to become rogues.

For another example, elves are now supposed to be magically attuned to an environment: dark elves to the Underdark, wood elves to forests and high elves to places rich in arcane magic or somesuch. That too could inform favored adventuring classes, regardless of society.

But can it be done with all species? I am not sure.

[KorvinStarmast]

Been meaning to reply to this. This is a good Default list, but I think there is no real merit for humans being "fighters", since they are the most versatile and adaptive species by default. 'Any one chosen at character creation' would befit them better.

Other than a Default list, Favored Class groupings could work as well. You forgot vHuman/Paladin. :smallsmile:

[Theodoxus]

You mean besides the thread's topic?

Except you and Arkhios were talking about species stereotypes, not classes - which is where I was coming from. Hence why I referenced Arkhios and then talked about potential stereotypes...

You know, I'm just gonna bow out. I got what I needed from the thread.

[sithlordnergal]

Hmmm, I could see it being brought back. However, I would suggest the following:

1) The benefits of a favored class should only apply to multiclassing, and it should be a minor boon at best. I like the idea of lowering multiclass requirements. So lets say your favored class is Wizard, you only need a 10 Intelligence to multiclass in and out of Wizard.

2) Instead of tying favored class to Race/Species, tie it to your Background. And try to give most Backgrounds two options that a player can choose between during character creation. For example, a Sage could choose between having Wizard or Artificer for their favored class. Or an Acolyte could choose between Paladin and Cleric.

The player could choose one of the given classes, and that class would become their Favored Class. You could still keep Custom Backgrounds too, by creating a Custom Background and only choosing one Favored Class.

[KorvinStarmast]

Leave it in some other edition.
5e doesn't need this. It's bloat.

It's noise, not signal.

[Arkhios]

Leave it in some other edition.
5e doesn't need this. It's bloat.

It's noise, not signal.

What isn't bloat? Every new content in addition to the basic three books is bloat. And even they include optional rules, such as feats and multiclassing rules. Bloat is a matter of preference. Some of us want more tools to play with, others less.

I'm not trying to impose the idea as mandatory in any way. Just pondering on the possibility of "what if" even if it's not "needed".

Also, at its core, this is a thought experiment (a term I had somehow forgotten or neglected to mention for some reason)

[Kane0]

I'm not voting it would be much of a positive addition, but if you were adding it back in i'd go for something minor like the suggested ignoring multiclass requirements.

While we're on the train of thought though, what about favored subclasses instead? Goliath would naturally fit giant barbarian for example.

[Arkhios]

Hmmm, I could see it being brought back. However, I would suggest the following:

1) The benefits of a favored class should only apply to multiclassing, and it should be a minor boon at best. I like the idea of lowering multiclass requirements. So lets say your favored class is Wizard, you only need a 10 Intelligence to multiclass in and out of Wizard.

2) Instead of tying favored class to Race/Species, tie it to your Background. And try to give most Backgrounds two options that a player can choose between during character creation. For example, a Sage could choose between having Wizard or Artificer for their favored class. Or an Acolyte could choose between Paladin and Cleric.

The player could choose one of the given classes, and that class would become their Favored Class. You could still keep Custom Backgrounds too, by creating a Custom Background and only choosing one Favored Class.

You know, I'm not opposed to the idea that favored class was tied to a Background instead. It would make it somewhat easier to import the concept into any setting (without causing as much of a debate as species, if at all). Good idea! I think this is going somewhere :)

So, let's do a recap:

1) Favored Class should be fairly minor boon. Reduced Requirements for your Favored Class seem to be the way to go. A minimum of 10 instead of 13 is plausible, though I could see it removed entirely from your Favored Class.

2) Favored Class should be a cultural, regional, or background related, not species related. To be honest, this is better all things considered. Even Cultural and Regional aspects fit better in the Background.

3) There should be several on-theme-options for a Favored Class to choose from at Character Creation. Tying Favored Class to Background makes sense in that they're not too strict about the class choice, but they do match better with a certain type of class or classes.

4) This is more of a personal preference, but it could be fun if the concept were to extend to include subclasses, not just the base classes.

[Psyren]

Instead of tying favored class to Race/Species, tie it to your Background.

This is an interesting idea. Avoids the earlier baggage while also making backgrounds matter.


Leave it in some other edition.
5e doesn't need this. It's bloat.

It's noise, not signal.

I 100% agree but I'm just engaging with the idea as a thought experiment. I wouldn't actually want this anywhere near 5e.



While we're on the train of thought though, what about favored subclasses instead? Goliath would naturally fit giant barbarian for example.

I'm not sure how this would work. "If you multiclass before you get your subclass, you need all the prerequisites, but once you get your subclass now you get to ignore them?" Talk about making Hexblade dips even more popular :smalltongue:

[Arkhios]

I 100% agree but I'm just engaging with the idea as a thought experiment. I wouldn't actually want this anywhere near 5e.
A thought experiment is exactly what this is. If it evolves well enough, I might consider using it in my games, but I'm not looking to impose a mandatory new feature for all games. It's entirely up to the reader whether they want to copy the idea or not.




I'm not sure how this would work. "If you multiclass before you get your subclass, you need all the prerequisites, but once you get your subclass now you get to ignore them?" Talk about making Hexblade dips even more popular :smalltongue:
I think it would work better if a favored subclass gave an extra benefit after you reach the appropriate level, and the extra benefit would need to be balanced against this.

I think it could work best if it's gated behind a feat, which of course would require a lot more work than just a thought process probing for ideas and thoughts.

[grarrrg]

As a semi-fix for the Subclass problem, and to make it more of an actual bonus, and to keep it Multiclass and...

Make the bonus based on your levels in your SECOND highest class.
Quick example: +1 max hp for every level in 2nd highest class. If you have 5+ levels in your second class you get an extra Skill proficiency (from lists of any classes you already have).



EDIT TIME
Spent some time mulling it over and this is what I got.
NOTE: this is not fully fleshed out or 'flavored' or anything. All examples are just quick examples to illustrate the idea.

The short version is 'Favored stacks for ASI milestones'.
Every race will have two(-ish) Favored Classes.
ALL levels in ALL Favored Classes will stack with levels in your Highest-leveled-Non-Favored-Class (HNFC) for purposes of granting ASI.
Multiclass ASI's will be granted every four levels.

The total benefit is minimal, you'll never get better than a Single class. But notable, because you'll still be able to get 5 ASI.

Humans and Half-Elves have Favored class of "highest leveled class". Simple, basic. As long as they only have 2 classes they get full stacking.

Races with sub-races will have one class as the 'general' favored, and each sub-race gets a specific more tailored to them.
Elves have Favored Ranger.
High elves also get Wizard, Wood get Druid, and Drow get Sorcerer.
Any given Elf only gets 2 favored, but slightly different options depending on the elf.

Races without sub-races might get a favored class, and a selection of sub-classes.
Dragonborn favor Paladins, but they also favor Dragonic Bloodline Sorcerer, Drakewarden Ranger, and Ascendent Dragon Monk. (notice the theme? It's subtle)


To fix 'the Fighter problem' maybe require a minimum amount of Fighter to get the extra?
Normally they get extra at 6 and 14, so "if your total level is 8+ and at least 4 of those levels are Fighter you get a bonus ASI." Likewise, total level 16, at least 8 fighter.