Talk:Classless (5e Class)
From D&D Wiki
Greetings, I was curious as to what qualifies as a Special Weapon? Also I'm enjoying the idea behind the Mcguffin skill, are Sentient Items considered part of the Wondrous aspect so that from the beginning of the campaign you're skilless character has to deal with a bickering item bound to them? Thanks. --HolyPagan (talk) 13:03, 16 May 2018 (MDT)
-Hello, author here. A Special Weapon is a weapon with special rules for its use, like a throwing net or a lance. It is simply a weapon that behaves in a unique way compared to other mundane weapons. You can find some examples in the PHB (Page 148). Because there are so few Special Weapons in the PHB, it's implied to be something the DM decides upon. For example, as a DM I might consider a gunblade to be a Special Weapon, since normal ranged weapons have disadvantage at close range but with a gunblade you could ignore that. Or such a weapon might be two weapons at once, having different properties if you shoot with it or stab with it. The important part is that it's different because it's mundane properties are different, not because it's magical. If it is different because of magic, then it's a magical weapon instead.
-Sentient items are items that have a soul attached to them. They can also be Wondrous items, but don't have to be (Though they usually are). The rules for sentient items can be found on pages 214-218 of the DMG. The examples provided in this section are all created the same way that Wondrous items are, but are more complex because of the nature of having a person and an item be the same thing. Essentially, ask the DM. They can rule that it's allowed. If I were to give the answer though, I'd say yes but at the cost of the item overall being weaker or the sentience being a pain to deal with. --Supersmily5 (talk) 16:04, 16 May 2018 (MDT)
I'm not the author of this, but I find it really good and interesting. Anyone care to put it up for the featured list ?
I don't know what the featured list is but as the author of the page I'd say go for it if you think it's worthy of it. I wouldn't know how to go about doing that though. Also, if you edit the talk page, can you please put a signature so I know who's speaking? The 2nd to last button above the code looks like a squiggly line and creates the following signature mark. --Supersmily5 (talk) 06:07, 8 November 2017 (MST)
Reworking the class
I'll just cut to the chase, if you don't mind: this concept is great, and should be all about how a commoner tries to keep up with heroes through planning, efficiency, adaptability, and luck. Regarding planning, this class is okay, but Perception and Investigation are only a part of it. You also need character knowledge regarding the weaknesses and workarounds of different problems. Regarding efficiency, this class should be well-versed in the action economy, but it is not. It only references bonus actions once in an extremely weak archetype feature (Dodge is better than most of those options combined), and reactions twice: in a good but weak move (Cleverness) and a move that is just a more restrictive Ready action (Perceptive Action). Regarding adaptability, this class only mentions damage types once and it only increases an already high damage amount to unnecessary heights once per rest. It also does not mention anything regarding adapting to damage or effects, yourself. Regarding luck, there is no ability that actually twists the luck in your favor, only increases a few skills. As a final note: is this truly supposed to represent a commoner? If it is, why all of the weapon and armor proficiencies? I would be willing to rework this class if you do not have the time. --TheStoryEnthusiast (talk) 20:43, 18 June 2018 (MDT)
- Keep The Point Of It In Mind
As one of my more favorite things I've made here, I'll find the time (Though it may take awhile). However, do make note that this class is explicitly built to be underpowered, that's it's whole shtick. Some of your concerns are probably valid though, like having little action economy or a large amount of weapon and armor proficiencies, but as for "luck," luck isn't a stat, and is entirely based on feats that let you reroll things. Adapting to damage types would be wholly unnatural and wouldn't make sense for a creature to do without some sort of spell effect; and the planning and knowledge aspect is completely based on your rolls, because it would undercut the DM to have knowledge beyond what you can roll for. This is why the class makes in combat perception easier, to allow for more chances to learn without outright giving the player more knowledge than they should have. Perceptive Action is also the base of this entire class, while I'd let it be improved it SHOULD NOT be removed.
With all of this in mind, how would you change the class to improve it? If you tell me here and I approve, I'll change the class and credit you accordingly. --Supersmily5 (talk) 06:13, 19 June 2018 (MDT)
I'd like to request some sort of alternate page, for I already made a character with everything this class already has and I don't wish for anything to be changed. I believe this class is fine as is since it's suppose to be a commoner character that would originally be an NPC. If you want to improve your character with this class, might I suggest picking a stronger Race or more bountiful Background. Just saying. --HolyPagan (talk) 18:36, 27 June 2018 (MDT)
I'm currently working on a "Classless, Revised" page that will be going up in a few days. I know you like this, and I can see all of the love and care you put into it, which is why I would never delete any part of it without your say-so. I just wanted you to know that you inspired me to make something similar in essence but different in mechanics. Mimicry is the sincerest form of flattery. --TheStoryEnthusiast (talk) 12:35, 29 June 2018 (MDT)
Well I can't wait to see what you've come up with. If there are any improvements between the two that I think I should make afterwards, I'll add or change them on my version of the class, or the effort might inspire parts of later classes I plan to create down the line, like my next class creation I'm working on, the Seer class. Additionally, any major changes I make will be to a new version of the class as well, so HolyPagan can keep playing this version without worry. Everyone wins! --Supersmily5 (talk) 15:59, 29 June 2018 (MDT)
An anonymous user changed the page to claim that the Mcguffin players receive HAS to be Legendary rarity. The Mcguffin could be more powerful than reasonable if the campaign starts at low level and the item is Legendary, which is why the option exists to have a lesser item as your Mcguffin. If you disagree, can you please tell me why? If it's a valid reason, I may alter the page to make the change. --Supersmily5 (talk) 06:05, 5 July 2018 (MDT)
Once again, an anonymous user altered the page, this time making the starting gold closer to what you have in a normal game. For the record, you can play the class with minor changes without making those changes present on the wiki page itself. There's less starting gold because this class is designed to be underpowered mechanically (Requiring the player using it to be more capable of planning and mentally keeping pace than normal). If you have a valid reason for the change, let me know on this discussion board, and I'll consider reworking the element of the class. --Supersmily5 (talk) 13:32, 9 September 2018 (MDT)
ONCE AGAIN, an anonymous user altered the page, removing Prestidigitation from the spell list you learn at 3rd level as a Generalist. Prestidigitation is given because the lore behind it is that it's famous as a practice spell, which makes it perfect for a wannabee mage. If you have a reason for the constant changing of the thing (It seems to be the same user number every time recently), then please make an account and TALK TO ME ABOUT IT. I can be reasonable about this, but only if you meet me halfway. --Supersmily5 (talk) 12:15, 11 September 2018 (MDT)
Finally Reworking The Class
I said I'd do this so now I have to. I'm keeping it mostly separate from the other versions out there because I still prefer its core concepts like Perceptive Action, but the class could stand to have better action economy and it definitely needs a real combat hook. In most games, players can't easily determine what the opponent will do before it happens, so that's what I'm basing the additions on, by giving Insight a bit more room in the class for use. Tell me what you think. --Supersmily5 (talk) 13:52, 9 September 2018 (MDT)
Hehe WHOOPS. Forgot I'm keeping this page as it is to allow those using it to keep playing with it. However, my final revision is complete, and appears on this page Classless Reborn (5e Class). --Supersmily5 (talk) 12:06, 14 April 2019 (MDT)
There's an anonymous user that altered the page to give you any 6 skill proficiencies. This is horribly unbalanced, as normal classes don't usually give out any more than two. If you want to play this with a slight change like that it's fine, but the version on this page is meant to be underpowered, and represent characters that aren't heroes like the normal classes of the game allow. To satisfy the masses, I did keep part of the alteration, allowing you to have any 2 skill proficiencies. Let me know if anyone thinks this is too powerful. --Supersmily5 (talk) 22:17, 20 April 2019 (MDT)
Additionally, this is a legacy version of the class. Any major changes you'd like to make should go here, Classless Reborn (5e Class), because people are using this version and I made a new one for such changes to spruce the class up a little bit. --Supersmily5 (talk) 22:28, 20 April 2019 (MDT)