Low fantasy classes

Do not fear the fags, user. They won't stop trying to ruin your fun.

There is a Lord of the Rings supplement with non-magical classes for PCs, hunt that down.

It has sorta shitty balance, but it should be up your alley.

Alchemists? Ran a low magic game a few years back and used those as a replacement for the cleric and mage classes. Lots of fire/smoke bombs, healing tinctures and alcohol

Sounds cool OP, I'd like to know more

Some suggestions:

Rogue - not so much the fragile lock-picker, this class knows that to survive as a thief running away and surviving to run away are just as important as sleight of hand and con artistry, if not more so. Cunning, fast-talking and quick, look to Jason Statham's early roles for a bit of inspiration, but maybe with a dash more freerunning and climbing. Prefers smaller weapons, but improvisation is a key trait.

Witch or Mountain Man - these guys would be druids if such a thing existed, they're not so much "one with nature" as much as they are just really used to being in it. Experts in survival and wilderness knowledge, they might commune with nature spirits, or it might just be the home-brewed spirits they imbibe, but whatever they're doing, it works. Endurance and concealment are noted traits - they can hide very well from beasts, and they know the right mushrooms that will let you shrug off walking through the snow for a fortnight without food or sleep. Does poorly in civilisation, but unlikely to be fooled easily. In a stand-up fight, expect weather-hardened fists and incredibly dirty fighting.

Hunter - no matter how big and dangerous something is, there's always someone arrogant and dumb enough to hunt it. Usually lots of people, though most of them die. Not this guy though - he had a good mentor and learned how to track, how to trap, and that when a beast is wounded and cornered it's the most dangerous of all. Weapons with reach are preferred - no hunter wants to get too close to their prey before they're well and truly dead, so bows and boar spears would be favoured weapons. Fire too is one of the hunter's greatest weapons - it kinda wrecks trophies, but it's great for forcing animals into traps. Not as good at hiding as the mountain man, but a lot more comfortable. How good they are with people is variable, but are invariably good with small groups, like a hunting party.

classless system you tit

Why not learn something new rather than repurpose what doesn't fit?

Some sort of sage or monk class. Someone's gotta read and write shit.

>5e modified to be more lethal
>I want the setting to be so gritty that not being a skilled warrior is a death sentence so most classes will be combat based, medics and negotiators are a good idea though

It's a lot of work to twist 5e into something it's not.

You want Savage Worlds. It's designed for lethal low-magic combat.

I almost recommended this to my roommate for the exact same reason. He is doing the modern level 0 people get sucked into a fantasy world plot.

Monks might be cool - even if god(s) aren't real, an educated motherfucker with a big mace is pretty inspiring, and you could always go CON-heavy a la Rasputin (OP did mention it was Russian-inspired) or have extra cash about

I'll check it out, thanks.

>RATCATCHER
Fuck, that's got to be one of the worst jobs in the Warhammer world - isn't there a thing where no-one believes them?

>2017
>Classes
GO.
FUCK.
YOURSELF.

Warriors - general "fighter"
Knight - heavy warrior with less customization and maybe moral boost options
Barbarian
Hunter - bonuses to tracking, hiding, and killing beasts
Lancer - specializes in polearms kiting, and holding their ground/unit tactics
Marksmen - soldier focused on ranges attacks
Rogue - hunter for people
Medic - soldier with a support role
Chemist - squishy that gives buffs and throws grenades

But has a point. Double down on canabalizing fighter, barbarian, and ranger classes into more specialized classes (lancer, marksman, duelist, etc.), or dump the class system.

>classes
Hahaha sissy weakling D&Drone.

Tell us more OP.

Also, is it entirely/almost entirely humans-only?

I'm not OP but I've been thinking of doing something similar as well. Alchemists seem like a great replacement for wizards because they would probably be INT-based, keep a "spellbook" of recipes, and need components and preparation. I'm just not sure how to do it mechanically. Some homebrew I've seen just has the alchemist prepare potions every long rest and then at the end of the day they become unstable and stop working, but that seems kind of lame. And the semi-official 5e alchemist from UA is even lamer, with a magic bag that contains unlimited potions of the recipes you know. So the point is, how do you make alchemists mechanically distinct from casters while making them functionally similar enough to act as replacements?

>Veeky Forums is so brainwashed by le generic fantasy setting that they can't just enjoy a medieval europe setting

Not him, bu considering most of Veeky Forums users are Americans, THEY FUCKING CAN'T EVEN MAKE A MEDIEVAL SETTING, European or not.

Hunters would be a varied and prestigious group in a land of giant beasts too.
Trappers
Trackers
Beaters
Weapon specialists too.

Agree with you too In regards to medics.
That's one that can focus either on herbs and preparations or first aid and surgeries.

I was hoping the answer would be "yes" - I think OP has made like 2 other post in this thread, and all we know so far is that they want it to be gritty, the beasts can't be tamed and that it's kinda based on medieval russia - not a lot to go on

Think carefully on why you want classes

Classes are a tool for worldbuilding, because they give you an idea of the character archetypes common to the world you are presenting, and the tools to make a character of that archetype. In D&D, this is represented by broad fantasy tropes. But that may not work for you.

If your campaign concept is "everyone is a skilled warrior because the world is very lethal," then perhaps you can just have a classless system where everyone has these particular combat skills - or a single-class system based around enhancing the fighter, since you are converting 5e

On the other hand, you can use classes to explore the various fighter archetypes common in fiction more in-depth. A folk hero such as robin hood, a wandering knight errant or ronin in the vein of Samurai Jack, a great hero with supernatural strength destined for adventure like Hercules or Yamoria, a younger warrior who wishes to be a great knight in the vein of Luke Skywalker, or an old-guard veteran and group mentor are all things that you might be able to make a class out of, in that respect.

Your alternative is instead to have your classes a tangible presence in your world... For instance, a specific organization of knights who rides a giant eagles or an aristocrat class or some such thing. DnD 5e does this a bit, with things like bards or clerics who represent a specific organization and sorcerers who have a specific heritage that grants them strength, so you can combine the two class 'types' without much issue

Size, prep and safe storage might be good limiting factors, and potions going off could help as well (maybe for stronger potions) - your alchemist can't indefinitely make potions and store them, but they can re-use bottles, which become the equivalent of spell slots. Ingredients only matter for rare and complex, you're assumed to have most of them

Does run the risk of becoming a bit book-keeping heavy, especially if you can't edit your inventory easily, but might be cool

>Lancer
Good luck with that

kek
Archers all use swords as well?

fighter
>subclass warrior
Rank and file Soldier, guardsman etc. specialized in one weapon type(s&s, polearm, bows, guns, crossbows, greatsword, etc), or proficient with several. maybe split up in one melee/ one ranged class instead
>subclass knight
Heavyly Armored, specialized in mounted combat and duels.
>>knightly vows
access to greater wealth and manpower, but bound by duties and the code of chivalry
>subclass barbarian
reckless melee expert, high damage and very tough at the expense of defense and strategy/tactics (in game terms: high damage per turn, high hp, low defense, little or no tactical options)

Rangers
>subclass huntsman
proficient with/in survival(wilderness), stealth(wilderness), tracking(wilderness), ranged combat, traps (n-no homo) and hunting (duh)
>subclass woodsman
low armored axe-fighter, full on bearmode. skillset like huntsman but tough melee fighter instead
>subclass scout
lightly armored, lightly armed very fleet and mobile class, with a focus on mobility and stealth and a secondary focus on survival. mixed weaponry (melee and ranged)

rogue
>subclass thief
the sneaky stabby lockpicking classic, lightly armored, lightly armed but knows where it hurts. proficient at stealth, lockpicking, pickpocketing and generally stuff you'd need for a "heist" situation)
>subclass goon/enforcer
medium armor, medium weaponry, knows where it hurts but lacks intelligence (game terms: tougher and more durable than thief, about equal damage output but lacks the skillset), proficient in intimidation methods
>subclass bard/scald
social skillmonkey and partyface, plays music, as the name implies, specialized knowledge(myths and legends).

scholars
>subclass academic
general knowledge dispensery, shit at combat, very pestigious for social situations
>subclass alchemist
the closest thing to a wizard without actual magic. can build bombs, brew potions, sticky pots, and generally useful indirect game effects
>medical doctor
as the name implies

Classes as stock characters or archetypes is a good explanation, this caught my eye:
>a wandering knight errant or ronin in the vein of Samurai Jack
Bogatyrs are the Russian version of this. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bogatyr

Also in a wilderness area similar to Siberia, I can see the inevitable Mongol/Kazakh-based horse people getting some classes or subclasses, like horseback archers, a barbarian focused on riding, etc.

clerics
>subclass priest
socially prestigious, face-type, knowledge dispensery(religion), has access to monetary resources but is beholden to religous vows
>subclass crusader/paladin/holy warrior
highly motivated, heavily armed and armored warrior. less proficient than fighter-types but inspires and encourages allies (morale buffs?)

Maybe some falconry in there too, assuming the big beasts are all terrestrial

Pic not all that related, but cool af

>your alchemist can't indefinitely make potions and store them, but they can re-use bottles, which become the equivalent of spell slots.
That raises a simulationist question, though - what's preventing them from buying more?

Oh, you're one of those guys that only learnt D&D and try to do every game with it even if it doesn't fit at all in the system. You'll fail just like every other guy that tried to rewrite the whole class system and ban magic instead of picking a game made for the setting you want to play.

What if you want to play literally D&D with new classes and no magic though, what system would you recommend?

more bottles is impractical. You can't move silently, can't hide (they are noisy), you can't jump (you'd break them).
or - you CAN buy more, but must suffer consequences in your maneuverability. And every hit you take can break them. You can carry many bottles, but only limited amount of them can be carries safely.

D&D isn't very fun with pure martials though

>Cavalier / Rogue - Light armored and quick one-handed fighter, overloads in dexterity. Charismatic and sneaky. Don't give rogues daggers, swords are so much more effective.
>Barbarian - Light armored fighter best with two-handed weapons, extreme strength with combat abilities but dumb and uncharismatic.
>Ranger - Light or medium armored fighter who uses a ranged weapon and a one-handed weapon, survivalist abilities, jack of all trades
>Warrior - Medium or heavily armored fighter, uses any melee weapons. Specialized in toughness and balanced combat.

Mostly what says - the more you carry, the more risks you take (especially if some are volatile).

Also, in this case, if you're in the wilderness there isn't exactly a glassblower behind every tree.

Though I think with all these limitations an alchemist would have to be quite good mechanically, which is a little ironic given they're taking the caster's slot.

True, you'd probably need a combat system that's a bit more expansive. Combat manoeuvres are a start, I guess.