theatreofcomets says:
... I'd be interested in your thoughts re the pros and cons of the other classes you could choose.
The playbooks are very open to interpretation by the player. Their direction can also vary greatly based on which Advances the player chooses or the nature of the world.
The
Bard is very much an Information/Knowledge based character, as is the
Wizard. Bards are, of course, the social one, being largely about working with others (PCs or NPCs), while Wizards' Spells can turn them into power-houses in the later levels.
I don't get to play DW very often (and also don't GM it that much). And these are off the top of my head. So take them with a grain of salt.
The Wizard's
Ritual Move is probably the single most powerful thing in this game. Given enough time they can achieve ANYTHING. As the rules say 'Ritual effects are always possible...' the GM does not get to say: "No, you can not do that", and it is not in the spirit of the game for the GM to put insurmountable obstacles before them. Players should not abuse this power.
Given the likely time constraints in this sort of 'practice' game, Rituals might not come up much, and will need to be simple.
I am not sure what to say, aside from that, and what I mentioned earlier about thieves and their impact on traps. When the
Thief was first introduced into DnD there was a uproar since it made it sound like the rules now said other characters could not sneak, or hide, or disarm traps, or open locked doors (which, technically they did say), before that all classes were assumed to be competent at these sorts of skills, they were the bread and butter of being an adventurer. Turning the Thief into a Rogue instead was a good move.
Rangers are sorta like fighters, but with a pet and they excel at wilderness travel and can be a huge boon during the Perilous Journey Move (which we probably won't see while in a single dungeon). They are flavorful though, so even if that is not a thing they do (and if they are not an elf they are not
that dominant at Perilous Journey) they can be a lot of fun. It is a common favorite archetype.
Fighters are a cool class, especially long term if they get to develop their Signature Weapon. Many rag on Bend Bars/Lift Gates, but I think it rocks (you can lift rocks too). And a player can give them a lot of personalised flavor because the playbook doesn't force much upon them.
Clerics are sometimes considered essential for the healing, but they are more than just healbots, and others can heal pretty well too. In later levels their Spells can become very potent.
I have never really seen much of the
Barbarian (it was added later and is not in my book). I can not comment.
The
Immolator is widely agreed to be broken/unfinished. I think they can work if at least one of the stats requirements is removed to make them less M.A.D. (Multi Attribute Dependant). I usually recommend changing the use of INT for attacks, to something they use already. I like using CON (their messy attacks don't seem precise (DEX) nor very WIS to me) and CON is already used by that Move). Their lack of Advanced Move choices can be a problem, though I have never seen a game play long enough for them to run out. Adding the Multiclass Dabbler Advances to the sheet could fix that to some degree. They are already an unfocused Playbooks that does too many things.
If you have any playbook specific questions, I can take a look and give my thoughts. But playbooks are very personal, aside from letting the GM/players know what you plan for the character, they are largely up to the player.
