A Blog Post About the Disney Star Wars Trilogy

If I invited you over to my house for dinner, and I promised to serve you spaghetti and meatballs, but served chicken alfredo instead, how would you feel? Pasta is pasta, right? Eat up! Yum, yum! Or, would you look at me with a furrowed brow and tell me you feel like you were tricked and lied to? I believe that if you're going to promise something, you should do your best to deliver it.

So, Star Wars is a film franchise with the themes of family, faith, and mythology. If someone tells you they're making a Star Wars movie, and the themes are not these, would you feel like you were promised spaghetti and delivered alfredo? In other words, have your expectations been unmet leading to disappointment? For some people, the answer is yes.

Now, what happens if I offer you spaghetti and meatballs, but I actually serve you chicken alfredo, except underneath the chicken alfredo is shepherds pie with pickled beats? Ok, that's a little weird, right? And certainly not what you were expecting. Now, you're disappointed and also confused.

To break it down, Star Wars 7 is spaghetti with meatballs. Star Wars 8 is the chicken alfredo. Star Wars 9 is shepherds pie with pickled beats. I regret that the problem with my food analogy is that I've picked foods that I like to eat. In reality, Star Wars 7 is spaghetti with cucumber spirals instead of noodles and tofu for meatballs. Star Wars 8 is rotten fish. Star Wars 9 is trail mix on top of pizza that's still frozen in the middle. One of these things is not like the other, one of these things does not belong. This trilogy does not have a feeling of consistency or cohesion. It's like the Mona Lisa with pasta and glitter glue. As a result, it's less than what it could have been.

Thank you for patience. Let's talk about the themes in Star Wars 7, 8, and 9.

What is / are the theme(s) of Star Wars episode 7? The movie begins with Poe doing spy-guy things, then Kylo-Ren does villainous things, and then we introduce Finn who does traitor things. Then Poe and Finn crash on a desert planet. Thematically, what do we set up? A sort of a found-family in the making? Cool. I like that.

Then we introduce Rey. She's alone on a desert planet and counting the days. She's unhappy with the world as she finds it. I see where we're going with this, and I'm getting excited! The first real weakness with the theming is that Poe goes missing until one of the final scenes of the film. This right here is the promise of spaghetti and meatballs and the delivering of the cucumber spirals instead of noodles. Darn.

So, let's speed this up. Rey does not have any family. You might say she's desperate for a family. Then she meets Han Solo. She might as well ask, "will you be my daddy?" And Han Solo being a guy with a rough exterior, but a heart of gold takes her under his wing. OK, I love it! What could possibly go wrong?

Skip ahead, and Kylo-Ren kills Han Solo. D'oh! So close!

OK, so the theme of family is still on the table (pun intended, see my food analogy above)! Very, very much so! How do we tie this knot? Well, let's discuss the family. The family in question is the Skywalker family; Or rather, the Skywalker-Solo family! Yes, these families are tied together via the marriage of Han and Leia. Kylo-Ren's real name is Ben Solo. Cool! That means Han, Leia, Luke, and Kylo-Ren are all family. Yippie!

But what about Rey?

Rey was 100% intended to be a Skywalker! I'm not privileged to the behind-the-scenes information, but how could you not piece this together based on episodes 1 through 7? Let's review. Luke Skywalker went missing. Why? Unclear; but if Luke went missing, does it not stand to reason that maybe he also wanted to hide his baby? Gasp! Rey is Luke's daughter? Can it be true? Well, why the @#$%! else would Leia Organa-Solo snub Chewbacca and hug Rey at the end of episode 7, you twit! And why the @#$%! else would Rey be so gifted with the force if she wasn't a descendent of Anakin Skywalker whose midi-chlorian count (bleh, I threw up!) was the highest ever recorded! Duh!

So why was Rey later revealed to be the daughter of a no one in Star Wars 8 and then re-revealed to be a Palpatine in Star Wars 9? That's the rotten fish dish and the half-frozen pizza topped with trail mix that I previously told you about. There really isn't a pay-off to wild changes like this, and it means we need a new reason for why Leia would hug smelly Rey Palpatine.

If Rey is the daughter of Luke, then she would be Kylo-Ren's cousin, and thus, the family theme could be salvaged! Rey's goal would be to save / redeem her cousin like Luke's goal was to save / redeem his father. Insert the clip of the interview with George Lucas talking about the prequels when he says, "it's like poetry, it rhymes." Ta-da! Instead, the way movies 7-9 work out, Rey turns out to be a Palpatine who survives when all Skywalkers and all Solos die, and Rey Palpatine, daughter of the villain of 7 movies, inherits the name and legacy of the heroes. She ends up alone in a desert without Finn and Poe. So, the found family concept is dropped, and Rey ends up as alone as she was at the start of the movies except for force ghosts. She has no kids or family of her own.

Now, let's talk about theme conceptually. What is a theme in a literary context? Well, stories are as much about entertainment as they are about teaching a lesson. The lesson is therefore the substance of your story. The lesson is the theme; the theme is the lesson. In stories, the lesson is communicated to the audience through the hero who must learn the lesson. The value of the lesson is communicated through the hero using that lesson to overcome the conflict (and presumably win or survive or achieve their goal). If the hero fails, it's usually because they didn't learn the lesson. So, if there is no lesson, there is no literary theme, and your story is entertainment with no substance. It's hollow and unfulfilling. It's unsatisfying, like  the 2021 Mortal Combat movie. It's just an excuse to watch people fight and blow stuff up for 90 minutes, and it's lacking the human element.

What lesson did Rey have to learn on-screen in order to achieve her goal? @#$%! if I know.

So, I invite you over for spaghetti and meatballs, but I serve you something else. Is my analogy working? OK, let's change it; what if I promise you spaghetti and meatballs, but it's all tofu and it's chemically altered to taste like spaghetti and meatballs, but it's not very accurate, and it leaves you feeling like something is missing. You're unfulfilled. You just sort of scrunch up your nose and try not to think about what you could have eaten instead. You regret your meal. It was a waste of time. But worse than that, you don't know if you can ever appreciate pasta again. That is the Disney Star War trilogy.

Flow State to Speed Up TTRPG Combat - Game Design & Managing Expectations

I have played in many sessions where we spent more than one hour in a single combat round. Ever since then, I have a newfound resentment for a game I already resent (D&D 5e).

The matter of how to speed up combat in D&D (or other TTRPGs) is more than just a few tips. I want combat to be as fast as any freeform roleplay scene. For that, we have to make concessions to rules and structure. It's in changing player behaviors. It's in changing GM behaviors. It's in changing the rules of your game. I warn you, it might not resemble the same game after you make all these changes. A fast game pace is prioritized over accuracy and complexity of game rules. You might think I'm asking a lot from you, and that I'm asking a lot from your players, but I promise you people will be playing TTRPGs like this in a hundred years. Also, this blog post is just over 4,199 words.

Flow

Flow as in flow state which is a term in psychology that describes the experience of being totally immersed and focused that you lose track of time and performance feels effortless. Think about streaming a movie or video with bad internet connection. The movie stops and stutters every few seconds to buffer. That's very annoying. Most people I know would rather wait for the internet to work properly to watch the movie. No one wants to put up with an analogue medium like a CD where the CD is all scratched up and the tracks don't play right. You want to press play on the movie or the album, and you want the experience to be smooth and fluid from start to finish. No interruptions.

It's difficult to get immersed in something when the quality is choppy and you're constantly being mentally and emotionally disengaged from the substance of the story or the game, then you have to reengage. D&D and TTRPGs are like this. You want to cut out all unnecessary interruptions, pauses or delays in the game. Here's a short list of interruptions: players asking questions (about anything), side conversations, side conversations, distractions (smartphones), people making jokes that don't match the mood of the scene, side conversations again, players not knowing how their spells work, using D&D Beyond with sh@#ty internet connection, players rolling dice to make decisions about how to roleplay their character, people looking up rules in the book, players talking over other players, players not being ready on their turn, and last but not least, side conversations again. I'm going to tell you now, curb anything that makes people disengage from the game and have to reengage with it. The best way to do that is to tell people no breaking character. When people break character, that's when all this stuff starts to happen. No breaking character!

Flow is very important to me in particular because I have ADHD! To me, interrupting flow or causing me to disengage from something I'm focusing on causes frustration. Breaking flow state is a certainty; There is no avoiding it, but, we can do better to preserve it! interruptions cause people to check out or tune out. Their minds wonder. They get impatient. They get frustrated. They get bored. If players are bored because they have to wait for their turn, that's bad GMing! It's bad GMing because you're letting the other players cause interruptions that are easily avoidable. Or you're running a game that's too slow and clunky because there are too many unique powers and spells and maneuvers with very specific rules to get right. Yep, it's you. Train your players and switch games! All of my ideas below are about stream-lining the game, making it more intuitive, being more flexible, being clearer, and encouraging awareness of flow and to preserve it!

Initiative

What is the first thing that slows combat down? It's when the GM says "roll initiative". I used to get excited or anxious, but I roll my eyes and groan these days because initiative is not an important or essential part of a TTRPG. Here are the downsides of initiative. This moment feels like pausing a movie right before the best part to take drink orders. Sure it takes a minute if you're efficient, but it takes people out of the mood. It's a moment where people can take a breather and tension is partially relieved, when people break character, decide that now is a good time to read that rule or read their character sheet for the right thing to do. It's a moment where people start making jokes or talking strategy. The momentum and energy of the scene is lost. In addition, you also have to make and keep a list. I have seen players get their turns skipped more than once. In my experience, it happens very frequently, and it ruins flow for everybody! This happens because initiative turn order is not intuitive. By intuitive, I mean being able to do something without thinking about it. You know what's intuitive? Clockwise turn order. Do clockwise turn order instead.

Why do we roll for initiative anyway? Because that's a rule in the game. Really? That's it? Because it's fair? It's not. Because we like the randomness or unpredictability? Then reroll from round to round. Because we like when the dice tell the story? What if the result doesn't make sense for this scene?

Here's my solution. I have two rules for initiative. First, the general rule is he who takes initiative gets initiative. Before you get excited, here's my point of view. The game is fiction, but that doesn't mean anything goes. There must still be a make-believe world with believable logic (else that's a distraction and we risk breaking flow). If the fighter kicks down the door and declares his intention to charge inside a room, then we roll initiative and the fighter rolls poorly and ends up last in turn order, that means he kicks down the door but somehow the other PCs run inside first, or the NPCs somehow, pending surprise, can potentially get up from whatever they were doing, charge for the door, and hammer the fighter before he goes. That's silly. If the use of the initiative roll ruins the internal logic of the world and the scene, you're using a rule inappropriately. The scenario with the fighter kicking down the door and going last happened in one of my games. It causes a certain cognitive dissonance (which is a mental distraction caused by overthinking) because it's blatantly absurd, and we all laugh at it. That moment of absurdity sort of spoils the mood of the scene. Therefore, the initiative roll is not mandatory and is situational. In fact, your goal should be to make the transition from non-combat into combat seamless. If one side can reasonably act first, they go first! Don't spoil a perfectly planned ambush with a random die roll.

My second rule of initiative roll is to use it to resolve uncertainty only. The perfect time to use an initiative roll is at the start of a duel when two fighters are staring each other down. Then the coin hits the ground. Then they draw their weapons and lunge almost simultaneously. You can even have them roll initiative after they declare their actions.

Interrupting Turn Order

Anything that interrupts or disrupts turn order causes someone to have to stop what they're in the middle of doing it, think about something new, resolve it, then go back to the last thing, and work forward from there. That's messy, occasionally frustrating, and it is an interruption of flow for someone. "What was I doing? Where were we?" "You were here." "Oh yeah." For these reasons, all reactions and held actions are either banned or work like actions. You can go when it's your turn. You cannot go when its someone else's turn. Ever. Even if you're the GM and your NPC has a special legendary action or lair action or whatever that lets them act on someone elses turn. Eff that.

It also stings bugs the ever-living hell !@#$% out of me when it's about to be someone's turn, they're prepared and ready and excited to go, then you cut them off to resolve the interruption, then you get back to that player and they're no longer ready. Ugh! This can happen because the interrupting action can change the conditions of the scene and spoil that player's idea. Interrupting turns should be a technical foul!

Once You Declare Your Action, You Can't Take It Back! (No redo's)

Can I redo my turn? I didn't know there was an obvious, big open pit there. My character would have been smart enough not to do that thing I did. He would have done this other thing instead. The answer is no redo's. Once you declare your action, you cannot change it. This will train players to pay more attention to your descriptions of the room or scene. Part of the problem with redos is they're pathetic. They are. They make everyone look at you and think "oh come on, man." Imagine watching an athlete ask the referee or the announcer if they can redo the last play. It breaks flow and this can spoil the mood of the scene, and that should be a foul.

Player Descriptions

Players absolutely have to describe their own actions! It's not even in question. Tell the players they are co-narrators. It's not about flavor, but it could be; instead, player responsibility is to clearly state what they're doing and how. The intent of the action should be clear. The intended outcome of the action should not be ambiguous. Leave nothing to interpretation. If the GM has to ask for clarification so they can make a ruling, that's back-and-forth we could avoid. It can help everyone if your description states where your character ends their turn. "I run up to the goblin next to the pile of skulls and I hit him with my axe" tells us where you are in space - next to the pile of skulls. This is better than next to goblin #5 because we have to think about where goblin #5 is. Also, avoid using game terminology. Avoid "I use 20 feet of movement to..." Instead, use natural language. "I run across the room to..." Avoid "I use my action to attack..." Instead say "I thrust my sword at the goblin." Use present tense too. Don't say "I'm going to attack the goblin," say "I attack the goblin." That's more concrete, therefore its clearer.

GMs, when the spotlight returns to you, do not restate a player action or narration. "As you swing your sword..." or "as you draw back your bowstring..." Just say what happens after. "You see the goblin's face go white with fear and your sword cuts through their flesh for 6 damage!" Done.

No Out-Of-Character Questions

Sometimes players ask "can I use my such-and-such skill/power/feature to do this thing?" In other words, they either want to know, one, if the rules of the game permit something, or two, they want to know how the Game Master will rule on something before they commit to it. Either way, these questions interrupt flow. You need to remove all of these sorts of moments from the game! All of them!

The solution to the first issue is to tell your players to think about the game as a story telling exercise first and a game second. If you can reasonably do something in real life, you can do it in the game. For example, the game doesn't have rules for hitting someone with the stock of your crossbow, but you absolutely could do this in real life, therefore, you can do it in the game. I don't care what the !@#$% rules say, you absolutely can whack someone with your shotgun by swinging it like a club or hammer. The reason why people have these questions is because they don't trust the GM or because they don't understand the setting or the game. Don't answer these questions; instead, remind the player about the basics of the game. Here's how to play a TTRPG: the player describes their action, then the GM makes a damn ruling and moves on with the game! Also encourage players to treat the setting like a believable world. If something can reasonably work in real life, it effing works in the make-believe world too!

The second issue has been called test-driving your turn. The player doesn't want to commit to something because they're trying to make sure that they're doing the optimal thing first. The solution is to tell them that this is an out-of-character question and tell them that they would be metagaming if they use your answer, and they absolutely would be metagaming. What is metagming? According to D&D 5e's DMG, it's thinking about the game like a game. According to most people, metagaming is making decisions in-character using out-of-character knowledge. The fact is, that weird thing you're asking about, your character wouldn't have access to the GMs answer. You the player are asking the GM a question when you should be immersed in the scene, and you should be in your character's head and you should be thinking about what they would do in the moment. That's what should be the basis for what you're doing on your turn, not a potential GM ruling.

Strategizing is Allowed Before Combat Starts (in play!), Not During

Speaking of metagaming, if a combat round represents mere seconds of time, you don't have time to strategize in the middle of combat. Therefore, any out-of-character conversation is metagaming. Plan ahead. If you're not prepared, why are you getting into a fight? You're playing your character like you don't care what happens to your character. You're thinking about the game like a game, not a role-play exercise or story-telling exercise. Cut that out!

Ready Bonus

If a player is ready on their turn, they get a +2 bonus to their roll. What does ready mean? To avoid argument and to establish expectations, it means that as soon as it is your turn, without any hesitation or delay, you state clearly and concisely what you do and how you do it. No questions. No reading your character sheet. No reading the rules. No questions. No making jokes. None of that crap. Pay attention to the game and be ready!

Skip Turns

If players aren't ready on their turns, that's fine, but people are not entitled to take forever. If they're dragging their ass, you can rule that their character hesitates this round and skip their turn. How much ass dragging is too much? I don't know, feel it out, but give them a last call to declare their action before skipping them. Make sure that everyone is aware of the rule before play.

Consider that players should not have thinking time if their characters do not have thinking time. Thinking time means engagement is not effortless because people are thinking. Part of the definition of flow state is that performance is effortless. Tell players not to be afraid to make decisions with their gut, not their head!

One Action Per Turn

On your turn, players can do one thing! This is called your action! There is no move action. You can act without moving, you can move without acting, and you can move as part of your action up to your maximum movement, but attacking ends your turn. Speech of any kind does not cost your action because you can reasonably speak while running and swinging a sword, but you can speak only one simple sentence per combat round due to the length of time that one combat round represents. One action per turn means shorter turns. Shorter turns means less waiting for your turn. It helps alleviate the problem of people from getting bored and checking out and being bored. Did I mention that long turns are boring?

I advocate cutting bonus actions and multi-attacks too! Every time I hear a player say "that ends my turn." or a GM ask "is that the end of your turn?", I get a little annoyed because that's an interruption in the flow of the game. It should be clear when your turn is over. We shouldn't need to seek confirmation. The exception is if you can describe your action and bonus action in one smooth, fluid sentence, like writing a line in the book; and also refer to the rule about no redo's. You hit the monster twice even though he dies on the first hit. Moving on. Consider that in chess, when you take your hand off your piece, your turn is over. In this game, when you punctuate your description, your turn is over.

Let's talk about a way that actions get a little loosey-goosey. I'm talking about the free action. This is the, ahem, thing that you can do as part of your action because it's so, so simple. Like drawing your weapon or opening a door. People can get stuck on this. Stuck is an interruption to flow state. Why? Because the rules can't cover every conceivable situation. So, a GM ruling is sometimes necessary here. Here's how to think about it: it's not about the number of things you can or can't do, it's about if you can reasonably do any / all of them in the length of time that your combat turn represents. If it sounds reasonable, let it happen. If it's cool and it doesn't cause cognitive dissonance, let it happen. This is charitable and simple.

One Action, One Roll

If an action is particularly complex, don't break it down into multiple steps and resolve each step. For example, let's say I describe my action as "I grab a discarded shied off the ground, then use it to slide down the banister of the stairs, dismount at the bottom, flip through the air, grab onto the chandelier, swing ten feet and fling myself past the soldiers, then tumble and roll, and run into cover behind the column." Let's say the rules let you do all these things on your turn. Resolve it with one roll! Because there are so many places to fail, then the lower the roll, the earlier in the sequence they fail. Easy. You might (might!) even say they that because they character is doing so much, that the difficulty is slightly greater. Actually, why do we need to roll?

Rules about Jokes (AKA Don't Spoil the Mood)

Jokes are part of the game. We are all very, very aware of the absurdity of this exercise; of sitting around a table and pretending we live in a world where Taco Bell doesn't exist and we're all really tempted to make a Taco Bell joke, or make a movie or song reference, or whatever. It's normal and some people would even say it's part of the hobby or the fun. To an extent, sure. As long as the jokes don't cause too big a delay, no harm; however, if we establish a scary scene or a sad scene, don't @#$%! spoil the mood! If you undermine the mood, you're a spoil sport to someone else. That's like talking during a movie. Don't do it! Exceptions are case-by-case, like if it's in-character and your character would totally say something inappropriate. As the GM, it is appropriate to do one arbitrary and malicious thing to the offending player's character as long as it doesn't harm the innocent player's character, but keep it within the logic of the scene. For example, an NPC who loses respect for that character. If no NPCs are obviously around, God is.

Simplified Character Sheets and Stat Blocks

Imagine flipping your character sheet over onto the back and then playing your character or NPC. Can you do this? If the answer is no, then your game is to complex. Stop it. Shame on you. If you have to look your character sheet over in the middle of the game, that means you're not paying attention to the game. You're missing GM descriptions or you're missing out on what the other players are doing or what's happening. If you're missing information, you might need to ask for it, and that causes an interruption. If you have to read the dumb rules about how to run your character when you should be describing what you do and how you do it, that's an interruption. Either learn your !@#$% better, or play a simpler game!

No Rules Discussion

None! Zero! Make a ruling and move on with the game! Allow players to make a simple case for why something should go their way, and rule in their favor or in favor of fun. No rule books. No reading rules allowed. No interpreting rules. No discussing how you would make a ruling. None - not during the game at least. Use the honor system. If you have questions or concerns, make a note to review it outside of the game. Deemphasize the rules. They're not perfect. There is no right way to play and there is no perfectly designed rule set or game. The game designers are flawed and imperfect just like you and me.

Treat Rooms and Scenes as if they are in a Quantum State

If a player is not confident in the specifics about room or scene, such as its shape, size, features, or other obstacles, this is going to cause them to want to ask questions. Oof! That's no good! So, here's the problem, we can't always get a room or scene as precise and literal like a professionally drawn tactical map! Then the solution is to embrace abstract space. Play "yes, and" and don't say no. Consider that rooms and their features are in a quantum state meaning things both exist but also don't exist at the same time, and we only know for certain when something is in the scene because someone speaks it into the scene.

Describe the theme and general features of the room once when the players enter a room, and tell the players they are allowed to have some say about what features are available to them. If it's a library, then anything that would reasonably be in a library is there! If they're in a kitchen, then they can pick up a knife off any counter and throw it; they don't need to ask where the knives are. If they're in a graveyard, they can always kneel and take cover behind a big tomb stone! If they're in a dense forest, then line of sight is always broken when characters are more than one move away. If a player is in a bar, there are stools and plates and mugs of ale handy, and they get tossed around when someone gets knocked into a table really hard.

With this rule, you'll need the players to track their own position in the room! Have them  include in the description of their action where they start and end their turn each round. I move from the door to the goblin in the corner. I run from the side of the room and hop up onto the table in the center. If we lose track of where you are, that's your responsibility, and we're not waiting for you to figure it out. I'm telling you where you are and you're going to like it. Also, be less strict about exact distances and placement. Don't count squares if you can just use a 6" pencil and approximate your move.

Simultaneous NPC Turns

If you have a group of like-NPCs, you can describe what they all do in one or two fluid sentences (because we're effectively using side-initiative). "These three goblins attack you" you say as you move three goblin minis to the fighter's mini, "and these two goblins attack you" you say as you move two goblin minis to the ranger. Then you make three attack rolls against the fighter, then roll damage, then two attack rolls against the ranger, then roll damage. Then say "the fighter takes 6 damage, the ranger takes 4." Remember the flavor. There, your turn is done. Roll attack and damage dice together, of course. Roll all of them at once! Group the dice based on proximity before reading them. Read dice left to right. Do not run trash mobs individually.

Simultaneous Player Turns

Speaking of consolidating turns, do this. Go around the table and have all players declare an action (including movement). That's it, nothing else. "I move and attack the goblin on the right of the evil shrine", "I shoot the goblin priest from the door", "I cast a spell on the crowd of goblins in the middle of the room." Once everyone's action is declared, then they roll dice. Then you describe the results. "You miss the goblin on the right side of the shrine, you hit the goblin priest, you blow up three goblins with your spell." Done. Use this for less important fights. Hell, use it for any fight.

There are Only Three Classes - Game Design Theory

What are Classes?

What is the point of classes in your TTRPG? Classes offer different categorizations of character options, but beyond that, what is the value of a class system? Classically, their value comes in distinguishing playstyles or roles in an adventuring party. Each class has a specialty meaning they can do something that the other classes cannot! If classes start to blend together, or if classes begin to overlap, then some classes risk become redundant.

Some classes systems are strictly mechanical, but some class systems describe your character's place in the setting. For example, the word fighter is an abstract word. As a class, it describes anyone who is trained in the art of war, but a soldier is a fighter with allegiance to a country. A knight or samurai are a part of social class. Further, the class of knight and samurai describes the character's cultural (and maybe even ethnical) origin. Some class systems also give titles to your character at different levels.

Pure Classes

Truely there are only three types of pure classes.

Fighter - guy who bonks, wears armor, uses shields; for conventual combat

Rogue - guy with uncommon, usually non-combat skills; a utility class

Mage - guy who casts magical spells; extraordinary and supernatural stuff

I call these the three basic classes. I'm going to refer to these three classes throughout this post, although, apologies, I might not use the class names consistently; Rogues are also known as thief, mages are also known as magic-user.

Combination Classes

Some classes are effectively a combination of classes or combo class for lack of a better term. For example, the cleric as it was originally published in the original D&D game was a little bit of a fighter and a little bit of a magic-user. It was something of an in between. What distinguishes cleric from fighter is they can't use as many weapons and armor. What distinguishes cleric from magic-user is clerics get a different spell list, and it didn't have the as much spell variety. Further, clerics have their own specialty in turning the undead and a roleplay restriction that required them to be an ethically or morally lawful / good character. Note that to create a combination class that's not excessively powerful, you must get some but not all benefits of one class, and some but not all benefits of the other class, and possibly some other restrictions or requirements.

Variant Classes

Over the years, other classes have been added. Paladin, Ranger, and Barbarian were originally variants of the fighter in Advanced D&D, not separate classes, which makes sense because fighter does not describe a specific type of warrior. Fighter abstractly describes any and all types of warriors. If you don't like the term variant class, you could also go with a sub-class. A ranger is a fighter who trades his heavy armor for tracking skills to fight beasts and outlaws on the edge of civilization. Barbarian comes from the Greek "barbaros" meaning foreigner, and so a barbarian is just a fighter from another culture, usually a culture with a lower level of technological development. A scald (I think this was mentioned in some unearthed arcana or other supplemental magazine) is a warrior poet. Scalds make records of the battles they participate in as a song or poem. I think it was a prototype of a bard. By the way, a bard is actually a rank for a druid-in-training, not whatever modern D&D says. Fantasy, am I right?

Prestige Classes

Some games have prestige classes. These are classes that are earned through play. In D&D 3e, arcane trickster and eldritch knight were both prestige classes. Knight and Samurai are, in my mind, prestige classes. Both knight and samurai are types of fighters, but they have a social rank. The elevated social status means you have privileges, but also duties and allegiances, and even a code of conduct. These positions must therefore be earned, or granted by an ranking NPC, hence why they're prestigious. I would also argue that a paladin is a prestige class because paladin comes from the latin word palatinus which means "of the palace"; a paladin was therefore a member of the palace. Who lives in a palace? Nobles and royalty. Ordinary warriors do not become paladins. How did paladins become religious warriors? Because they serve a lord whose authority comes from a higher power (God). God blesses the king, and so, paladins, being of loyalty to a king blessed by God, and being of faith in that God, get just a touch of that blessing. This is why paladins can perform lay on hands and turn undead and etc.

Specialties

What's important about classes is that they have a specialty or a niche. This means that there is something that only they can do that no one else can do, or alternatively, no one else can do as well as they can! If a class doesn't have a niche, then there's no point in having them as a distinct class. Maybe you should opt for a skill-based system rather than a class-based system.

If you have a class that isn't the best at doing what it does, then why would you pick them? For example, in 5th edition D&D, there is the Rogue class and the Ranger class. The Ranger can get the survival skill and they can be double-proficient in it, unlike the ranger. Furthermore, the 5e Rogue has a combat action called Sneak Attack which allows them to add a bunch of bonus damage dice to an attack roll if a condition (having advantage) is met. Meanwhile, the 5e Ranger class has a Hunter's Mark bonus action. Get a load of this. It costs a bonus action to use it to mark a target or to mark a new target. When you attack a marked target, you get to add an additional damage die. Just one. Want to know how to simplify this? Just give the ranger a bonus damage die when they attack. They would still be doing less damage than a Rogue's Sneak Attack. So, if a 5e Rogue can track better than a 5e Ranger, and do more damage than a ranger, why pick Ranger? In my opinion, the other 5e Ranger options are meh. In my opinion, the designers of modern editions of D&D have trivialized the ranger as a distinct class and they should just make the ranger a subclass of either rogue or fighter (or maybe they can make it a floating subclass?). The reasons why they haven't are up to speculation, and I'm not usually one for that.

Designing a Class System

One of my favorite examples of games with a class system is Lamentations of the Flame Princess; it's a retroclone of D&D Basic Expert (or B/X) from 1984. To my recollection, you can download the players handbook and referee guide (both books without pictures) for free on the website! What I like about the LotFP Fighter is that they are the only class that gets a scaling to-hit bonus. Every other class only gets a +1 to-hit bonus, but Fighter's to-hit bonus is equal to their level. Why do I like this? Because it makes the fighter distinct. Really, why would a magic-user grow in martial proficiency as they level up? You could argue that they'd get a little better over time, but do we really need rules for that? For simplicity, I would say just nah.

In the Thief Class (the old name for the Rogue) section of the LotFP book is where the game describes skills. Why? Because you don't need skills to be in a separate chapter because only the Thief needs skills. Duh. Skills are rolled on a six-sided die in LotFP. The book says the referee can permit any player to roll a skill check if it is reasonable, but they succeed by rolling a 1. In other words, the other classes have a 16.67% chance to succeed a skill check if the referee rules it's allowed. The thief is the only character who can do all the skill rolls and can improve them as they level up.

The Magic-User Class in LotFP is the only class that can do magic (asterisk, there is a cleric class and an Elf class). In summary, if you want to hit things, be a fighter. If you want to do skills, be a thief. If you want to cast spells, be a magic-user. That's a class system.

Re-Flavoring an Existing Class Rather than Creating a New One

The LotFP Magic-User is the only class who can cast spells. There is a fully designed Cleric class in the book, but I've heard the game's author say that there really isn't a cleric class in his head because the Cleric in LotFP in his setting is just a magic-user who thinks he's a cleric because all magic-users are a little crazy. This makes sense because the LotFP book does not distinguish magic-user spells from cleric spells, and the mechanical distinctions between Magic-User and Cleric in LotFP are minor. I think I like this a lot! It says to me that if you want to be some other class, all you have to do is pick a standard class and flavor it as something else.

I really like this idea. I would rather have this as an option than a long, long catalog of distinct classes. Why? Because I don't need that! It's bloat! It's clutter! And because I want to make my own stuff. I want looseness and flexibility in my games! I don't want players looking at a catalog and asking "is this it?"  If you want to be a Paladin, pick Fighter and flavor it like a religious character. If you want to be a Druid, pick Cleric and re-flavor it as the priest of a nature religion or a nature wizard or whatever the eff a fantasy druid is. Etc. There's no need to design distinct, separate classes that are basically the same with minor differences.

Balance

Did you notice I never once mentioned jack crap about balance? Attempting to balance the character classes is probably what ruins the class system. Classes should have specialties. There should absolutely be things that some classes cannot do, or if they can all do it, the rest of the classes have the basic, minimal chance that any normal man would have at doing it. The trouble with balancing classes is that it's work, it's unnecessary work, and you probably can't achieve a perfectly balanced class-based game with classes that feel distinct. I feel that the wizard class is trivialized by the presence of other magic classes.

Proposed Alternatives

Five Torches Deep is a 5e compatible game that made four classes. I don't recall exactly, but it's basically fighter, magic-user, thief, and cleric, but with different names. All of the 5e classes appear as subclasses. Fighter, Barbarian, and Monk might have been subclasses of the Warrior. Thief, Bard, and Ranger might have been subclasses of the Rogue. Druid, Paladin, and Cleric might have been subclasses of the Zealot. And finally, wizard, sorcerer, and warlock are subclasses of the Mage. Why? Because you're taking the four basic classes, the most basic classes, and you're using them as a base. Then you're creating distinct flavors of each base. That is so effing slick! Seriously, look up Five Torches Deep!

Olde Swords Reign (is free online by the way!) is 5e compatible and also uses the four basic classes of fighter, specialist (instead of thief), magic-user, and cleric. There are no subclasses or variant classes. Instead, the game takes all the class features you're familiar with and puts them into different pools of feats. The categories are fighter feats, specialist feats, and general feats. Everyone has access to the general feats. Essentially, this decouples class from subclass entirely, because subclasses or variant classes are restrictive. You aren't restricted to a single growth path like in 5e, instead, you can pick and choose what you want when you want it. It's customizable and allows for a lot of flavor.

Social Skills-Using Class

In case you're wondering, I don't care to create a class dedicated to influencing others socially because this is a roleplaying game and I don't believe the mechanics of the game should govern or try to mechanize or systematize conversations. I don't believe conversation should be balanced with other aspects of the game, like combat or exploration. In fact, I hate that! I think anyone who can fight well can also talk and explore perfectly well.

Classes Describe the Setting

Another thing to consider is that the rules of the game describe the setting. The class options that are available to the players describe what classes exist in the world, or alternatively, which character classes are adventuring classes. For example, in D&D B/X, there is no option for dwarves to be any class. They are restricted to the Dwarf class. As a reader, you wonder why. The book doesn't explain it, but you have to figure that there must be Dwarf clerics because they have their own pantheon, it's just that dwarf clerics don't adventure. Fair. In AD&D, dwarves had class options but were restricted from being magic-users. Why? Must be something about dwarven culture shunning magic or the career. Use your imagination. Maybe there are dwarven magic-users, but they're very rare. I recall notes that most dwarfs are lawful good and the thief class can't be that alignment, so there you go. Dwarf culture does not produce thieves.

If you take my recommendation to pick a basic class and flavor it, that flavor must be compatible with the setting. If you pick any class and flavor it as a traveling minstrel or a troubadour, that means there are traveling minstrels in the world. Just keep in mind that, rules as written, the game master (GM) is the curator of the setting and it's his setting even if it's a published, official setting. That means if the GM says no dwarf wizards, then there are no dwarf wizards.

Multi-Classing or Dual-Classing?

Multi-classing means being able to gain a new class and the benefits of the new class while still retaining the benefits of the old class. Dual-classing means being two full-classes at once, possessing all of the benefits of each, and progressing in them both simultaneously. Dual-class characters usually need double xp to advance in level, but a multi-class character needs normal xp based on the total of their levels in all their classes.

I believe multi-classing must be pursued in play. If you're a thief and you join the army and receive military training then congratulations, you're now multiclassing as a thief-fighter. However, if you as a player of a thief character decide you want to also be a fighter one day, no, you can't just add that to your character sheet. If one multi-classes, there must be a penalty for balancing, right? Not necessarily. If I join the military and go through boot camp, why wouldn't I be able to do everything a beginner soldier can do? I would just be a beginner or a novice in that new class. No dual-classing.

The Three Basic Classes in Other Genres

I'm not much of a sci-fi guy, but I suppose I could be into space opera. Think Star Wars for a moment. How do these three classes (fighter, thief, magic-user) translate into Star Wars? First, let's make some basic assumptions. First, piloting is a common skill and does not indicate a class (example a pilot class). Lots of people seem to be able to use vehicles. No big deal. Second, use of computers and machines (even droids) is also common to people within the setting, even if it's all unfamiliar to you! These skills do not indicate a need for a class to me, such as an engineer or machinist class. Third, there is no magic, instead we have the force. Forth, guns are the dominant way of fighting in many places, and in those places, they'd be common and ordinary, but weapons that bonk or cut or stab are probably uncommon in those areas.

So, a fighter in Star Wars would be able to handle any armor and any weapon. A staff, a grenade, a big gun, whatever. There's one exception: the light saber is off limits. Why? Because! Now shut up.

A thief would be able to use peasant weapons, small arms, a holdout blaster. Right? And they'd be able to hack any computer terminal or pick any locked door too, and they'd be able to disarm any trap or explosive, at least better than anyone else. They can sneak and they can back attack. Familiar? Cool? OK.

A magic-user is out. Sorry. Instead, we have force-user. Either a jedi or sith, or some uninitiated force adept. A force adept is someone with some force sensitivity or above-average potential with the force who has discovered a few basic force powers. They can't really learn more on their own, they need a teacher. Jedi have restrictions to the list of force powers, but the sith have unrestricted access. The force-user has access to the same weapons as a thief (small blasters, bonk-sticks), and the supremely supreme light saber.

As a thought experiment, what is Han Solo's class? He's described as a smuggler, but does that mean the same thing as a Thief? Maybe he's a fighter who smuggles? I would say if you wanted to interpret Han as either a thief or a fighter, you can. It depends on how you justify it.

Now, the Star Wars KOTOR games describe three (non-jedi and non-droid) classes: Soldier, Scout, and Scoundrel. If you read them, you'll easily identify Soldier is the Fighter and Scoundrel is the Thief. So what is a scout? At a glance, I think it's something like a ranger, but I'm not sure. I only conclude that based on the fact that I think ranger definitely suits a setting like Star Wars. I think someone really only stuck the Scout in the game for variety. I would rule that it's just a variant of thief with wilderness survival skills instead of urban thievery skills and call it a day. And I think that's fine.

I played Shadow Run on the PC by Harebrained Schemes. It's good. It's a cyberpunk fantasy thing. They have street samurai as their fighter and that's what I picked. They have a class called a Rigger that remotely controls drones or robots as a utility class, possibly a thief(?), and a class called a Decker who goes into the internet almost like going into the matrix and they hack computers (another utility class). Cool in concept but I thought it wasn't fun. They have mages (magic-users) and shamans (magic-users with a nature flavor). They also have a class called either the adept or the physical adept which as far as I can tell is the monk, so a flavor of fighter.

Skill System Plus Class System?

Not really into this myself. The first time this might have been done is D&D 3e, and I think this led to the eventual trivialization of the Ranger class by taking their specialty, tracking, and making it into a general skill, survival, that anyone else can do. I think the benefits of a class system is to simplify a game, and the benefits of a skill system are to allow customization. The thief is the utility class. Give them a theme for their skills. Thievery or Wilderness Survival or Alchemy. Just use your judgement in-game and play. It's fine.

If you want multiple skills or skill sets, I suggest instead making clear, distinct variants of the Rogue / thief, aka the utility class. Basic Fantasy RPG (also free!), has the thief as a core class and the ranger as a supplemental optional class which just swaps some skills around. Effectively, the dungeon skills and the wilderness skills. Use the logic of your setting to make these variants.

Conclusion

There are three categories of classes: The combat class, the utility class, and the magic class. Each category has flavors (variants). You don't need distinct mechanics for each. I have an opinion that classes should be distinct. For example, if you're a non-combat class, why would you be good at combat? Only the utility class needs to worry about skills, and only the magic class needs to worry about magic. Below, I have an abstract concept of how one might distinguish these. Features that are listed are part of the class, but features that are not listed are not. For simplicity, I am using D&D 3e saving throw names.

Combat Class

HP: base of 10 HP, +1 HP per level

Weapons and Armor: all, including shields

Hit Bonus: +1 per level, max +10

(optional) Either Bonus Attack or Bonus Damage Die: +1 every 5 levels

(optional) Crit range: +1 every 5 levels (19-20 at level 5, 18-20 at level 10)

Saves: Fortitude +1 per level

Flavors: Fighter, Barbarian, Paladin, Monk / Pugilist, Soldier, Knight

Utility Class

HP: base of 8 HP, +1 HP at even levels

Weapons and Armor: peasant

(optional) Hit Bonus: +1 at even levels or +1 every three levels beginning at level 3

Skill Bonus: +1 per level, max +10

Skills: Based on flavor or a theme

(optional) backstab: +2 bonus damage dice when attacking unaware foe from behind

Saves: Reflexes +1 per level

Flavors: Thief, Dungeoneer, Ranger, Alchemist, Assassin, Rogue

Magic Class

HP: base of 8 HP, +1 HP at even levels

Weapons and Armor: peasant

(optional) Hit Bonus: +1 at even levels or +1 every three levels beginning at level 3

Spellcasting Bonus: +1 per level, max +10

Spells Available: Based on flavor or a theme

Saves: Will +1 per level

Flavors: Mage, Cleric, Druid, Wizard, Sorcerer, Witch, Warlock, War Priest

I would suggest allowing players to distinguish these characters with feats or talents if this is too basic for them. How are they available, either by level up or training or whatever, and how frequently, is up to you, but don't hand them out too often.