Community

We all know about the every class included from a PHB 1 from all editions to date, but some may end up as Themes or what-have-you (I'm looking at you, Barbarian).

All I want is some form of Monk right off the bat.

IMO, the default/baseline should be as simple as possible, whilst still allowing classes to do what they're supposed to do. I'm talking essentials-style slayer here. Beyond that, modules could be used to add more complicated mechanics.

A stripped-down slayeresque fighter is pretty straightforward. I'm not sure exactly how much the wizard could be simplified whilst still keeping it "wizardly", but I think it would be worth playtesting and assessing whether there might be scope for a super-simple wizard that lacks a spellbook and potentially even lacks Vancian magic/AEDU structure - perhaps similar to the Bladesinger in terms of reliance on at-will attacks. Perhaps that's going too far! But I think whatever the baseline is for the wizard class, it should be as far towards the simple end of the spectrum as palatable. Perhaps a super-simplified version of Vancian casting might work as a very simple baseline mechanic (AEDU without the E or U?)

If the idea of modules is to start simple and then build up complexity, then the baseline has to be simple. Of course, vancian/AEDU should be amongst the earliest modules released - arguably IN the player's handbook. But I don't think any class should feature complex mechanics as their baseline, if the whole modules idea is going to work.

I agree if the simple fighter is just a preselected feat heavy version then they'll have missed the mark.  Some people want something with few tactical decisions during combat.  You and I may want more than that but there is a definite element who want true simplicity.