D&D 5E "Choice Points", "Background" and "Specialities" Wish List

gyor · Apr 26, 2013

Just an idea I had since Mike said that Paragon Paths, Prestige Classes, and even some rarer classes will be turned into Choice Points and Specialties (feat chains) I was wondering which ones you'd likevto see as Specialties and which as Choice points and for which classes.

To get started

Specialty- Malconvoker, Dragon Disciple, Shadowdancer, Incantrix, Arcane Archer.

Choice Points:

Paladin- Greyguard, Avenger, Archivist, Warden, Cavalier, Blackguard, Exorist, Glorious Servitor, Ruby Knight.

Cleric- The current deity archtypes, plus moon, beauty, runes(runepriest).

Ranger- some type of favoured enemy that=Seeker, undead slayer, Sabotuer (constructs), Demon/Devils bane.

Druid- Circle of Oak, Circle of the Moon, Circle of Primal Beast, Circle of Spirits (Shaman), Circle of Shadows (Blight Druid), Circle of the swarm (vermin druid), Circle of the City (Urban Druid).

Warlock- Fey Pact, Fiend Pact, Star Pact, Shadow Pact. Binder only if they can do the flavour right.

Sorceror- Favoured Soul (Divine), Ardent (Psionic), Warmage (Dragonblood), Graveborn (shadow magic and undeath), Wildmage, Beguiler (feytouched), Elementalist.

Wizard- The rest of the schools of Magic, Red Wizard.

That's just a start for now.

Sunseeker · Apr 26, 2013

Personally, your first few start off well, I agree in large part with the Specialities, Paladins and Clerics, but I think you lose sight when you hit Ranger.

Favored enemy is an annoyingly limited mechanic. Your DM either says "You're fighting a lot of undead." In which case you are amazing. Or your DM throws everything and the kitchen sink at you and you suck most of the time. Pathfinder gets Ranger right with it's Archetypes. Avoid favored enemy at all costs, when it exists, keep it minimal.

Rangers should focus on the different types of rangers possible.
Hunter ranger - this is your wilderness guy. Doesn't shave, great at tracking, might not shower either. This guy is a tracker and scout.
Urban ranger - This is your batman/green arrow archetype. Skills, tricks, and a combat style. This guy is a detective.
Combat ranger - This is your sniper/skirmisher archetype. Fewer skills, limited combat styles, emphasis on combat. This guy is a fighter.
....and so on....

I think your druid ones are largely spot on, we should encourage the druid to specialize without totally stripping it of it's unique class features.

Warlock, again is like your Ranger issues. Unless you're suggesting significant class modifications based on the Pact chosen...which is great IMO. Warlocks who deal with the Fey and warlocks who deal with demons should have different types of magic available to them. They may have some similar overlaps, but by and large they should be different.

I don't think Favored Soul or Ardent(or anything psionic) fit into Sorcerer. Favored Soul is more of a Cleric-Sorcerer hybrid who wants to be a Paladin. I'd probably put them as a subset of Cleric since they have traditionally used the Cleric spell-list. It's one of those classes that might even just be better off on it's own given how it's a little bit of everything.

Psionic IMO still needs to be it's own class tree.

But otherwise it's a nice start.

gyor · Apr 26, 2013

Take another look at the 5e Ranger. Favoured Enemy works different from 3.x.

It grants abilities that are useful against certain types of enemies, but which are more universal useful. So the Dragon Favoured enemy gives abilities like like immunity to fear, because dragons cause fear, but its useful against anything the causes fear. They also get an ability that benifits them when fighting large enemies because dragons are big, but that benifits them against any enemy of larger size from pitfiends and giants, to dinasaurs and Tarrassques.

Warlock's I assume will have a very different feel depending upon ones pact.

It wasn't my idea to stick Favoured Soul in Sorceror it was Mikes. His idea was a sorceror who cast divine magic instead of arcane, with other types of Sorcerors casting over types of magic. The basic theme being that being a sorceror was about having innate magic of any sort. This idea is why I suggested Ardent (4e verison), be a type of Psionic Sorceror as being an Ardent is innate psionic magic, as opposed to the disciplined training of an Psion or Battlemind(Psionic Warrior) type.

Psion I'd have the traditional disciplines like Telepathy, Kinetic, and so on, although I might merge Battlemind into Pyschometabalism aka Egoists. Egoist sounds cooler then Battlemind aka fightbrain.

If you want you could also have a few more exotic disciplines like Alienist, Thrallherder, and Divine Mind.

gyor · Apr 26, 2013

shidaku said:
Personally, your first few start off well, I agree in large part with the Specialities, Paladins and Clerics, but I think you lose sight when you hit Ranger.

Favored enemy is an annoyingly limited mechanic. Your DM either says "You're fighting a lot of undead." In which case you are amazing. Or your DM throws everything and the kitchen sink at you and you suck most of the time. Pathfinder gets Ranger right with it's Archetypes. Avoid favored enemy at all costs, when it exists, keep it minimal.

Rangers should focus on the different types of rangers possible.
Hunter ranger - this is your wilderness guy. Doesn't shave, great at tracking, might not shower either. This guy is a tracker and scout.
Urban ranger - This is your batman/green arrow archetype. Skills, tricks, and a combat style. This guy is a detective.
Combat ranger - This is your sniper/skirmisher archetype. Fewer skills, limited combat styles, emphasis on combat. This guy is a fighter.
....and so on....

I think your druid ones are largely spot on, we should encourage the druid to specialize without totally stripping it of it's unique class features.

Warlock, again is like your Ranger issues. Unless you're suggesting significant class modifications based on the Pact chosen...which is great IMO. Warlocks who deal with the Fey and warlocks who deal with demons should have different types of magic available to them. They may have some similar overlaps, but by and large they should be different.

I don't think Favored Soul or Ardent(or anything psionic) fit into Sorcerer. Favored Soul is more of a Cleric-Sorcerer hybrid who wants to be a Paladin. I'd probably put them as a subset of Cleric since they have traditionally used the Cleric spell-list. It's one of those classes that might even just be better off on it's own given how it's a little bit of everything.

Psionic IMO still needs to be it's own class tree.

But otherwise it's a nice start.

A hunter ranger might be counted as a Ranger with favoured enemy beasts. An Urban ranger is tougher, humaniods is already taken by Drizzt type ranger. If they decide to add favourite Terran as alternate options Urbane Ranger would fit. Actually an Urbane Ranger might fit well as a Ranger with the humaniod favoured enemy and the Charlatan background or simular urbanish people orientated background.

Sunseeker · Apr 27, 2013

gyor said:
A hunter ranger might be counted as a Ranger with favoured enemy beasts. An Urban ranger is tougher, humaniods is already taken by Drizzt type ranger. If they decide to add favourite Terran as alternate options Urbane Ranger would fit. Actually an Urbane Ranger might fit well as a Ranger with the humaniod favoured enemy and the Charlatan background or simular urbanish people orientated background.

I would honestly like to see some rangers who didn't use the favored enemy or terrain mechanic at all, and spells while we're at it.

gyor · Apr 27, 2013

There called fighters with the scout background

Li Shenron · Apr 27, 2013

I kind of had a thread for this already: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?336406-Fill-in-the-blanks

gyor · Apr 27, 2013

Crud you right. In fairness you thread title is less then clear. I never actually read it the thread itself.

Li Shenron · Apr 28, 2013

gyor said:
Crud you right. In fairness you thread title is less then clear.

It often happens with my threads... :blush:

the Jester · Apr 29, 2013

I've just got to throw my two coppers in on the matter of "Necromancer".

I think that Necromancer should be a specialty, since D&D has traditionally had both cleric and wizard necromancers. A well-conceived necromancer specialty, along with a few feats to help build up your undead army and so on, is better (IMHO) than making a necromancer wizard tradition.