D&D 5E What Subclasses would you like to see?

[Delandel]

Rogue: Knife/Dagger thrower subclass. I want this. I need this.

Back when I played 3.5 I remember jumping through so many hoops to make that concept work. I remember taking a Halfling Rogue Paragon class thing, following up with a dagger rogue PrC, then a dab of master thrower prc, and some tome of battle prc so my daggers could return to me. What a glorious mess. No regrets, of course, but if they gave me it as an easy to use subclass I would be so, so happy.

 

[Khaalis]

Rogue: Knife/Dagger thrower subclass. I want this. I need this.

Its not a subclass but 2 feats were tossed out in Morrus's feat thread that might work for you in a pinch.

Daggermaster
Thrown Weapon Master

I do agree though that a daggermaster subclass might work well. Might add that to the to-do list. What do you think the concept needs that can't currently be done (or do the feats pretty much cover it)?

 

[Mouseferatu]

Honestly the more I think about this the more I really think I need to do a separate alternate fighter class especially as it can support its own full grouping of subclasses.

I'm really torn on this. On the one hand, I get where you're coming from; I absolutely see the appeal. On the other, there would be so much overlap with the "normal" fighter--especially battlemaster, since so many of those maneuvers are perfect for a duelist/swashbuckler type--that I still really feel there should be some way to do it as a subclass.

You know... I have no idea if 5e would ever include something like this, but this is a good place for Pathfinder's archetypes. They swap out certain class abilities to create a new version.

I mean, what does it take to turn the battlemaster into a swashbuckler or duelist sort? Swap out medium and heavy armor proficiency for a Char-based Unarmored Defense. That's it. Absolutely everything else is just a matter of choosing the right options: the duelist or two-weapon styles, the most swashbuckly combat maneuvers, and a selection of solely Dex-based weapons. I honestly can't think of anything else you really need.

 

[Minigiant]

Shadowdancer for the rogue.
Hiding in any shadow but your own. A pet shadow to tail enemies. Shadow jumping. And DANCING!!!


And a SF/KoF Monk subclass that is based on reaction based counterattacks, punishing misses, and overcomminiting to aggressive attacks.

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

I guess one could come up with Arcana Evolved-flavored subclasses:

An Oathsworn Monk
An Akashic Bard
A Greenbond Druid
A Champion Paladin

 

[Li Shenron]

Subclasses design space is virtually unlimited...

But what I think it's sadly missing from the PHB is more clerical domains and rogue archetypes.

For domains, the sky's the limit... pretty much any single "concept" can be turned into a "God(dess) of <insert concept here", so I'd like for instance to have domains to better cover some concepts used by deities of FR, and the historical pantheons: Wisdom, Justice, Duty, Agriculture, Magic, Death(good), Sea/Ocean, Mountains, Crafts, Arts, Beauty, Deserts, Murder, Lies, Disease, Luck, Undeath........

For Rogue Archetypes, just take a look at older ones in the playtest. A glaring omission in the PHB is that of a treasure hunter. Of course, all D&D characters are in a sense treasure-hunters, but IMHO the Rogue always more than the others, and the most iconic Rogue ever is Indiana Jones: so when I think of "Rogue" I always start from Indy foremost, and the problem is that he is neither a thief, nor an assassin, nor an arcane trickster.

Then another Rogue Archetype needed is that of a spy: the spy background doesn't help at all, in fact a true spy is someone who disguises herself as having another role in society, and that means it should have (or otherwise look like it has) any other background.

Possibly another missing archetype is "con-man" but in this case it might be that the Charlatan background itself covers it well enough.

In addition to those, I would like to see...

- more Totem Warrior animals
- a Bard subclass themed on being a dreadful performer (think Assurancetourix/Cacophonix)
- a tamer-or-beasts Druid (with plenty of animals, not the usual single "pet")
- as many additional Fighter Maneuvers as they can design
- more elemental Monk's abilities (not sure how many there are already, but I've heard they are not that many...)

Adding Sorcerer, Warlock, and Wizard new subclasses would be much easier than the other classes, so I'm not going to repeat other people's suggestions.

That leaves out the Ranger... it has only 2 subclasses, and honestly I can't at the moment think about more stuff beyond those (except that 3 favoured enemy types are really few, but that's not technically part of the subclass IIUC), except maybe a "planewalker" ranger. Terrain-based rangers could be another option, although IMO they could also do these with replacing favoured enemy with favoured terrain.

 

[Khaalis]

I'm really torn on this. On the one hand, I get where you're coming from; I absolutely see the appeal. On the other, there would be so much overlap with the "normal" fighter--especially battlemaster, since so many of those maneuvers are perfect for a duelist/swashbuckler type--that I still really feel there should be some way to do it as a subclass.

You know... I have no idea if 5e would ever include something like this, but this is a good place for Pathfinder's archetypes. They swap out certain class abilities to create a new version.

This is basically what I'd been getting at earlier with making Light Fighter an ALT-Fighter, as well as my comments on the need for a Spell-Less Ranger.

I'd really like to finesse the core archetypes, not replace them. Personally I don't care if it overlaps a normal fighter a little because if it is presented correctly it will be no different than having two regular fighters in a group. They'll just shine at different times. Or could be looked at as a fighter choice to fit different campaign styles. If you are running an Urban Renaissance Fantasy or a Swashbuckling Seas campaign, you don't necessarily want a heavy fighter over a light fighter.

I mean, what does it take to turn the battlemaster into a swashbuckler or duelist sort? Swap out medium and heavy armor proficiency for a Char-based Unarmored Defense. That's it. Absolutely everything else is just a matter of choosing the right options: the duelist or two-weapon styles, the most swashbuckly combat maneuvers, and a selection of solely Dex-based weapons. I honestly can't think of anything else you really need.

I'ld look at INT over CHA for Unarmored Defense personally. The archetype IS known to be a bit flashy in some of its subclasses, but mot all. However, all subclasses are known for their styles being more INT based.

Here is the Duelist Thread where I presented a few ideas. It is a simple subclass adaptation of Battle Master:
* Lose Student of War and gain Duelist's Defense.
* A few changes to the maneuver list.
* New item "Buckler Shield".

Then I got to thinking about a light fighter which would be better at:
* Better skill list aimed at the light fighter subclasses.
* Better equipment tailored to the various subclasses.
* Better Fighting Styles choices, such as adding Brawler, Firearms, while removing Archery, Great Weapon Fighting, etc. Each list of available fighting styles being designated by the subclass.
* One thing I would do though is swap Combat Superiority to be base class and move Fighting Style to be part of each Subclass's 3rd level slot.

 

[77IM]

I'm really torn on this. On the one hand, I get where you're coming from; I absolutely see the appeal. On the other, there would be so much overlap with the "normal" fighter--especially battlemaster, since so many of those maneuvers are perfect for a duelist/swashbuckler type--that I still really feel there should be some way to do it as a subclass.

You know... I have no idea if 5e would ever include something like this, but this is a good place for Pathfinder's archetypes. They swap out certain class abilities to create a new version.

I mean, what does it take to turn the battlemaster into a swashbuckler or duelist sort? Swap out medium and heavy armor proficiency for a Char-based Unarmored Defense. That's it. Absolutely everything else is just a matter of choosing the right options: the duelist or two-weapon styles, the most swashbuckly combat maneuvers, and a selection of solely Dex-based weapons. I honestly can't think of anything else you really need.

A feat for Unarmored Defense would do it, and could apply to other classes as well (swashbuckling paladin? Yes please!).

It would actually be great as a function of Defensive Duelist which I feel is slightly weak, since it uses your reaction, and the classes most likely to want this (rogue and battlemaster fighter) already have good defensive reaction options. Also Unarmored Defense is slightly weak so combining them should be fine. Plus Defensive Duelist already covers the conceptual space.

I'd let it set your unarmored AC to 10+Dex+Cha or 10+Dex+Int to make it appealing to Int-based rogues too. Also allowing the choice of two abilities makes it slightly more powerful (more likely to hit AC 16 early on). It also becomes an attractive feat for high-Dex wizards, sorcerers, bards, and bladelocks, but I think that's OK (it doesn't seem like a must-have). Using Int or Cha nicely does not overlap with the barbarian or monk versions. This leaves rangers, clerics, and druids out in the cold, but I think that's OK.

 

[HardcoreDandDGirl]

I would love to see

1) a swashbuckling rogue build that uses maneuvers and dice like the battlemaster fighter
2) either a ranger or barbarian that plays like a 4e warden with changing forms
3) an assassin's creed style rogue or monk with enhanced senses and deadly strikes
4) Psychic warrior for fighter
5) Druid with an animal companion
6) Warlock pact with Dragons
7) Chronomancer school for wizards

 

[Ratskinner]

The more I think about it, the more I think there is room for a duelist subclass--but as a subclass of rogue, not fighter. The rogue is already built to function with little/no armor, to focus on Dex, to be skill-intensive, and to be more maneuverable. I think it might be a lot easier to tweak the rogue into swashbuckler than the fighter, which was built with heavy armor and the like in mind.

IIRC, there was even a Rogue Swashbuckler kit in 2e (of course, IIRC there were swashbuckler kits for rogue, fighter, and maybe bard). So its not without some precedent, I think.

Strangely, if you're willing to reskin, I think the monk might be best class to go whole-hog armorless fighter. ?!