D&D 5E Classes you're hoping WotC will create

[ppaladin123]

Check out Second Edition Psionics, they had attribute checks as part of the manifestation.



I am not confident on them adding sub-classes anymore. In the Elemental Evil Compendium they added Deep Gnomes, and they are not a gnome sub-race they are a separate race. This does not give me the confidence that the systems they put in place for sub-class and sub-races will be used in the future.

Actually they are a sub-race of gnomes. If you read carefully they note this and then point out that they simply combined the stats and features of gnomes and the subrace together for the convenience of the reader (so one wouldn't have to look at two documents at once).

 

[Eric V]

Did you notice that also their Channel Divinity is pretty much the twin attack roll thing from Oath of Enmity? I think the best avenger in 5e is an Oath Of Vengeance/Assassin. It works super well.

Sorry, that's what I meant.

Can it work? I don't know...It's got huge MAD issues, some seriously incompatible armor and weapon (considering SA limitations) proficiencies, reduced spell capacity, and more. Not sure that combo works out in actual play, quite frankly. Have you played one? How did it go?

 

[Eric V]

What got cut from 5e wasn't the concept of a warrior-leader, or the story that brings, but rather the specific mechanics of morale-based healing and fiddly movement and buffs. It's entirely possible to play an interaction-based character who fights and coordinates the efforts of others in 5e.

True, but those mechanics make sure that the playing of the character that way has an actual in-game effect. They're not unimportant.

 

[mordaken]

Actually they are a sub-race of gnomes. If you read carefully they note this and then point out that they simply combined the stats and features of gnomes and the subrace together for the convenience of the reader (so one wouldn't have to look at two documents at once).

Ahh yep, missed that sorry. Confidence restored.

 

[AverageCitizen]

The 4E class I'd like to see return is Invoker - because I think it just missed out on a lot of potential. The concept hits a sweet spot in the role/power source matrix that deserves to be addressed with a fun class. I'd love to see an Invoker in robes that calls down wrath with a spell list that is a bit more 'Heaven's Wrath' than the cleric's - and with mechanics that support the idea that while the cleric may be the hands of their Gods, the Invoker's are the head.

What about the Light domain?

 

[Tony Vargas]

I'm amazed at how many posts there are! I expected 2 or 3 max!

The main topic of this thread seems to have become "5e psionics", and I'll say this: the roots are there.

Psionics, Warlord, and Artificer have each been brought up repeatedly. The Warlord and psionics, in particular, are obvious issues because they were present in a past PH1, but cut from 5e, even though concepts with less history and less to differentiate them made it in.

The Artificer has an issue in that it's all about magic-item creation, but 5e defaults to a relatively low-magic-item assumption. I suppose it could mostly create consumables, or create items that only function when it's around to empower them with it's own spell slots or something.

 

[pickin_grinnin]

I would love to see a dedicated shapeshifter class.

 

[Jester David]

I would love to see a dedicated shapeshifter class.

A changeling druid would handle that nicely.

 

[Sunseeker]

A changeling druid would handle that nicely.

Not really, as you're still saddled with all the spells and extraneous stuff that druids come with, you're also still limited by size and type, these restrictions would IMO, fall away as you gained levels (which they don't for a druid) so in place of spells you can become small or large, eventually tiny and huge. Plus you've got all those ties to nature and stuff, which would need to be done away with.

Sure, you could make a shapechanger druid, but it would be such a heavily modified druid that it might just need its own class.

 

[Jester David]

Not really, as you're still saddled with all the spells and extraneous stuff that druids come with, you're also still limited by size and type, these restrictions would IMO, fall away as you gained levels (which they don't for a druid) so in place of spells you can become small or large, eventually tiny and huge. Plus you've got all those ties to nature and stuff, which would need to be done away with.

Sure, you could make a shapechanger druid, but it would be such a heavily modified druid that it might just need its own class.

That is all true, and I can't *really* argue against that. But I'm not sure I'd want that.

A dedicated shapeshifter is one of those things that sounds could and could theoretically exist. It wouldn't be *that* hard to balance, replacing the druids spellcasting with set transmutation spells from various spell lists and abilities of similar power. But it's one of those ideas that doesn't have a solid history in the game and isn't super archetypal in fantasy.
There's certainly some examples. Skinwalkers in Dresden Files spring immediately to mind. But they're not as ubiquitous as the fighter or the rogue.

Ideally, classes should be big tent ideas. Things designed to fit into almost every world or setting (with minimal changes) or campaign. Things that you play from level 1 to level 20. Each with a variety of subclasses.
Smaller, niche ideas should be lumped into subclasses. Or, theoretically, prestige classes.

This would be easier with 3rd Party Products or an OGL as there could be world specific classes and content. Stuff like a "shapesmith" class could fit nicely in that paradigm, and belong to a world where shapechangers are as important as mages and thieves.
There's LOTs of cool ideas that could theoretically work as classes, but that I'm not sure warrant full official treatment in a splatbook. There's almost an infinite amount of neat new mechanics or bits of flavour that could be worked into a class.