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

[CasvalRemDeikun]

I would love to see an Onion Knight class. A class that combines the Cleric/Fighter/Rogue/Wizard into one class. It would be different from the Bard as it wouldn't have the musical theme. It would be great for beginners or someone who can't quite decide what to play. It could have four subclasses, one for each of its parent classes, that would allow you to specialize further into said class. So, by the time 3rd level rolls around, the player can boost their favorite part of the class, while still having some abilities from the others.

 

[KingsRule77]

I want to see a Nitpicker class. It would be a wizard or scholar who reads texts with a fine tooth comb and only finds things it doesn't like, even if it's small. With specializations like Nerdrager and Fanboy I really think people could sink their teeth into the role play aspects.

 

[Evenglare]

I want a Psion (as do many others), but on a rather obscure note, I'd love to see a Horizon Walker subclass for Ranger. I always thought they were really freaking cool conceptually.

 

[TrippyHippy]

The issue I have with introducing more Classes, aside from the general proliferation of rules and the point that most of the ideas for new Classes could mostly fit into the existing Background/Class/Archetype range currently available….is that if you look at most fantasy fiction, at 95% of all Characters would end up being Fighters or Rogues anyway.

Instead of wanting more and more Classes, why not simply use the existing framework to make more interesting personalities and motivations for characters?

 

[Minigiant]

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.

I could easily see a shape-something class.

The base having a slightly stronger version of wild shape. Extra attack. Natural weapons and unarmed count as magical.

Subclasses of:
The super shapeshifter who gets expanded forms.
The true lycanthrope who gets hybrid forms
The true doppleganger who gets expanded humaniod forms

The only issue is getting over the "it wasn't in D&D before, so we don't need it" issue. But we got over that with the sorcerer and warlock recently.

 

[KingsRule77]

The issue I have with introducing more Classes, aside from the general proliferation of rules and the point that most of the ideas for new Classes could mostly fit into the existing Background/Class/Archetype range currently available….is that if you look at most fantasy fiction, at 95% of all Characters would end up being Fighters or Rogues anyway.

Instead of wanting more and more Classes, why not simply use the existing framework to make more interesting personalities and motivations for characters?

It's the videogamification attitude of builds not characters. And I love video games but the two mediums are different.

 

[Jester David]

The only issue is getting over the "it wasn't in D&D before, so we don't need it" issue. But we got over that with the sorcerer and warlock recently.

I personally view the issue as less "it wasn't in D&D before" as "it makes the game more complicated and the worlds more crowded". In the same way adding four or five brand new humanoid races is problematic for campaign settings and adds more options bogging down character creation. Suddenly you're explaining how shapechanger wilden fit into Eberron.
Some of the existing classes could probably go bye-bye as well (barbarian, ranger, paladin, and sorcerer) but survive due to tradition. Newer options don't have that same history, the "well, it was in four other versions of the game..." impetus to keep it around.

Yeah, it's easy to say "well, don't permit that option in your game." But then WotC is creating content they expect a large number of people to ignore. Making ignorable options is fine for a DM book with rules options (especially ones that only take a page or two) and have far more limited testing. Classes should be playtested out the wazoo at multiple levels, making them very work intensive.
Classes take a lot of work to make, so it shouldn't be done unless there's an expected high usage. In the 5-pages a new class occupies, we could have a like 10 new subclasses.

 

[tuxgeo]

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.

I would narrow it down a bit farther: the Invokers are the mouths of their gods.

Also, theirs is the "Divine Controller" source/role niche. This includes many multi-target attacks, thus:
Of the 4E Invoker's 1st-level At-Will attack powers, 5 are Ranged but 4 are blast or burst -- two are Area burst 1 in 10, two are Close blast 3.
Of the 4E Invoker's 1st-level Encounter attack powers, 3 are Ranged but 7 are blast or burst -- three are Area burst 1 in 10, one is Close blast 3; but three are Close bursts instead, for wider spread.
. . . and it goes on from there, giving a strong Controller flavor.

The 5E Cleric, in contrast, has only a single attack cantrip (Sacred Flame), which is only a single-target attack.
The 5E Cleric also has only a single 1st-level attack spell (Guiding Bolt), which is also only a single-target attack. This means that the 5E Cleric could not fill the 4E Invoker's Controller role in combat.

 

[Minigiant]

I personally view the issue as less "it wasn't in D&D before" as "it makes the game more complicated and the worlds more crowded". In the same way adding four or five brand new humanoid races is problematic for campaign settings and adds more options bogging down character creation. Suddenly you're explaining how shapechanger wilden fit into Eberron.
Some of the existing classes could probably go bye-bye as well (barbarian, ranger, paladin, and sorcerer) but survive due to tradition. Newer options don't have that same history, the "well, it was in four other versions of the game..." impetus to keep it around.

Yeah, it's easy to say "well, don't permit that option in your game." But then WotC is creating content they expect a large number of people to ignore. Making ignorable options is fine for a DM book with rules options (especially ones that only take a page or two) and have far more limited testing. Classes should be playtested out the wazoo at multiple levels, making them very work intensive.
Classes take a lot of work to make, so it shouldn't be done unless there's an expected high usage. In the 5-pages a new class occupies, we could have a like 10 new subclasses.

It would probably be best to include new classes in splatbooks and gauge the community.

The warlock was a perfect example. It started in a 3rd splatbook as was so loved it made it to 4th and 5th phbs. Warlock is my 2nd favorite class and cannot even imagine creating a D&D setting without them.

Things that aren't iconic in D&D but iconic in fantasy should be given a chance. Some could stick like warlocks and others can disappear like shadowcasters or be forced into a subclass like artificer.

But my setting has shape-shifting elves and tieflings in it and I fear the day when a player wants to run one since I haven't finished the class.

 

[Jester David]

It would probably be best to include new classes in splatbooks and gauge the community.

The warlock was a perfect example. It started in a 3rd splatbook as was so loved it made it to 4th and 5th phbs. Warlock is my 2nd favorite class and cannot even imagine creating a D&D setting without them.

Things that aren't iconic in D&D but iconic in fantasy should be given a chance. Some could stick like warlocks and others can disappear like shadowcasters or be forced into a subclass like artificer.

But my setting has shape-shifting elves and tieflings in it and I fear the day when a player wants to run one since I haven't finished the class.

I really like the warlock too. I dug it in 3e and played a melee eldricht strike warlock for some time.
But how many other 3e classes were created that were less engaging? 20? 30? Likely more. The odds of makings new, lasting addition to the game are likely 25:1. For every warlock, marshal, or ardent there's a healer, archivist, favoured soul, beguiler, hexblade, dragon shaman, dragonfire adept, spirit shaman, spell thief, and sooooo many more.

And I don't see 5e having the same content for the sake of content as 3e and 4e, where they can just throw waves of forgettable options into the game in the hopes of creating something memorable.

New classes are options that should cry out to be included. Things that are impossible to do under the current rules and just fit perfectly.