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

[TwoSix]

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

Honestly, because a new backstory for your character simply lacks the more visceral pleasure of "My new maneuver does 4d6 damage to those 3 orcs, and you all get a +4 to your next attack."

 

[Tony Vargas]

In 4e, the Shaman was a primal leader while the Druid was a primal controller. In 5e, classes - especially primary neo-vancian casters - aren't limited to fully handling just one role, so the Druid could easily encompass both leader and controller, and a 'Shaman' could, indeed just be a Druid 'circle' that gets a spirit companion instead of, say, shapeshifting. It wouldn't have to be any more or less leader-ish or controller-y than the other two circles - though keeping some of the leader-y spirit companion functions'd be cool - just more spirited(pi).

 

[Dargrimm]

Besides psion, I don't think we need more classes. What we need is more options for the available classes. Adding options/archetypes to the various classes available they can build almost any other previous class.

But anyway, what I would like to see is a forge oriented Rune Priest (a sub-class of cleric would do).

 

[Tony Vargas]

Besides psion, I don't think we need more classes. What we need is more options for the available classes. Adding options/archetypes to the various classes available they can build almost any other previous class.

That's more or less true on a class-by-class basis, depending on how much of the class can be re-defined in an archetype/school/whatever. For casters, simply changing the spell list or adding a new spell can radically change them. So, even though you called out the psion as the one class the game actually needs, it could be fairly easily handled by a new Sorcerer option, using a spell list slanted towards psionic abilities and imagining metamagic as augments. I don't think it would adequately represent the D&D tradition of psionics for fans thereof, but it's arguably feasible.

In contrast, the few non-caster archetypes are all locked into high DPR class-level features - multi-attacking, rage, and sneak attack, leaving too little 'design space' for an alternate archetype to add enough to represent classes that don't traditionally use such mechanics.

But anyway, what I would like to see is a forge oriented Rune Priest (a sub-class of cleric would do).

Like a 'Rune' Domain?

 

[Greg K]

In 4e, the Shaman was a primal leader while the Druid was a primal controller. In 5e, classes - especially primary neo-vancian casters - aren't limited to fully handling just one role, so the Druid could easily encompass both leader and controller, and a 'Shaman' could, indeed just be a Druid 'circle' that gets a spirit companion instead of, say, shapeshifting. It wouldn't have to be any more or less leader-ish or controller-y than the other two circles - though keeping some of the leader-y spirit companion functions'd be cool - just more spirited(pi).

It is not just having a spirit companion, in my opinion. The spell list should be a blend of certain cleric and druid spells as well as have additional spells dealing with spirits. It should also have the ability to turn/control spirits similar to how clerics turn/control undead.

 

[Tony Vargas]

It is not just having a spirit companion, in my opinion. The spell list should be a blend of certain cleric and druid spells as well as have additional spells dealing with spirits. It should also have the ability to turn/control spirits similar to how clerics turn/control undead.

Spell lists can change with archetype. Trading out class abilities would be a bit more of a stretch, I agree. Maybe a Cleric Domain would work better? Though I do think the Druid is thematically closer.

 

[pogre]

Give me the Rat Catcher!

A down and dirty fighter who effectively uses pets in battles!

 

[Minigiant]

I still think D&D could do the paragon class: the superbeing of the PC's race.

Superhumans. The elfiest elf. A dwarf with the toughest beard ever. Iron Gnome. Hulkorc.

 

[Sunseeker]

I still think D&D could do the paragon class: the superbeing of the PC's race.

Superhumans. The elfiest elf. A dwarf with the toughest beard ever. Iron Gnome. Hulkorc.

While I like the idea, I question how distinct they would be. I wouldn't mind a sort of 'alternate advancement' for races with 'racial feats' like some of the planetouched races get in various books.

Give me the Rat Catcher!

A down and dirty fighter who effectively uses pets in battles!

So, a Pokemon Trainer?

I wouldn't mind seeing the Summoner from Pathfinder, obviously not as OP of course, but the concept of building your own minion is pretty sweet. They could probably roll it into a Wizard or Sorcerer subclass though.

After running through the list of my favorite classes in my head, outside of Psion, who I think would be best served with a whole class structure of their own, I can't think of any who really NEED their own class. Even Psion is a little iffy. You could do psionic subclasses for Rogue, Fighter and Wizard/Sorcerer and get essentially the same result.

 

[Greg K]

Spell lists can change with archetype. Trading out class abilities would be a bit more of a stretch, I agree. Maybe a Cleric Domain would work better? Though I do think the Druid is thematically closer.

Just my opinion, but if one is going to replace the spell list, and alter several skills and abilities, it should be a new class to do it justice.