D&D 5E Should 5e have more classes (Poll and Discussion)?

[Crimson Longinus]

So, the Summoner. I'm legit surprised that this class hasn't made it's way into DnD. Given the popularity of Pokemon, and that we are getting more crossover with MTG, a base Summoner class seems like a slamdunk. The problems are obvious, action economy and such, but this is a class that has definite options. A summoner can also be a support class, laying down buffs on your summons or your party (or both).

Yet again this shouldn't be a class. There are already several classes capable of summoning and the could easily have subclasses that focus on that further like the druid has.

 

[Hatmatter]

There's more than one way to be a Warlord and I think it'd be really boring and limiting to try and pull it off with a single Fighter subclass. There's not just enough room in a Fighter subclass for it! For my home-brew Warlord I wrote up EIGHT subclasses, with a 9th one I have in mind right now, and they aren't as simple as 'inspiring Warlord vs Tactical Warlord'.

the same could easily be said of the Barbarian, Paladin and Ranger. The fact 5e managed to give us multiple subclasses for those prove there is plenty of conceptual ground to work with that would not be fully covered if they were reduced to a single subclass.

I would like to see a Warlord class, as I liked it in 4th edition...it felt fresh and new. I know that there are 5th edition Warlords out there, and I have only skimmed them, but maybe you all could tell me what you think of this idea: A warlord as a fighter subclass where there are various tactical and warlord-appropriate subclass abilities, something akin to Battlemaster and Cavalier as some have said, but more unique and appropriate to a warlord subclass. Yet, this subclass would have the following addition: The warlord subclass could share its Second Wind, Action Surge, Extra Attack, and Indomitable fighter features with a selected ally or allies within a set range. In the case of Second Wind, Action Surge, and Indomitable Wind, because the way the features are written, these could only be shared with a single ally per round (e.g. A 17th-level fighter who has two action surges could give an action surge to one ally, perhaps a wizard, in one round and the following round could use it him or herself, could share it with the wizard again, or share it with a different ally); yet the Extra Attack feature could be divided among different allies each round. So, an 11th-level fighter warlord who gets 3 attacks/round might forgo an attack action one round and give all three extra attacks to a single character. The next round, the fighter warlord might use one attack and give the remaining 2 attacks to two different allies, the next round, the fighter warlord might forgo an attack and spread the 3 attacks to 3 different allies, the next round the fighter warlord might use all 3 attacks him or herself.

I thought that might be a cool and elegant way to use the existing fighter class but do so in an interesting way that really enhances one's allies. I like the idea of the fighter warlord (who has reached 5th level when the fighter gets Extra Attack) distributing extra attacks as he or she directs his comrades using superior tactical knowledge and experience. Also, it would feel way different from the cleric.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

It wouldn't sneak attack. It would fight smart, use ancient techniques, and invent or refine special weaponry.

Fight smart? Pick your moment and make a single, well-placed and significant attack? Sounds like a rogue.
Uses techniques, both ancient and the modern, refined versions of them? Skilled in techniques and knowledgeable about combat? Sounds like a fighter.
The issue with inventing or refining special weaponry is that after it is invented, anyone can use it. Unless it becomes personal enough that it is just an infusion by another name. Base 5e D&D already has pretty gonzo weapons like medieval hand crossbows already out there.

There HAS to be a combat strategy for no spellcasting nonwarriors than being the dirtiest underhanded cheat on one side of the plane.

What would that look like mechanically? You have the multiple opportunities at dealing damage of the fighter, and the single telling blows of the rogue.

It's too bad the artificer snatched all SCIENCE! and made it magic.

Isn't science by definition something everyone can use? Ability checks. (I generally apply Arcana for science-type facts.)
When you hit the point where you're screaming "SCIENCE!" into the void and motioning for your minion to pull the lever, you've pretty much moved into personalised magic.

And all diplomacy is in the bardic or enchantment sphere.

Any character can have diplomacy. If the bard or rogue choose to specialise in diplomacy and your group doesn't allow feats like Prodigy or the UA ones, they can just be a bit better than you are.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I would like to see a Warlord class, as I liked it in 4th edition...it felt fresh and new. I know that there are 5th edition Warlords out there, and I have only skimmed them, but maybe you all could tell me what you think of this idea: A warlord as a fighter subclass where there are various tactical and warlord-appropriate subclass abilities, something akin to Battlemaster and Cavalier as some have said, but more unique and appropriate to a warlord subclass. Yet, this subclass would have the following addition: The warlord subclass could share its Second Wind, Action Surge, Extra Attack, and Indomitable fighter features with a selected ally or allies within a set range. In the case of Second Wind, Action Surge, and Indomitable Wind, because the way the features are written, these could only be shared with a single ally per round (e.g. A 17th-level fighter who has two action surges could give an action surge to one ally, perhaps a wizard, in one round and the following round could use it him or herself, could share it with the wizard again, or share it with a different ally); yet the Extra Attack feature could be divided among different allies each round. So, an 11th-level fighter warlord who gets 3 attacks/round might forgo an attack action one round and give all three extra attacks to a single character. The next round, the fighter warlord might use one attack and give the remaining 2 attacks to two different allies, the next round, the fighter warlord might forgo an attack and spread the 3 attacks to 3 different allies, the next round the fighter warlord might use all 3 attacks him or herself.

I thought that might be a cool and elegant way to use the existing fighter class but do so in an interesting way that really enhance one's allies. I like the idea of the fighter warlord (who has reached 5th level when the fighter gets Extra Attack) distributing extra attacks as he or she directs his comrades using superior tactical knowledge and experience. Also, it would feel way different from the cleric.

Good stuff. Trading some of the exta attacks for attacks for allies had accurred to me (beastmaster ranger kinda does that with their pet) but sharing the other stuff too sounds pretty radical though ingenious. This seems like a really promising approach to me.

 

[Hatmatter]

Good stuff. Trading some of the exta attacks for attacks for allies had accurred to me (beastmaster ranger kinda does that with their pet) but sharing the other stuff too sounds pretty radical though ingenious. This seems like a really promising approach to me.

Thanks, Crimson, I really appreciate that.

 

[TwoSix]

If you've already fixed it, aren't you already done? Why do you need them to fix it a second time?

Not the poster you quoted, but as someone who plays and DMs for multiple groups AND uses an extensive amount of homebrew, I will say that distributing and utilizing homebrew and fixes across those groups is not a frictionless endeavor. I do it because it's worth the effort, to me, but there IS effort involved. And that's for homebrew that's purely additive, actual restrictions would be even more effort, I imagine.

 

[Minigiant]

Fight smart? Pick your moment and make a single, well-placed and significant attack? Sounds like a rogue.
Uses techniques, both ancient and the modern, refined versions of them? Skilled in techniques and knowledgeable about combat? Sounds like a fighter.
The issue with inventing or refining special weaponry is that after it is invented, anyone can use it. Unless it becomes personal enough that it is just an infusion by another name. Base 5e D&D already has pretty gonzo weapons like medieval hand crossbows already out there

I was actually thinking more like the scholar can create a plan and add their INT/WIS/CHA modifier to their or their allies attack rolls, damage rolls, AC, or saving throws.

You're could prepare a plan for big bonuses or craft one on the fly to get a small bonus in the specific aspect you wish.

So Lord Reginald might prepare Reggie's Turtle Gamble that add his Int modifer bonus to AC and Wis score as THP. But when facing a trio of ogres, he realizes that offense is the key to victory and cobbles together a quick plan that adds his Intelligence modifier as bonus damage on weapon and cantrip attacks for himself and 3 allies.

Since he is proficient in Nature, he also knows how to refine natural venoms and toxins and adds his proficiency bonus to the DC of any poison he enhances.

 

[DND_Reborn]

If you've already fixed it, aren't you already done? Why do you need them to fix it a second time?

I want them to fix everything I haven't gotten to yet! As I said, I am tired of doing (what I believe) is their job. It is a lot, after all...

But, no, their philosophy instead is: "Let's just add more garbage to the pile and hope no one notices."

 

[DND_Reborn]

actual restrictions would be even more effort, I imagine.

And you would be correct in assuming so.

 

[Maxperson]

But there's only one true version of a character, within any objective reality. Superman may vary a lot across the decades and different media, but there's only one of him at any given time (barring specific shenanigans). If you're reading a comic that came out last year, he's going to be consistent within that comic arc.

Likewise, there's only one true you in the objective reality we call life. Your ability to swing a sword, and the number of fireballs you can throw in a day, is objectively quantifiable. There is only one true territory, and allowing different people to create their own maps of that territory can only create confusion.

This isn't relevant to D&D where we aren't discussing individual PCs, but rather entire classes of PCs. There may be only one Ranger Rick, but there are a plethora of different kinds of Rangers. Your one true way is only for you, not us.