D&D (2024) Brawler is out. What subclass should replace it?

[CleverNickName]

I voted "Other," but what I meant was "None." I'm in favor of reducing the number of subclasses overall. Three per class is plenty, IMO.

 

[Remathilis]

I voted "Other," but what I meant was "None." I'm in favor of reducing the number of subclasses overall. Three per class is plenty, IMO.

I will never stop being amazed by people who want to give us LESS options.

 

[Gorck]

• The PHB subclasses were chosen as opposed pairs
• The Champion (simple strategy) was paired with the Battlemaster (complex tactics)
• The Brawler (uses nonweapon attacks) was paired with the EK uses (spells)
• The chosen subclass will likely have to pair with the EK

I agree with most of your list except for the above lines. I’m not so sure that the “opposing themes” is something that is etched in stone. They might be willing to drop it just to get a 4th subclass into the book. Or maybe it was just an amusing little coincidence that they noticed and thought was kinda cool all along.

 

[mellored]

I agree with most of your list except for the above lines. I’m not so sure that the “opposing themes” is something that is etched in stone. They might be willing to drop it just to get a 4th subclass into the book. Or maybe it was just an amusing little coincidence that they noticed and thought was kinda cool all along.

I agree it's not etched in stone.

Aberrant and Draconic are not really "opposing" themes for instance.

But they will still try to cover as much thematically as they can.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Warlord.

And they don't need to put in a UA, because they would just have taken the 273 different Warlord threads found on EN World, RPG.net, Reddit, and all the others over the last 10 years that the posters all went over with a fine-toothed comb and could easily cobble together four subclass features out of them that are all fully playtested.

 

[Remathilis]

Warlord.

And they don't need to put in a UA, because they would just have taken the 273 different Warlord threads found on EN World, RPG.net, Reddit, and all the others over the last 10 years that the posters all went over with a fine-toothed comb and could easily cobble together four subclass features out of them that are all fully playtested.

The Internet: 5 minutes later:

 

[OB1]

If they could work it out with Crit Role, I'd love to see the Echo Knight as the 4th option, but I'm betting it will be Psi Knight. I think you could tone down Echo w/o public playtest (really just needs a per day or per short rest limit on brining out the Echoes to balance it) and maybe some re-fluffing.

 

[Kurotowa]

• The PHB subclasses were chosen as opposed pairs
• The Champion (simple strategy) was paired with the Battlemaster (complex tactics)
• The Brawler (uses nonweapon attacks) was paired with the EK uses (spells)

And this is where people go wrong, because this is absolutely incorrect. In the video, Crawford not only said that some classes use a thematic pair model and some use a "four quadrants" model where each subclass covers a different niche, IIRC he called out Fighters specifically as an example of a four quadrants class. So the Brawler was never a pair with the EK, and its replacement isn't required to fill that slot either.

I'm not sure where to put my money between Psi Warrior and Rune Knight. Both of them have stylistic overlap with Battle Master; the PW with its dice pool and the RK with its selectable abilities. I might give a narrow edge to PW because it has a shorter word count, but I don't know how much that matters. Probably the decision is going to come down to data we don't have easy access to, about use rates and player satisfaction with the two classes.

 

[Minigiant]

And this is where people go wrong, because this is absolutely incorrect. In the video, Crawford not only said that some classes use a thematic pair model and some use a "four quadrants" model where each subclass covers a different niche, IIRC he called out Fighters specifically as an example of a four quadrants class. So the Brawler was never a pair with the EK, and its replacement isn't required to fill that slot either.

IIRC Crawford explicitly called out the Brawler as part of a pair.

Now they might scrap the fighter pairs.

I see the Psi Warrior and Rune Knight are the forerunners. But I am sure that WOTC would lament half the fighter subclasses to be explicitly overtly magical.

 

[bedir than]

Take the Cavalier, remove all the Horse Stuff. Add Rallying Cry and Inspiring Surge from the Banneret.

Call it the Sergeant or Knight