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

[Clint_L]

Thematically, it's not clear what niche arcane archer is trying to fill. All types of rangers are already basically arcane archers. Rogues can already be excellent snipers. And a dex-based fighter can already be a great soldier-style archer, especially if they go battle master and add a few feats, which fighters get in abundance.

I agree with the point made above, that the mystic-style archer really feels like it should be a monk sub-class, if anything (also, a ranged sub-class option for an already dex-based class? Interesting!). So I think this is a case of a subclass that lacks a clear identity.

Tell me a gunslinger wouldn't be way more iconic and add an option unique to fighters. I know, not gonna happen. But still! I bet if it was added, it would instantly become one of the most popular subclasses in the game.

I suspect WotC will play it safe and just go rune knight - it won't take much tweaking to make it a bit stronger and more interesting, and the underlying concept is easy to grasp.

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

Thematically, it's not clear what niche arcane archer is trying to fill.

Very true. It would be more at home with Ranger or Bard. Especially because the caster classes have other resources they can use to benefit further archery, while Arcane Archer itself only gives you two magic shots per rest.

With its current design, I think its only reasonable niche, because nothing in the subclass scales, is for it to be a 3-level dip for some other class.

Tell me a gunslinger wouldn't be way more iconic and add an option unique to fighters.

Ooh, definitely! They are already the weapon+armor class, so it'd make sense (hush, Artificers) for them to be blasting stuff with gunpowder (and weirder particles in later levels), hopefully in a VERY different way than all the hand crossbowers we have been blessed with.

 

[Clint_L]

Ooh, definitely! They are already the weapon+armor class, so it'd make sense (hush, Artificers) for them to be blasting stuff with gunpowder (and weirder particles in later levels), hopefully in a VERY different way than all the hand crossbowers we have been blessed with.

I really surprised they haven't just fully gone with the Matt Mercer version, with some tweaks (it's a bit OP...but then so are Echo Knights and WotC rolled with those). It's already an optional sub-class on DDB, and everything. It's right there.

Fighter

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

(it's a bit OP

I'm not seeing it. It's like a Battlemaster that needs to declare their resource use before seeing the attack hit. Their specialized equipment deals a little more damage, but it's not likely there'll be magical variants of them in a random loot pile.

Admittedly, their reload/misfire features seem to be intended as the real balancing feature but aren't really, because you can avoid those by just carrying multiple guns...

 

[Remathilis]

Thematically, it's not clear what niche arcane archer is trying to fill. All types of rangers are already basically arcane archers. Rogues can already be excellent snipers. And a dex-based fighter can already be a great soldier-style archer, especially if they go battle master and add a few feats, which fighters get in abundance.

Hawkeye, bro.

The arcane archer is designed to be the guy who has all the trick arrows without relying on actual magical arrows. They aren't casting spells as much as they are supposed to be pulling flaming, iced, or putty arrows out of the quiver to do all sorts of neat stuff. The class is a concession because actual magical items aren't reliable enough to build a character around (see also: artificer) and because Hawkeye's quiver has enough arrows in it to complete the plot -1. Hence, D&D gives him the ability to make magic arrows per day only he can fire.

You could theoretically do that with rangers or artificers by changing the nature of the arrows to primal/tech, but the idea of a warrior with a quiver of trick arrows is fine as it is.

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

the guy who has all the trick arrows without relying on actual magical arrows.

We could use a martial controller. That would definitely be a solid niche. Right now, the best we have is grapple+prone and Battlemaster with Menacing Attack..

 

[Scott Christian]

Samurai, in its traditional sense (maybe with a name change) could be interesting. If many of the sub-class's abilities and skills revolved around building and maintaining keeps, armies, and land. Some leadership skills and tactical maneuvers.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Samurai, in its traditional sense (maybe with a name change)

So... paladin? In it's non-D&D sense.

 

[Scott Christian]

So... paladin? In it's non-D&D sense.

Not exactly. Sure, the paladin has leadership qualities, but I was thinking more skills as they are listed in backgrounds. Like, securing safe passage. Maybe have some of those baked into creating and establishing a keep or militia.

 

[Kurotowa]

Not exactly. Sure, the paladin has leadership qualities, but I was thinking more skills as they are listed in backgrounds. Like, securing safe passage. Maybe have some of those baked into creating and establishing a keep or militia.

That sounds like a Dread Pirate situation. Where if you're in a campaign where those come up it's great, but if you don't the class is kind of useless. Really, if those are going to be campaign elements than everyone should be able to participate, and if they're not you don't want to waste class features on them.