D&D (2024) All 48 Player’s Handbook 2024 Subclasses

The new Player's Handbook contains 12 character classes, each with 4 subclasses, making 48 in total.

• Barbarian: Path of the... Berserker, Wild Heart, World Tree, Zealot.
• Bard: College of... Dance, Gamour, Lore, Valor.
• Cleric: Life, Light, Trickery, War domains.
• Druid: Circle of the... Land, Moon, Sea, Stars.
• Fighter: Battle Master, Champion, Eldritch Knight, Psi Warrior.
• Monk: Warrior of... Mercy, Shadow, The Elements, The Open Hand.
• Paladin: Oath of... Devotion, Glory, The Ancients, Vengeance.
• Ranger: Beast Master, Fey Wanderer, Gloom Stalker, Hunter.
• Rogue: Arcane Trickster, Assassin, Soulknife, Thief.
• Sorcerer: Aberrant Sorcery, Clockwork Sorcery, Draconic Sorcery, Wild Magic.
• Warlock: Archfey Patron, Celestial Patron, Fiend Patron, Great Old One Patron.
• Wizard: Abjurer, Diviner, Evoker, Illusionist.

 

[Kurotowa]

Honestly, I'm just hoping Martial Arts and Unarmored Defense got a boost. I want to my "unequipped" Monk to be able keep pace with the other martials, damage/defense-wise.

Just for reference, don't consider what we see in the PHB to be the full picture. Crawford has dropped mention of magic items that enhance Unarmed Strike making it into the DMG, and there may be more like that on the menu.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

If it is any consolation, nothing during the 5E compares to how WotC claimed, with a straight face, how 3.5 fixed all the issues of 3.0.

No, dear WotC, 3.5 didn't fix 3E. 5E fixed 3E.

Just to note that I fully expect WotC to semi-intentionally insert enough powercreep into the 2024 rules that nobody will decide against purchasing the new books to instead stick with 2014. Since I refuse to be surprised by this, I think I'm in a good shape for the impending release...

Well, for a given definition of "fixed." The caster/martial disparity is still alive and well. It's not as bad, but it's still bad.

 

[Vaalingrade]

No, dear WotC, 3.5 didn't fix 3E. 5E fixed 3E.

So... still broken then.

 

[CapnZapp]

So... still broken then.

D&D is not perfect but much less bad in 5E than in 3E.

The martial-caster divide was much more severe in 3E.

The way NPCs were created as PCs broke the game several ways, not least by how time-consuming their creation became at higher levels.

 

[CapnZapp]

Well, for a given definition of "fixed." The caster/martial disparity is still alive and well. It's not as bad, but it's still bad.

A fighter is MUCH more viable in 5E than in 3E.

Maybe it's not enough for you to play one, but the improvements are definite and the disparity is small enough for me to say fighters are definitely pulling their weight in a 5E party.

Remember; in 3E a single-classed fighter were a joke.

Plus, I suspect actual parity between casters and martials is much less popular and desired than you appear to assume.

If a fighter can do just as many varied and wondrous things as a magic users, well, then almost by definition magic would feel... much less magical.

Zapp

PS. If behind your posts you are secretly longinging for a 4E style martial-caster parity, not saying you are, then let's simply disagree and end it there. I'm glad the majority of D&Ders rejected that approach if you ask me.

 

[Clint_L]

They didn't go far enough. Every class should be magical or supernatural. Nonmagical warriors should be NPCs.

OR we could leave a few options open for those with a class fantasy that is more Conan than Elric.

Different people like different things. It’s okay that the game will continue to cater to options you don’t like. I hate psionics, but I’m glad the psi-knight is there for those who feel differently.

 

[Clint_L]

Well I don't look at a lot of videos to see what they are saying. In terms of what they are doing though there has never really been an effort to balance casters and non-casters in 5E and if the playtest is any indication, the imbalance will actually increase in 2024, both due to combat rules changes that work against martials and due to the power up of the full caster classes.

This is not what we are finding in our ongoing playtest. We are finding that martials have more versatility and their damage is WAY up. Spellcasters don’t feel tons different from 2014.

Edit: the WotC videos also point out that weapons oriented classes got a lot more changes. I think once you play them, you’ll agree that they have quite a different feel. Even a subclass as basic as the champion actually has a lot more going on.

 

[Remathilis]

OR we could leave a few options open for those with a class fantasy that is more Conan than Elric.

Different people like different things. It’s okay that the game will continue to cater to options you don’t like. I hate psionics, but I’m glad the psi-knight is there for those who feel differently.

But then the people who want nonmagical characters get upset they are upstaged by their magical friends doing wahoo things, which usually leads to calls that they also get to do wahoo things, but nonmagically. Which is why I think if they want to do wahoo things too, let them be magical as well.

 

[Scott Christian]

But then the people who want nonmagical characters get upset they are upstaged by their magical friends doing wahoo things, which usually leads to calls that they also get to do wahoo things, but nonmagically. Which is why I think if they want to do wahoo things too, let them be magical as well.

Conan was rarely upstaged. Through strength of will (maybe a bunch of different ways to help saving throws), brute force (think extra damage bonuses), and cleverness (think of abilities that allow you to use the environment), Conan was always a match for a wizard or sorcerer. Heck, give the physical warrior straight up legendary saves and magic resistance at higher levels. It's not magic, it's determination.

 

[Clint_L]

But then the people who want nonmagical characters get upset they are upstaged by their magical friends doing wahoo things, which usually leads to calls that they also get to do wahoo things, but nonmagically. Which is why I think if they want to do wahoo things too, let them be magical as well.

I have not found this to be the case. I have found non-magical options to be very popular and competitive choices. When I look at my party compositions on DDB, non-magical options are over represented. WotC have also emphasized that less complex, non-magical options have a significant fan base.

I think there is a vociferous contingent on this forum that wants what you describe. I have noted that there is an overlap with the contingent who seem to strongly prefer the 4e approach to D&D.