D&D 5E Should the Paladin be changed into a more generic half-caster magic knight?

[Shardstone]

So as I'm thinking about the Exorcist, which is the name I'm giving my next arcane half-gish, I'm exploring different mechanics and narrative themes. One thing I keep coming to is how the 2024 Eldritch Knight can replace attacks with spells. I think this is fine for the Fighter, who has multiple attacks, but a typical gish with two attacks wouldn't use the same tech. But then I realized that it really isn't all that OP (IMO) to spend a leveled spell as a gish specifically in place of one attack.

This is the direction I'm currently leaning, which comes online at 5th level for the Exorcist. When I think about this idea, I think of it as a replacement for the typical spellblade mechanic (which I already used for a Pendragon subclass, and will probably bring into a Exorcist subclass as well). I imagine you attack with your weapon (or unarmed strikes, more on that later) and then unleash a spell right after your attack. Like Yusuke's Spirit Gun, a Naruto Ninjutsu, Mistborn allomancies, Witcher signs, and so on -- these aren't used alongside weapons (generally) but as parts of combat styles. This is the kind of Fantasy I want the class to emulate.

I also want to steal a bit more from 2024. Both Paladin and Ranger have a "key spell" (Smite/Hunter's Mark) that is now interwoven into the class. So, I want to make one for the Exorcist as well. I have TWO IDEAS.

IDEA ONE: I'm thinking some kind of "Arcane Reinforcement" where they generate a pool of Aura when they cast the spell, which can be spent in several ways for as long as they have it. No concentration, can be upcast for more options and re-cast to refill the pool. The Aura is a magical energy that the Exorcist uses to reinforce their body from magical harm and also enhance other actions and spellcastings, etc.

IDEA TWO: In this case, the spell would be a "Signature Spell;" the Exorcist would choose one spell they know and make tweaks to it as they level it up, creating different variations of that spell which they can cast for free once per short rest. This will probably be the idea I go for, because the first idea could be made a class or subclass mechanic, and this idea allows me more interesting space to work subclasses in with.

I will continue to farm this thread for class ideas, from the chaos of the squabbling.

 

[Scribe]

why what do the plan to sell, people already complain about sub class bloat?

They do?

 

[Mind of tempest]

Adventures, I guess?

5e adventures seem to be very hit or miss not a sustainable business plan as 5.5 seems not likely to shoot up in quality

 

[Micah Sweet]

5e adventures seem to be very hit or miss not a sustainable business plan as 5.5 seems not likely to shoot up in quality

I agree, but if they don't want to make new rules widgets *as some are saying some are saying), then that's their only option for gamable material.

 

[Mind of tempest]

I agree, but if they don't want to make new rules widgets *as some are saying some are saying), then that's their only option for gamable material.

the shareholders would eat them, nothing but adventures and at best a slight update to some sub-classes is business suicide.
people want the promise of something interesting they just need to get better at that.
some new content in different areas but packed in a reliably sellable way they learned if you mix the lore books with the class and race options you get more sales, why not continue that with just a clear idea of what seems to work and where people are heading?

 

[Micah Sweet]

the shareholders would eat them, nothing but adventures and at best a slight update to some sub-classes is business suicide.
people want the promise of something interesting they just need to get better at that.
some new content in different areas but packed in a reliably sellable way they learned if you mix the lore books with the class and race options you get more sales, why not continue that with just a clear idea of what seems to work and where people are heading?

I'm sure they'll figure something out. Making as much money as possible is clearly far and away their primary motivation, so I would think that they are decent at it.

 

[Hamilburg]

I agree, but if they don't want to make new rules widgets *as some are saying some are saying), then that's their only option for gamable material.

As far as flashy presentations to the shareholder's go, gamable material is a chump's game anyway. Quick google suggests 50 million people have played 5e over it's lifespan. For a $50 PHB each, that's $250M. HAT grossed that much in theaters. BG3's licensing cut to Wizards (~$100M?) will probably represent more profit for Hasbro than the new PHB does.

 

[Micah Sweet]

As far as flashy presentations to the shareholder's go, gamable material is a chump's game anyway. Quick google suggests 50 million people have played 5e over it's lifespan. For a $50 PHB each, that's $250M. HAT grossed that much in theaters. BG3's licensing cut to Wizards (~$100M?) will probably represent more profit for Hasbro than the new PHB does.

Fair enough. WotC should stick to backpacks, water bottles, keychains, and mugs.

 

[CreamCloud0]

If there's a good and solid X to choose and use, I think the idea might eventually gain legs. As I've said previously, the primary warrior/arcanist in pop culture and fiction right now is the Witcher, with X being monsters and potions and defending commonfolk from said monsters. So if the game decided to incorporate the Witcher (or their own version of the Blood Hunter) into their class list, you might have something there.

The only issue is that I think too many people don't actually want that. They want the open-ended warrior/arcanist mechanics for the sake of mechanics so they can make their characters into whatever they want. But with the Eldritch Knight and the Fighter/Wizard multiclass already available to them and they just refusing them because those two don't have "special and unique" features and mechanics (which apparently seems to be the only reason to play a warrior/arcanist for those folks), they turn their nose up at them.

do note, i was using X in 'uses X focus to defend against threats' to refer to their type of magical focus with different subclasses intergrating different kinds of magic but other subclasses would be more target oriented, so you can have your witcher-esc potion subclass alongside a teleportation themed subclass and the anti-caster subclass and the elementalist subclass...

personally i don't think it's unique mechanics so much as apropriate implementation, they 'turn their noses up at them' as you so dismissively describe it because they don't fufill the feel of the desired fantasy in the same way that a fighter with an acolyte background doesn't feel like a paladin, the eldritch knight and bladepacts are decent concepts but bad execution because they're far too biased to one side or the other of the caster/martial spectrum, the straight multiclass option is a bad swordmage because there's no true synergy between the two sides, you're casting half the time and warrioring the other half, not swordmaging all the time,

 

[Mind of tempest]

I'm sure they'll figure something out. Making as much money as possible is clearly far and away their primary motivation, so I would think that they are decent at it.

I saw the news for dnd beyond which is as likely to keep customers away as it is to get money from them.

As far as flashy presentations to the shareholder's go, gamable material is a chump's game anyway. Quick google suggests 50 million people have played 5e over it's lifespan. For a $50 PHB each, that's $250M. HAT grossed that much in theaters. BG3's licensing cut to Wizards (~$100M?) will probably represent more profit for Hasbro than the new PHB does.

which is worthless if no new stuff happens and we are not getting a bg4 from the same studio any time soon