D&D 5E (2024) What should the 15th Class be?

[CreamCloud0]

Sooooo...why does a new class need to support subclasses at all?

There's no reason why one base class can't have five subclasses while another has zero, depending on the flexibility and scope of the base class.

do you really think if they add a new class there's any chance it's not going to have subclasses? subclasses are how they keep selling new content for old classes.

 

[Cergorach]

If a recent discussion is to be believed: Cannibal.

 

[Corinnguard]

why does a new class need to support subclasses at all?

If 5e was more like PF1, you could play as a member of the base class as is or you could play an archetype of the base class. 5e, unfortunately, doesn't give you the option. All of the flavor of a given class resides in the various subclasses of that class.

 

[Kurotowa]

Sooooo...why does a new class need to support subclasses at all?

There's no reason why one base class can't have five subclasses while another has zero, depending on the flexibility and scope of the base class.

In the grand sense of things, nothing at all. All rules are social constructs and all precedent is non-binding. Be free and do as you will.

In the specific sense of making a new base class for D&D 5e that will be welcomed by the players, rules and precedent have weight. They set expectations so everyone is on the same page. They contain hard won wisdom about how to properly realize the return on investment for the man-hours spent creating it. You don't ignore them lightly, but only when you have a clear vision for why it's a good idea.

Now look, I'm not 100% against the Warlord having some place in 5e. I've never understood the obsession some people have with it, though I know communities like to seize on a cause celebre and beat it to death. But maybe there should be a new base class of some sort that has Warlord as one of its subclasses, hmm?

 

[Minigiant]

Very much this. Can you easily name at least four distinct subclasses that will go with this new base class? If no, then it's something that should itself be a subclass somewhere, not a base class.

I have for Warlord

Battle Captain (Intelligence based Buffer)
Combat Veteran (Wisdom based Tank)
Knight Commander (Charisma based Healer)
Arcane Marshal (1/3 arcane caster Trickster)

 

[Lanefan]

Mostly because that's how 5th edition works. Otherwise, I agree with you, it would be great if there could be classes that stand on their own with flavourful abilities in place of subclasses.

You could have a base class that kind of builds in its own single subclass, such that the player doesn't have to bother choosing subclass but the relative degree of effectiveness etc. remains vaguely balanced against other class+subclass options.

 

[cbwjm]

Think im getting over subclasses.

Yep, I think I prefer something more like this:

If 5e was more like PF1, you could play as a member of the base class as is or you could play an archetype of the base class. 5e, unfortunately, doesn't give you the option. All of the flavor of a given class resides in the various subclasses of that class.

2e kits/PF1 archetypes would be my preference, completely optional, the base classes stand alone, and you can customise them with archetypes if desired. Right now, 5e class creation requires the class and at least a couple of subclasses which I'm sort of over, especially since some subclasses might fit one or more classes but they only get built for a single class. Admittedly kits and archetypes don't quite fix this since they tend to replace base abilities with other abilities so would still require some work.

 

[Kurotowa]

I have for Warlord

Battle Captain (Intelligence based Buffer)
Combat Veteran (Wisdom based Tank)
Knight Commander (Charisma based Healer)
Arcane Marshal (1/3 arcane caster Trickster)

That... is way more versatility than most subclasses can manage. Both in role and in stat focus. Usually subclasses are variations on a common tune, not entirely different songs.

So I remain unconvinced that this is a viable design path.

 

[cbwjm]

You could have a base class that kind of builds in its own single subclass, such that the player doesn't have to bother choosing subclass but the relative degree of effectiveness etc. remains vaguely balanced against other class+subclass options.

I'm pretty sure that's what the basic sets do, you're a champion fighter which just builds the subclass in (or perhaps just limits it to a single subclass and still keeps them separate), but, if wotc builds a class, it is definitely going to have subclasses so they'd need to come up with some options for it.

 

[Minigiant]

That... is way more versatility than most subclasses can manage. Both in role and in stat focus. Usually subclasses are variations on a common tune, not entirely different songs.

So I remain unconvinced that this is a viable design path.

Not really. Not more than Cleric or Druid or Warlock.

The base idea is that the Warlord gets to substitute or add their Int, Wis, or Cha bonus to an attack in special situations.
AND
the Warlord would get a heal (or THP buff) as well.

It's no different than Light Cleric, Life Cleric, and War Cleric. Just buffing a class features instead of spells.

Hell fighter subclasses are wildly different from each other.