YMMV, of course, but it'd have to depend on the fullness of the rest of the bonus action economy and also the structure of the core system. Without the core system identity expressed I just went off 5e's designs 'cause... well. You haven't really outlined anything.
Cool.
Sure.
Your design notes for "Wild" on Spellblade was just the PF Magus's melee weapon spell attacks. I've got that in my Swordmage design and have had for months. And it's not even their core identifying feature, but a late-game bonus.
And for you that would just be a "5e Homebrew" class.
Then you hit on a FF Magic Structure that's been adapted to almost every edition since 2e, and one Mike Myler made for 5e in one of his recent releases.
And then you hit Truenamer which is straight out of 3e and there's at least a dozen of those online including C. E. Usiku's version which he's sold on DTRPG.com for the past 6 years at this point.
None of these are "Wild" they're just concepts that have been done but never as core structures.
The post I was responding to, which lead to that reply chain, was trying to build up unique stuff for each class and was like "Barbarian rage is already unique" so I took that design note and tried to do something 'unique' for Ranger that fit in within the same level of creativity and change.
Sorry I thought the question was clear especially with the examples. So let me explain what I look for in detail:
I wrote:
"What I mean with "go wild" is late 3.5 experimental (and a bit like late 4E experimental) creating more unique classes. For this to work, the game (in my oppinion) needs to be heroic not deadly. (Since if you are dead after 1 hit, well then there is not much distinction to have)."
So what I mean is unique class mechanics (in existing or new classes), which may have been done before, but which are mechanically unique, as in something other classes normally cant do for a potential new D&D system. You can take the official 5.5 classes as examples of what "normal classes can do", but it should not assume 5E structure.
So in general no 5E homebrew (even if the person who did it wants money for it).
Also just because someone did something in some way in a 5E homebrew, does not mean the mechanic is less "wild". And what I mean with wild is that it fundamentally changes parts of the game as the examples I have given compared to "normal". Things which WotC would most likely not put into 5.5 as is because its too much risk.
So to explain what makes, in my oppinion, these mechanics I mentioned "wild" aka make them work vastly different to the "standard":
Spellblade:
- Makes spell slot not lost on a single miss. Kind of makes them (mostly) unmissable since you can use another weapon attack again.
- Change spells to melee attacks, changing their range (and potential them not triggering potential opportunity attacks)
- Let spells gain new properties which normally only weapon attacks would have (being able to crit, profiting from weapon dice rerolls, and potential other things only weapons can do).
- Can apply spells by targeting physical defense, rather than a magical defense, and since they might be vastly different these attacks are now good against different enemies.
- This creates NEW DECISIONS because you have potentially 2 ways to use a spell, and they have different advantages or disadvantages.
- Makes learning abilities not dependant on leveling up, but the adventure. This also means that "the same bluemage" in different adventures might in the end play completly different.
- The above also means that you cant really plan your build beforehand but you need to adapt to what you get. So changing the character planning from strategical to tactical.
- Get the potential to create "untypical" effects for spells, because you immitate special abilities with your spells.
- Forces the game to have many creatures with special attacks (which are not spells) and have them in a balanced system.
- This creates NEW DECISIONS because you might now want to no longer burst down enemies before they have a turn, because you want to learn their abilities. Also you might want to go hunting special enemies creating a new potential motivation.
Truenamer
- Ressources are no longer binary. You dont have a spell or not, you have a spell with different strengths.
- Because of unique limitations like "only 1 of the same spell at a time" before purely positive things (like longer duration) is no longer just positive, this may even add the possibility to have mechanics to reduce duration.
- It leads to NEW DECISIONS, because not using a spell or only sparingly allows one later to have a chance to use it in an empowered form (like as a swift action) and also you might want to cast a stronger version of a spell (metamagic empowered) instead a normal one even though it has a much lower chance to succeed, because you dont have cantrips and you want to get the most out of your (in the end still limited) numbers of casts
On the other hand "doing a basic attack as a minor action" does normally not change any decision, your decision still is "I want to attack enemy X with all I have". The same decision other martials have, and using the same means (basic attacks) and all useful actions for it.
If you have created some cool classes with unique mechanics? Cool tell us about them! Thats exactly what this thread is about. Mentioning cool unique class mechanics which differ from "standard" (5E) D&D.
Please feel free to do this!Oh, God, what have you done? You've given me a reason to blather.
Oh boy. Gonna be burning the midnight oil for this...or not. I promised my best friend I wouldn't. But you'd better freakin' BELIEVE you're gonna be seeing heightened maximized quickened wall of text!
Last edited:







