OneDnD 48 subclasses in the 2024 PHB: What are they?

log in or register to remove this ad


If they do 4 subclasses for Wizard, I'd prefer something along the lines of how Level Up did it - Specialist ( you choose which ), Generalist, Bladesinger and Elementalist. I think this would cover all the ground necessary.

Also, I don't think Hexblade is necessary for Warlock. Pact of the Blade should be the go to Warrior Warlock and the Hexblade should be folded into the Blade Pact.


12 classes x 4 subclasses each = 48.

Barbarian - zealot / berserker, beast / totem, storm / wild, ancestral guardian
Bard - lore, valor / sword, glamour / eloquence, whispers
Cleric - life, light, knowledge, war
Druid - land, moon, shepherd/fire, healer
Fighter - Samurai/Champion hybrid, Battlemaster, Rune Knight (or otherwise pseudo-blacksmith type), Psi knight/eldritch knight/arcane arrow
Monk - open palm, elemental / dragon, ninja, kensei
Paladin - holy knight, fear-based dark knight, oathbreaker, pacifist/redemption
Ranger - hunter, beastmaster, fey wanderer / horizon walker, gloomstalker
Rogue - thief, assassin, swashbuckler, arcane trickser/soul knife
Sorcerer - dragon, abberant mind, wild, divine soul
Warlock - fiend, abberation, fae, undead
Wizard - evoker, bladesinger, necromancer, illusionist

No 1/3 classes, use other other methods similar to psi points; more dragon monk than elemental monk.
"Simple" subclass option listed first.
I'd love to see a warlord fighter option, but doubt it'll happen, or just get folded into battlemaster again.

Well, they said that there'd be 48 subclasses in the 1D&D playtest.

They didn't, AFAICT actually say for sure that they'd all wind up in the 2024 PHB. It's probably the INTENT, but I doubt anyone can be fully sure about that. Even if they wind up with 48, they might not be the same 48 from the playtest.

But... that shouldn't stop us from speculating!

My first comment would be to ask: To be "fair" that ought to be 4 subclasses per class (though 5e is not known for it's symmetry, for good or ill).

So... what Wizard subclasses should we cut to make room?

Or perhaps "School Specialist" should just be one subclass? Then we can actually fit 3 more!

I think what they could and should and might do with the Wizards PHB is merge them into a single subclass that is designed simularly to the Circle of the Land Druid, doing a subclass for ever School of Magic sucked up soooo much space.

Anyways I expect Divine Soul because the changes effect that subclass far more then most others and it's one of the most popular subclasses.

There is also the interesting possibility of adding other Psionic subclasses besides Great Old One like Psionic Soul, Soul Knife, etc...


I'll agree, consolidating into a single subclass all the specialist schools for the Wizard would be a good idea. So, here's my pitch for the Wizard:
1. School of Specialization
2. School of Hedge Wizardry (This is the Witch subclass. Gains a limited ability to scribe Primal spells and lay down curses)
3. School of Bladesinging
4. School of the Theurge (adds some access to Divine Spells)

Wildly over-represented by how many subclasses they have? Why is this a problem? Are you saying having more subclasses lends some sort of advantage?
Not really. If anything it divides more abilities among subclasses. Thing is, the 8 schools don't make that much sense--some are by spell effect, like Divination, some are by spell purpose, like Abjuration, and some are by theme, like Necromancy. If I make a rotating fire column that shields me from incoming projectiles, is that Evocation (creating energy) or Abjuration (protection)? D&D players have been arguing this sort of thing for 30 years and I doubt I'm going to make any new points. Also with the larger number of schools there's less space to make each individual school flavorful. Of course, Warhammer has 8 winds of magic, many with the same issues, so it's not that outrageous an idea, though notice they have applications like healing and plants and animals that get assigned to clerics and druids in D&D.

Assuming some or all of them are from Xanathar's or Tasha's, I'd guess we'll see the following:
Bard: College of Glamour
Sounds good
Druid: Circle of Dreams
I'm hoping for the Circle of Wildfire - far more evocative and means you don't have to shapeshift
Monk: Way of the Drunken Master
Love the theme but you don't need it with refluffing the open hand.
Ranger: Gloom Stalker
Horizon Walker. Possibly both if they are going to reach four.
Rogue: Swashbuckler
Almost certainly
Sorcerer: Divine Soul
Definitely. Also room for a second - I'm hoping they fix Storm.
Warlock: Hexblade
Unlikely IMO. The Hexblade is only really a thing because they messed up the Pact of the Blade and is a seriously OP multiclass. Probably Celestial

Also Way of the Beast Barbarian - we need more shapeshifters.

This would be such a great solution.
Ack, no, please. (At least unless we're handling it with ludicrous numbers of options). I for one massively prefer the "You get special abilities that reflect the magic of your school" to the forcibly generic "You get a bonus to learn spells from your school and an extra spell of that school per level per day no matter what that school is".


People last year blasted WotC for trying that with the Strixhaven UA, so I think that's unlikely. I thought it was a pretty interesting idea, but it was loudly rejected.
Yes, those were huge messes though interesting. It does seem that standardized Subclass progression and the Group tech might change the scene here, though: a "Skillmaster" that's available to Bards, Rangers and Rogues, or a "Weapon .aster" for Barbarian, Fighter, and Monk, or so on, seem doable. Wouldn't be surprised if they tested again with these new design structures in place.

I am pretty sure they will test revisions for all 41 2014 Subclasses, and see one more each for Bard, Barbarian, Druid, Ranger, or Sorcerer.


Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
Unless the way bards and rangers prepare spells in this UA polls poorly, I’m guessing wizards will do the same, and their spellbook will contain the list of spells that are always prepared. Then you’ll have the option to specialize in a school, which will somehow make it easier to add spells of that school to your spellbook.

Actually, considering that they seem to be standardizing subclass progression and they start at 3rd level in this packet, I wouldn’t be surprised if the 2nd level feature every Wizard subclass had that lets you copy spells of your chosen school into your spellbook in half the time and for half the cost just becomes a universal wizard feature. Choose which school you gain that benefit for when you gain the feature.


Crown-Forester (he/him)
45 subclasses would mean every class but Cleric and Wizard get 3, while those two get 7 and 8 respectively. 48 means that Death Domain, Oathbreaker, and one other subclass make it in.

What is that final subclass that breaks the bank? That's about as mysterious to me as the 5 subclasses they'd be adding to round out the Barbarian, Bard, Druid, Ranger, and Sorcerer. I sort of feel like these 6 questionmark subclasses will be something entirely new - remember that they said they wanted the Rules Expansion Gift Set to be as meaningfully expanding the 2024 Core Rules as it is to the 2014 Core Rules.

That would mean that Xanathar's and Tasha's subclasses would be off-limits. I GUESS they could add in outstanding things like the Path of the Battlerager, but I sort of feel like if they haven't revived a subclass from SCAG yet, they don't intend to. Narratively, The Undead replaces The Undying, for example.

I also feel like this could be a chance to reboot some of the early subclass trap options, or else options that step on each other's toes. Death and Grave Domains are a great example - in an ideal game, we'd have one domain that could handle both concepts, given that they're both talking about the Gods of Death.


Keep in mind that we don't know yet if four subclass slots at 3, 6, 10, and 14 will be standard across all four class groups. We only know that it's the case for Experts.

Likewise, 48 / 12 = 4 doesn't mean four subclasses per class. They could achieve the same total number of subclasses simply by keeping the current spread, and giving one more each to seven of the classes.


That would mean that Xanathar's and Tasha's subclasses would be off-limits.
You make a compelling argument, but worth noting that some will already need revision to work optimally with the 1D&D Expert structures, and I imagine more will in the other categories as well. Certainly provides an excuse for moving some into core. It's possible they may hold off on those options for a non-core update book post 2024, though.


Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
Each class has 3 subclasses, and the rest are variations on wizard and cleric. ;)

Honestly though, I'm ready to move away from each Wizard school is a subclass. They could make it a bit like warlock where there's a pick that gives a few adjustments for school, and then a bunch of flavorful actual subclasses.


Crown-Forester (he/him)
Keep in mind that we don't know yet if four subclass slots at 3, 6, 10, and 14 will be standard across all four class groups. We only know that it's the case for Experts.

Likewise, 48 / 12 = 4 doesn't mean four subclasses per class. They could achieve the same total number of subclasses simply by keeping the current spread, and giving one more each to seven of the classes.
That's what I assume will happen... Barbarians, Bards, Clerics, Druids, Paladins, Rangers, Sorcerers, and one other would each get an extra subclass. Cleric & Paladin bc of 2014 DMG subclasses. The others because they only had 2 in 2014. The last is a wild card.

FYI, there were only 40 subclasses in the 2014 PHB, not 41.

An Advertisement