Baron Opal II
Hero
Do we need an Eldritch Knight and a Bladesinger? Does a 2/3 - 1/3 balance both ways add enough to take up two subclass "slots?"
Well, I'm not expecting Bladesinger in PHB 2024 since it wasn't in PHB 2014. So Eldritch Knight is probably a shoe-in.Do we need an Eldritch Knight and a Bladesinger? Does a 2/3 - 1/3 balance both ways add enough to take up two subclass "slots?"
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!
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?Yeah, clerics and wizards are wildly over-represented in the 2014 PHB. That said, I think a single specialist subclass for wizard would end up being a cheat, and effectively be nine subclasses anyway.
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.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?
Sounds goodAssuming some or all of them are from Xanathar's or Tasha's, I'd guess we'll see the following:
Bard: College of Glamour
I'm hoping for the Circle of Wildfire - far more evocative and means you don't have to shapeshiftDruid: Circle of Dreams
Love the theme but you don't need it with refluffing the open hand.Monk: Way of the Drunken Master
Horizon Walker. Possibly both if they are going to reach four.Ranger: Gloom Stalker
Almost certainlyRogue: Swashbuckler
Definitely. Also room for a second - I'm hoping they fix Storm.Sorcerer: Divine Soul
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 CelestialWarlock: Hexblade
This would be such a great solution.Or perhaps "School Specialist" should just be one subclass? Then we can actually fit 3 more!
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".This would be such a great solution.
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.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.
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.That would mean that Xanathar's and Tasha's subclasses would be off-limits.
Even more astonishing is the amount of quality assurance labor the D&D community is willing to do for free!The amount of content they intend to release for free is astonishing.
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.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.