What problems to you for see?
I would only allow 2 (fighter & rogue) personally, but that gets you 12 subclasses. I think monk and barbarian (which I assume are the other 2 you are talking about) are to much like magic for me (if no magic was the goal).It works In 5E. The only issue is you only have access to 4 classes. 6 classes if you allow multclassing
There also may be some UA classes / subclasses that could work too.My players will like this. They prefer strong campaign concepts. We are tired of the usual D&D tropes. We did play one game of AIME last year and they liked it.
Yes, but I would think you need to replace the spells with somethingWould a Ranger (Hunter) without spells by interesting?
I would only allow 2 (fighter & rogue) personally, but that gets you 12 subclasses. I think monk and barbarian (which I assume are the other 2 you are talking about) are to much like magic for me (if no magic was the goal).
YMMV and all, but every no-magic D&D hack I've seen is a kludge. It usually involves rewriting or outright banning most options that even look like magic, rewriting rests and healing, extremely limited monster selection and very limited treasure rewards. Every time I've seen it, it's ends up a lot of work to use what amounts to a crippled version of the game.It actually works pretty great with D&D. You just have to find a group that buys into the no-caster model.