At this point, we have a pretty good idea which subclasses will be in the new PHB, though we don't know all of them yet. What do you think of the ones they ultimately decided to include? Are there any excluded that you think are unfortunate omissions?
You're welcome to answer in mechanics or thematics terms but, for me, the main question is whether they captured the major fantasy archetypes.
For reference, here's a list of all the subclasses we've seen in the playtests so far:
barbarian--4 subclasses so far
path of the berserker (playtest 5 & 7)
path of the wild heart (i.e. totem warrior, playtest 7)
path of the world tree (playtest 7)
path of the zealot (playtest 7)
bard--4 subclasses so far
college of dance (playtest 6)
college of glamour (playtest 6)
college of lore (playtest 2 & 6)
college of valor (playtest 6)
cleric--4 subclasses so far
life domain (playtest 3 & 6)
light domain (playtest 6)
trickery domain (playtest 6)
war domain (playtest 6)
druid--3 subclasses so far
circle of the land (playtest 6)
circle of the moon (playtest 4 & 6)
circle of the sea (playtest 6)
circle of stars (playtest 6)
fighter--4 subclasses so far
battlemaster (playtest 7)
brawler (playtest 7)
champion (playtest 5 & 7)
eldritch knight (playtest 7)
monk--3 subclasses so far
warrior of shadow (playtest 6)
warrior of the elements (playtest 6)
warrior of the hand (playtest 6)
warrior of mercy (playtest 6)
paladin--4 subclasses so far
oath of devotion (playtest 4 and 6)
oath of glory (playtest 6)
oath of the ancients (playtst 6)
oath of vengeance (playtest 6)
ranger--3 subclasses so far
beast master (playtest 6)
fey wanderer (playtest 6)
gloom stalker (playtest 6)
hunter (playtest 2 and 6)
rogue--4 subclasses so far
arcane trickster (playtest 6)
assassin (playtest 6)
swashbuckler (playtest 6)
thief (playtest 2 and 6)
sorecerer--2 subclasses so far
aberrant sorcery (playtest 7)
clockwork sorcery (playtest 7)
draconic sorcery (playtest 5 and 7)
wild magic sorcery (playtest 7)
warlock--4 subclasses so far
archfey patron (playtest 7)
celestial patron (playtest 7)
fiend patron (playtest 5 & 7)
great old one patron (playtest 7)
wizard--4 subclasses so far
abjurer (playtest 7)
diviner (playtest 7)
evoker (playtest 5 & 7)
illusionist (playtest 7)
Please let me know if I missed any, thanks!
It seems like most classes have an "odd one out" and not in a good way.
Barbarian Zealot - It's never been a subclass that made much sense, and it feels very contrived. The changes in 2024 improve it slightly but make it feel even more contrived and at odds with the general themes of Berserkers.
Bard - No odd one out, but should probably have dropped Valor for Swords.
Cleric - Trickery absolutely should not be in there. It's a bad subclass (even with changes), it's not a particularly popular theme for Clerics, nor does it fit many gods people actually want to be a Cleric of. Death would be the obvious replacement.
Druid - These seem fine, actually.
Fighter - Brawler needs to be vastly reworked to justify it's existence. As is it's not a strong subclass conceptually or mechanically (certainly before level 7 or 10, which most will never reach), despite Fighters "like that" being extremely common in fantasy fiction. The absolutely awful-ness of the design is best illustrated by giving them an unarmed attack which they can't use to attack with (only wrassle), which is completely off-beam for the fictional archetype (and weakens the class further mechanically). I'd like the theme to retained, but the mechanics just have to improve and to support the actual fantasy fiction archetype, not Crawford's eternal hate of unarmed attacks.
Monk - I mean, this class needs to go, but if it's not going, these four do represent a decent spread of themes.
Paladin - Glory is a total waste of a spot. Not only is it objectively inferior, mechanically, to all three other options, but it's an incredibly boring theme, not one people associate with Paladins, and not one that adds anything. It's just like a narcissistic/smug version of Devotion. Any other Paladin subclass would beat it - I'd suggest a darker one, even Oathbreaker (perhaps renamed).
Ranger - Hunter should go, frankly. There's no need for a "vanilla" Ranger that is absolutely packed to the gills with magic and relies on magic to even make their special attacks. If you're not going to have a non-magic Ranger, lean into the special-ness of the Ranger, and cut Hunter's intentional boring-ness (but tons of mechanical complexity) and replace it with something Actually Cool. Horizon Walker or Swamkeeper.
Rogue - I see they "improved" Assassin, but it's still basically a trap subclass, in that it's written in such a way that people will think it's really good at assassinating people - it isn't, you
can't be good at that in 5E's rules (not with martial abilities anyway), it's just not possible currently - but basically it's actually worse at killing people than the Swashbuckler, arguably even than the Thief. It's particularly funny that Surprising Strikes is now a misnomer - you will only ever get the (relatively small) benefit on a single strike, rather getting to crit on every attack. Shouldn't be pluralized mate! If WotC can't see their way clear to making it good at it's "one job", then replace it with something cool and weird like Soulknife or Phantom. Fantasy fiction is full of "assassins" (many teenage or young 20s girls) right now and has been for a while - but the majority have far more in common with either Thief or Swashbuckler, or with the Phantom/Soulknife/AT (or even with Shadow Monks) than D&D's uninspired and ineffective vision of an Assassin. Don't lean into things your system is inherently opposed to - and D&D 5E is inherently opposed to letting characters - including non-trash monsters/NPCs - get one-shot.
Sorcerer - I don't have a strong opinion, but Clockwork is clearly the odd one out, and doesn't seem to fit with the "innate magic" theme particularly well, so should probably be cut - albeit not for bloody Divine Soul - Shadow Magic would make sense.
Warlock - Celestial is by far the weakest, conceptually (just absolute "I want all the upsides and none of the downsides!" stuff), and undermines the entire theme of the Warlock so I'd 100% kick that out for re-worked The Genie. Honestly a lot more people would have a lot more fun with that.
Wizard - At least have one non-school! Abjurer is the most boring and least-picked, I suspect, so replace that with probably Bladesinging.
Oathbreaker and Death Domain are in the 2014 DMG as Villianous Class Options (p96-97).
So I could see the Villianous Class Options in the DMG be expanded.
It's totally bizarre and silly that either is in the DMG, especially Death, which numerous and Neutral and Good-aligned Gods have in their purview. Just absolute "apology edition" nonsense. Expanding that would be just an outright bad idea.
Hopefully there are no subclasses, races or other essentially player-facing material in the DMG.