D&D (2024) Class Tags in the new MM

[pukunui]

Class tags were a thing WotC introduced partway through the 2014 era of 5e. They've continued with it for the 2024 iteration. The reason for them, according to the new MM's intro, is still to alert the DM that such a creature is eligible to attune to magic items that have that class as an attunement requirement.

With that in mind, I did a skim-through of the entire book to see what all stat blocks had a class tag. The only monsters with class tags are the Lich (wizard) and the Mummy Lord (cleric). The only NPCs with class tags are the three Mages (wizard) and the three Priests (cleric). That's it!

This feels like a real missed opportunity. Like, the Druid stat block doesn't have the "druid" class tag!

At the very least,* I think the following stat blocks should have had class tags as well.

Bandit Deceiver = wizard (it's an arcane trickster!)
Bullywug Bog Sage = druid
Centaur Warden = druid
Cultist Fanatic = cleric
Cultist Hierophant = warlock
Cultist, Aberrant = cleric?
Cultist, Death = cleric?
Cultist, Elemental = cleric and/or sorcerer?
Cultist, Fiend = warlock
Death Knight / DK Aspirant = paladin
Druid = druid
Githzerai Monk = monk
Githzerai Psion = wizard?
Goblin Hexer = wizard
Knight, Questing = paladin
Kuo-toa Archpriest = cleric
Lizardfolk Geomancer = druid
Merfolk Wavebender = cleric or druid?
Mind Flayer Arcanist = wizard
Noble Prodigy = sorcerer
Performer Maestro = bard
Performer Legend = bard
Sahuagin Priest = cleric

Interestingly, there are no rangers in the MM. They could have included a Scout variant with ranger spells, for instance.

On the one hand, I'd say it's not worth including class tags because it's easy enough to see what class a particular NPC or monster might have anyway (the Death Knight casts paladin spells therefore they should be able to attune to magic items that paladins only can attune to!). On the other hand, if you are going to include something like a class tag, then please be more consistent about it!

What are your thoughts?

*I think you could also make the argument that the various non-spellcasting class creatures and NPCs should have their respective class tags as well (so the Assassin would have the "rogue" tag, while the Berserkers would have the "Barbarian" tag and the Warriors would have the "Fighter" tag and so on), but I'm not sure how useful that would be, since there are few, if any, magic items with attunement limited to those classes.

 

[Reynard]

Any creature connected to.a bloodline in the PHB should get a "sorcerer" Tage. Similarly for creatures that might be connected to Warlock patrons. Why limit it to NPCs and humanoids?

 

[Remathilis]

I personally think the class tag is useless. The concept wasn't, but WotC's execution in MotM and beyond was. It does nothing. It doesn't inform the creatures abilities, proficiencies, spel lists, caster stat, hit dice or anything useful. It basically says "this creature counts as X class for purposes of using magic items that attune to specific classes." So if you wanted to give the lich a staff of the python, they can't use it. It's a otherwise pointless addition.

That said, following MotM's use of it, if the classes name is in the state block name (abjurer wizard, warlock of the archfey) the class doesn't get a tag either since it's assumed in the name. I guess that's what druid didn't get a tag.

Anyway, color me surprised class tags were a ball drop. Frankly, they were in MotM too.

 

[Stormonu]

Class tags are also helpful if you want to switch out an ability or two or "advance" them further into the class.

 

[Li Shenron]

Class tags were a thing WotC introduced partway through the 2014 era of 5e. They've continued with it for the 2024 iteration. The reason for them, according to the new MM's intro, is still to alert the DM that such a creature is eligible to attune to magic items that have that class as an attunement requirement.

With that in mind, I did a skim-through of the entire book to see what all stat blocks had a class tag. The only monsters with class tags are the Lich (wizard) and the Mummy Lord (cleric). The only NPCs with class tags are the three Mages (wizard) and the three Priests (cleric). That's it!

This feels like a real missed opportunity. Like, the Druid stat block doesn't have the "druid" class tag!

At the very least,* I think the following stat blocks should have had class tags as well.

Bandit Deceiver = wizard (it's an arcane trickster!)
Bullywug Bog Sage = druid
Centaur Warden = druid
Cultist Fanatic = cleric
Cultist Hierophant = warlock
Cultist, Aberrant = cleric?
Cultist, Death = cleric?
Cultist, Elemental = cleric and/or sorcerer?
Cultist, Fiend = warlock
Death Knight / DK Aspirant = paladin
Druid = druid
Githzerai Monk = monk
Githzerai Psion = wizard?
Goblin Hexer = wizard
Knight, Questing = paladin
Kuo-toa Archpriest = cleric
Lizardfolk Geomancer = druid
Merfolk Wavebender = cleric or druid?
Mind Flayer Arcanist = wizard
Noble Prodigy = sorcerer
Performer Maestro = bard
Performer Legend = bard
Sahuagin Priest = cleric

Interestingly, there are no rangers in the MM. They could have included a Scout variant with ranger spells, for instance.

On the one hand, I'd say it's not worth including class tags because it's easy enough to see what class a particular NPC or monster might have anyway (the Death Knight casts paladin spells therefore they should be able to attune to magic items that paladins only can attune to!). On the other hand, if you are going to include something like a class tag, then please be more consistent about it!

What are your thoughts?

Not that I personally care about this, since I am playing 5.0 and don't see the need for class tags at all: if I want an NPC to use a magic item which requires attunement, they just do, as non-player creatures don't need to follow rules the reason of which is primarily to balance player characters with each other.

Having said that, for consistency I agree that at the very minimum the NPC druid should have the druid class tag, and I would expect this to receive an errata-corrige in the future. That's because those NPCs are really meant to be "lite" versions of PC classes in the sense of being easier to use by a DM compared to a fully-detailed character using a PC class, but narratively still very much the same thing; so if they added the tag to wizard and cleric, there is no reason for not having the same tag added to druid.

For the others, it's a bit more open to interpretation, as each NPC has its own narrative that does not necessarily match with that of a class. Some probably are effectively meant as monster+class (but still "lite" version for practical use), in which case having the class tag makes a lot of sense. Others maybe not. It's debatable, but for instance I generally use "cultists" as truly lesser dabblers with magical stuff than clerics, something between totally non-magic priests and full clerics, so I wouldn't feel like they particularly need to earn the cleric tag.

 

[pukunui]

It's debatable, but for instance I generally use "cultists" as truly lesser dabblers with magical stuff than clerics, something between totally non-magic priests and full clerics, so I wouldn't feel like they particularly need to earn the cleric tag.

I suggested cleric for a bunch of them because they cast cleric spells and use Wisdom as their spellcasting ability.

The elemental cultist is a little weird because they cast what could be sorcerer spells rather than cleric spells but they still use Wisdom. (I prefer the PotA approach to elemental cultists, where their spellcasters are all either sorcerers or warlocks – even the ones referred to as priests.)

 

[Weiley31]

I liked class tags.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I liked class tags.

I also like them. And I think elementals should get a tag for what kind of elementals they are...

 

[Epic Meepo]

This feels like a real missed opportunity. Like, the Druid stat block doesn't have the "druid" class tag!

I'm looking at a physical copy of the book, and the Druid stat block therein has the (druid) tag.

 

[pukunui]

I'm looking at a physical copy of the book, and the Druid stat block therein has the (druid) tag.

OK so that must just be an error on DDB!