D&D 5E Classes you're hoping WotC will create

[Greg K]

I still think D&D could do the paragon class: the superbeing of the PC's race.

Superhumans. The elfiest elf. A dwarf with the toughest beard ever. Iron Gnome. Hulkorc.

As long as it is an optional module, sure, why not? I may dislike it, but I don't want to stop other DMs from having such a tool.

 

[travathian]

5E PHB should have released with just Fighter, Mage, Cleric, and Rogue. Everything else can be a sublass/archetype/etc

 

[MoonSong]

I really like the warlock too. I dug it in 3e and played a melee eldricht strike warlock for some time.
But how many other 3e classes were created that were less engaging? 20? 30? Likely more. The odds of makings new, lasting addition to the game are likely 25:1. For every warlock, marshal, or ardent there's a healer, archivist, favoured soul, beguiler, hexblade, dragon shaman, dragonfire adept, spirit shaman, spell thief, and sooooo many more

Sorry for taking so long to quote this but I must say, I love the favored soul and the healer, and I miss them, wish it was possible to play an accurate version of both (the cleric doesn't do justice to any of them).

5E PHB should have released with just Fighter, Mage, Cleric, and Rogue. Everything else can be a sublass/archetype/etc

I don't know you, but the warlock and sorcerer allow for characters that are just plain impossible under the dnd wizard/mu/mage, forcing them to be under it would effectively erase these kinds of characters. Just like the Cleric is too different from the healer and favored soul, the paladin is too different from the avenger and the druid is just too far away from the [4e] shaman.

 

[Jester David]

Sorry for taking so long to quote this but I must say, I love the favored soul and the healer, and I miss them, wish it was possible to play an accurate version of both (the cleric doesn't do justice to any of them).

Every class probably has some fans. I know some people adored Incarnum or the Truenamer. I did psionics and the soul knife.

I don't know you, but the warlock and sorcerer allow for characters that are just plain impossible under the dnd wizard/mu/mage, forcing them to be under it would effectively erase these kinds of characters. Just like the Cleric is too different from the healer and favored soul, the paladin is too different from the avenger and the druid is just too far away from the [4e] shaman.

Mechanically, no they cannot be replicated. But flavour wise, yes.

Pretty much any archetype can be reduced to some ratio of warrior/expert/spellcaster. A warlock or sorcerer is just a wizard with a different origin and backstory. You can give them different mechanics, but that doesn't make a new class. You could make a soldier, warrior, and sellsword that are each very different mechanically and play very different, but that wouldn't make them fundamentally different from a fighter.

 

[travathian]

I don't know you, but the warlock and sorcerer allow for characters that are just plain impossible under the dnd wizard/mu/mage, forcing them to be under it would effectively erase these kinds of characters. Just like the Cleric is too different from the healer and favored soul, the paladin is too different from the avenger and the druid is just too far away from the [4e] shaman.

You are too hung up on lists of abilities with a fancy name to decide what you play. Cleric/healer/shaman/druid are all the same thing, magic users that channel divine power. Sure they are different flavors and have different stats/abilities, but at their core they are the same. Take the base 4 (or really 3) and just have more feats, subclasses, and options to pick from. Done. No need to vomit out a bunch of classes just to sell books. Or convince people that they can't play something unless WotC creates a special class just for it.

That's the great thing about a role playing game, you most certainly can play your cleric as a shaman, nothing is stopping you but your imagination, creativity, and willingness to work with your DM.

Let me ask you this, are the mechanics of the warlock what makes it fun to play, or the flavor of the class? Hey cool, I am a warlock, so I am a magic user with a bunch of random abilities to pick from as I go up in levels?!? Ever notice how all those abilities are based off . . . magic user spells? Again, all a warlock consists of is taking a wizard, gimping their spellcasting ability, replacing those spells with spell like abilities, and adding some flavor. What is stopping you front taking wizard, picking spells that mimic those abilities, and creating a background that you learned magic from an otherworldly source? You now have what amounts to 90% of what makes up the warlock. If missing that 10% just totally kills your fun, I don't know what to tell you.

This is what cracks me up when someone rattles off half a dozen classes they are waiting for WotC to release. Why wait? Look at what is released already and get creative. It is like having a Lego set, but not building anything new because you are waiting for the Lego company to release a new set for what you really want to build. Why wait, use what you have, get creative, go have fun and just ignore the fact that your spaceship is using a fire hydrant for an escape pod.

 

[aramis erak]

The only classes I really want for mainstream are Psionicist, Tinker and the Dragonlance specific ones (Tinker, the knights, and the wizards of high sorcery).

I wouldn't mind subclasses for Oriental Adventures.

Now, if people manage to get AEG & WotC to approve a Rokugan book for 5e... The Bushi, Yojinbo and Shugenja are, for non-Rokugan OA, best done as subclasses (of fighter and wizard), but for Rokugan they are better done as classes with lots of subclasses.

 

[Minigiant]

While I like the idea, I question how distinct they would be. I wouldn't mind a sort of 'alternate advancement' for races with 'racial feats' like some of the planetouched races get in various books.

I was thinking like some kind of mystic warrior.

• Paragon
  • Guile Paragon (human, halfling)
    • Bonus feats
    • Sneak attack
  • Fey Paragon (elf, gnome)
    • Teleports
    • Charms
  • Stone Paragon (dwarf, goliath)
    • Stone skin
    • Boulder throwing
  • Elemental Paragon (dragonborn, tiefling, genasi, aarockora)
    • Elemental weaponry
    • Elemental armor

Who wants to be a servant of a fey when you can become one?

 

[TwoSix]

5E PHB should have released with just Fighter, Mage, Cleric, and Rogue. Everything else can be a sublass/archetype/etc

My biggest objection to that is that it prevents a lot of multiclassing possibilities. I certainly sympathize that it feels nice from a symmetry standpoint.

 

[TwoSix]

Let me ask you this, are the mechanics of the warlock what makes it fun to play, or the flavor of the class?

The mechanics, obviously. If you just say that my wizard is the thrall of a powerful devil, but you cast the exact same fireball as everyone else, who cares? I want mechanics that show me your character's story.

 

[MoonSong]

Every class probably has some fans. I know some people adored Incarnum or the Truenamer. I did psionics and the soul knife.


Mechanically, no they cannot be replicated. But flavour wise, yes.

Pretty much any archetype can be reduced to some ratio of warrior/expert/spellcaster. A warlock or sorcerer is just a wizard with a different origin and backstory. You can give them different mechanics, but that doesn't make a new class. You could make a soldier, warrior, and sellsword that are each very different mechanically and play very different, but that wouldn't make them fundamentally different from a fighter.

Well, a healer was the closest 3e ever came to the white mage archetype -Life cleric is just too martial bent for my tastes-.

You are too hung up on lists of abilities with a fancy name to decide what you play. Cleric/healer/shaman/druid are all the same thing, magic users that channel divine power. Sure they are different flavors and have different stats/abilities, but at their core they are the same. Take the base 4 (or really 3) and just have more feats, subclasses, and options to pick from. Done. No need to vomit out a bunch of classes just to sell books. Or convince people that they can't play something unless WotC creates a special class just for it.

That's the great thing about a role playing game, you most certainly can play your cleric as a shaman, nothing is stopping you but your imagination, creativity, and willingness to work with your DM.

Let me ask you this, are the mechanics of the warlock what makes it fun to play, or the flavor of the class? Hey cool, I am a warlock, so I am a magic user with a bunch of random abilities to pick from as I go up in levels?!? Ever notice how all those abilities are based off . . . magic user spells? Again, all a warlock consists of is taking a wizard, gimping their spellcasting ability, replacing those spells with spell like abilities, and adding some flavor. What is stopping you front taking wizard, picking spells that mimic those abilities, and creating a background that you learned magic from an otherworldly source? You now have what amounts to 90% of what makes up the warlock. If missing that 10% just totally kills your fun, I don't know what to tell you.

This is what cracks me up when someone rattles off half a dozen classes they are waiting for WotC to release. Why wait? Look at what is released already and get creative. It is like having a Lego set, but not building anything new because you are waiting for the Lego company to release a new set for what you really want to build. Why wait, use what you have, get creative, go have fun and just ignore the fact that your spaceship is using a fire hydrant for an escape pod.

Of course it is the flavor, but when the mechanics get in the way of that flavor I cannot have fun with it. This is my problem with it. Yes a sorcerer or warlock is a kind of wizard, but a generic wizard, not a d&d wizard which is a very speciffic thing -one I happen to hate-, that 10% you mention is the core of the class -and no I'm not talking about claws, scales and dragonbreath- the 10% that makes spellcasting not a voluntary thing that could happen anywhere -anywhere-, or that 10% that makes magic something stolen and not yours -and thus quite easy to do-. The 10% you cannot change without the classes is basically Presto, and I cannot stomach Presto.

And you know, check your privilege, if you have a long time DM who just blindly allows you to tinker with everything value him/her. The rest of us simple mortals have to conform with whatever official material comes out. I've yet to find a DM who would allow me to use multiclassing bard to convert 3e sorcerers, let alone to actively tinker with classes. Homebrew is a privilege not everybody can afford.