D&D 5E Classless Subclasses

[DJCupboard]

I'm pretty much shooting off the cuff here. I don't have any examples built, but as a thought experiment, what do people think of subclasses available regardless of class? Maybe completely on there own, maybe tied to race or background.

 

[Leatherhead]

Do you mean level dependent powers that are gained in addition too or in place of subclass powers?

Because if they are an addition to existing powers, then they are basically like the Dragonmark Feat from the Eberron UA.

If not, it would be like the Vampire Class from 4e I am assuming?

Or is it something between like the racial feat for the Deep Gnome, where the race is more powerful than normal and has to gain access to it's full suite of powers by paying a tax of sorts?

 

[Mercule]

Gut reaction: Too much like 3E/4E Prestige Classes, which were a big factor in the "bloat" from 3E (no opinion on 4E). I adamantly oppose the introduction of Prestige Classes in 5E and rejoice at their exclusion (YMMV, IMO, etc.).

Marginally deeper thought: Different classes get their sub-classes at different levels. Even those that choose at the same level generally have differences in when they get a sub-class power. You would end up with a constant mismatch. Also, some classes require their subclass just to really fulfill the archetype of the parent class (warlock?).

I think the question is logical and not heretical by any means. I just don't see it working. You'd do better by creating parallel sub-classes (e.g. Eldritch Knight and Arcane Trickster) for concepts that can span multiple classes. Or, if the concept you're trying to implement is tight enough -- say, three or fewer minor abilities -- add it as a feat. Just avoid feat trees; 5E is better off without those, too.

 

[PnPgamer]

Racial and background subclasses sound nice. Dwarven defender for fighter or... Actually for every prestige or path from previous editions i come up with can be simulated easily with various already existing classes and subclasses.

Dont get me wrong i liek the idea but fifth edition may make it unnecessary.

 

[DJCupboard]

I agree about feat trees (and probably prestige classes, if I think back). I was intending this in place of the class's subclass, as an option. It would be very hard to balance (and probably not worth the effort), but not everything in the game is balanced for every class now, and that's not a problem. You are correct for the classes that get all their meat from their subclass choice.

One of my favorite things about 5e is its simplicity, but one of my favorite things about 3.x was the capacity for new rules system (I never had be worried about power creep back then, because WotC wasn't either ).

 

[delericho]

It's an interesting idea. But...

Marginally deeper thought: Different classes get their sub-classes at different levels. Even those that choose at the same level generally have differences in when they get a sub-class power.

I suspect this is pretty much a deal-breaker. A shame.

 

[Leatherhead]

I agree about feat trees (and probably prestige classes, if I think back). I was intending this in place of the class's subclass, as an option. It would be very hard to balance (and probably not worth the effort), but not everything in the game is balanced for every class now, and that's not a problem. You are correct for the classes that get all their meat from their subclass choice.

Maybe you should do it backwards then:

Make a full fledged race/background class, then add features to it with a subclass, and make people multiclass into it.

Like say, the Vampire Class.

You start off as a Human Fighter, get to level 4 or something with the Battlemaster Subclass. Then you get "bit" and turn into a Vampire, so you take some Vampire levels and take the "Blood-Blade" subclass, so that you can stack up your Fighter and Vampire Levels for the purposes of things like extra attack and hit points. The result of which is you stop getting levels of Battlemaster, meaning no new maneuvers or better dice. But you gain levels in Vampire, so you can do those bloodsucking and turning into a bat things.

 

[DJCupboard]

That might work, but it brings to mind shades of Savage Species, which was a mess.

I'm thinking dropping the idea as an interesting pipe dream is best, as others have suggested.

 

[Mercule]

One of my favorite things about 5e is its simplicity, but one of my favorite things about 3.x was the capacity for new rules system (I never had be worried about power creep back then, because WotC wasn't either ).

I don't think that 5E is less open to new rules systems than 3E. Just the opposite, in fact. I've tinkered with every edition of D&D since BECMI and generally liked the results -- until 3E. Really tinkering with the core of 3E tended to end badly because it was so tightly coupled.

5E's simplicity is also a strength. You just can't think of it in the same terms as 3E; it's much more like 1E/2E. Just know the bounds of what you can change. You can slap on kits without totally breaking the game (whether you want to is a different question). You can add descriptive critical hits or critical fumbles. Ignore feats or add feat trees (bad idea, IMO). You could even make Background selection meatier by adding in benefits at, say, every five levels or make it possible to "replace" your background by roleplaying through significant changes. You could even pull Fate aspects into 5E, wholesale, using advantage/disadvantage for the mechanical impacts.

To change the sub-classing system though, means changing the sub-classing system. That's pretty hard-wired into the game. The impact is that you'd end up having to rebalance the whole thing so that all classes get sub-class abilities at the same levels and they're getting roughly the same level of oomph from their sub-class vs. the parent class. It's doable, but passes my ROI cutoff by a fair margin. It also means that your "universal" sub-class is something that needs to be locked in by about 3rd level. My gut says that the best use of universal sub-classes is to represent some RP aspect that you want to have grant a mechanical benefit, say Harper Agent, which could easily come at 10th level or so. I'd either use a feat for the couple of perks that come with that or just RP it.

On the other hand, if being locked it at 3rd level is okay, then using a background is probably fine, too. If you want something meatier than the existing backgrounds, replace the standard Ability Score Increase (4th, 8th, etc.) with background benefits. I'd want to do it for all backgrounds, just for consistency, but it would be a fine mechanic. Alternatively, especially if keeping the feat mechanic is important to your group, just add in a couple of feats with certain backgrounds as prerequisites.

 

[steeldragons]

I'd like a little more clarification....like, what subclasses are you thinking about that would/could be open to all classes?

As Mercule covered well, things that sort of replace/bring features in through an organization make the most obvious sense.

I think [hope] the desire to avoid "prestige class" bloat can be easily avoided and/or conducted through feats easily enough, for folks to pick and choose as they wish.

I could see some of those, kinda, "crossing" class lines. For example: an Arcane Archer Feat that, say, prereq's "character must have X levels as Fighter, Ranger, Sorcerer or Wizard and proficiency with the long or short bow."

But something that could be available to any/all classes? That would seem to fall in the realm of a background or a feat...as they are already constructed and fit into the system. I am having difficulty conceptualizing what "sub-class" would actually exist in this way.

Something like a "racial" subclass...I suppose could, and has already been shown with the Deep Gnome magic stuff (which I think makes a ton of sense), be done through a feat as well...with a [fairly obvious] "must be X race" prereq...

Maybe in "larger" cases a background...like "Elf of Sylvanesti" or "Mystaran Hin Slinger" or something like that...where you differentiate their race/region/location/training/upbringing somehow in a way that could be applied across the board for all classes of X race that take that background...but BGs are not really constructed to give PCs added "features", per se. Backgrounds are for tools and proficiencies and RP/story possibilities stuff.

So, that isn't really the same as bringing in a "subclass", where you have character defining features kicking in at xyz levels. So, again, having trouble with the concept...what are you imagining would be a sub-class that could potentially be taken by any base class or any base class of a given race?