WotC’s Ray Winninger has hinted on Twitter that we may be seeing something of the 2024 next edition of D&D soon — “you’ll get a first look at some of the new design work soon.”.
Last edited:
Monks are really fun swashbucklers, as well.Re anti-indigenous racism - the history in Canada is terrible, but awareness is growing fast at least.
Re Monk: The flavor is, as you say, kind of wild and not in a good way. However, the chasis has some validity. It's clearly not for everyone, and it suffers from the ranger's problem of "can't be better at fighting than a fighter, otherwise what's the point of playing a fighter". But it is fun and it suits some players well, and it can be reflavored quite easily . My last monk was a kensei wild elf, and his monk powers were just "elven ways". What better way to show the supernatural speed and reflex of an elf than with a monk?
Or they’d be subclasses of the swordmage or whatever, but yeah.Strangely, I find myself both agreeing and disagreeing with you.
First we have to consider what is a "magical swordsman" (or a gish). If one takes the definition of "someone who can fight and cast arcane spells", then poof, multiclass fighter mage, done. But I don't think that's what you meant - you mean a swordsman who has integrated magic into his fighting.
You are completely correct that there is no "proper" class focused on this concept, and that there could have been, or perhaps even should have been. I have a magus in a PF game that I hoped (in vain) would switch to 5e. Converting him accurately is nigh impossible. It's particularly bad if you restrict yourself on the PHB. Ironically, the closest we have to a gish is the paladin - but even then that's quite wrong because the flavor of the spells and class as a whole just don't match.
on the other hand, the magical swordsman has always seemed a bit... idiosyncratic to me. Instead of having one "path" to gish-dom, 5e offers a very wide array of ways to do it:
Eldrich knight
Hexblade
College of sword bard (esp with a 1 level dip in hexblade)
bladesinger
aaaand that's not all!
Fighter-mage MC can still work
Arcane Trickster (which pairs well with bladesinger btw)
Some artificers (a more steampunk approach if you will)
Some other fighter subclasses are sort of "magical warriors" - psi warrior and rune knight in particular, and this can be enhanced by taking things like ritual caster.
Hexadin/Sorcadin
If you have a dedicated gish class, half of these options probably wouldn't exist.
Eh, there are plenty of European warrior cults that the monk could easily lean into. Some would give it mild conceptual overlap with other classes, but that’s good IMO.The complaint is usually western vs eastern tropes. That the monk doesn’t fit in with the rest as it’s the solitary eastern fantasy trope is a game dominated by western fantasy tropes.
Mystic, for my money. The martials arts doesn’t actually set it apart. What sets it apart is using breath/focus/inner power to do impossible things like stop aging and leap 30 feet.That's why we have backgrounds like Acolyte. We could rename the class to something else, I'm not sure what it would buy to change the label or what that label would be. Fantasy Martial Arts Expert doesn't really roll off the tongue so you have to call them something. Ninja would probably be closer I suppose.
I take your point (not invalid) but I think the key difference is "good enough" factor of those vs. the weird hyperspecificity of the Monk (which isn't even a D&D specificity really).What classes are based on fictional tropes that you think monk is that much different? Do D&D wizards, warlocks, paladins, clerics or rangers really match any pre-existing fiction? Why would monks be any different? Most classes in D&D are their own fictional construct which are inspired by, but do not accurately model, other fiction.
I love it when people say this, because it's so funny, it's like "Just design every single adventure for the whole of the rest of time in an extremely narrow and specific way that feels pretty wrong a lot of the time! That'll fix it!". Yeah, I could also fix my foot hurting by chopping it off, sure.If the 5 minute work day is an issue in a game, don't allow a 5 minute work day.
Yeah half of them wouldn't exist, because they should never have existed in the first place. It's like saying "If you have efficient nationalized provision of social services, lots of kinds of charity won't exist because they won't be needed! OH NO!".Strangely, I find myself both agreeing and disagreeing with you.
First we have to consider what is a "magical swordsman" (or a gish). If one takes the definition of "someone who can fight and cast arcane spells", then poof, multiclass fighter mage, done. But I don't think that's what you meant - you mean a swordsman who has integrated magic into his fighting.
You are completely correct that there is no "proper" class focused on this concept, and that there could have been, or perhaps even should have been. I have a magus in a PF game that I hoped (in vain) would switch to 5e. Converting him accurately is nigh impossible. It's particularly bad if you restrict yourself on the PHB. Ironically, the closest we have to a gish is the paladin - but even then that's quite wrong because the flavor of the spells and class as a whole just don't match.
on the other hand, the magical swordsman has always seemed a bit... idiosyncratic to me. Instead of having one "path" to gish-dom, 5e offers a very wide array of ways to do it:
Eldrich knight
Hexblade
College of sword bard (esp with a 1 level dip in hexblade)
bladesinger
aaaand that's not all!
Fighter-mage MC can still work
Arcane Trickster (which pairs well with bladesinger btw)
Some artificers (a more steampunk approach if you will)
Some other fighter subclasses are sort of "magical warriors" - psi warrior and rune knight in particular, and this can be enhanced by taking things like ritual caster.
Hexadin/Sorcadin
If you have a dedicated gish class, half of these options probably wouldn't exist.
Those aren't Monks.The Monk is merely the chasis for the magical and fantasy spirtual martial artist. There are a bunch of them.
If I were to do monk subclasses by decade
70s: Classic Open Palm Monk
80s: Star Wars Jedi Monk
90s: Street Fighter or Dragonball Monk
00s: Avatar Bender Monk
10s: ????
Add in Shadow Monk and Drunken Fist and you have most of the core concepts of the class in media.
Mike Mearls in the Happy Fun Hour laid out he would have dine the Rabger if he could do it over again, and it boiled down to making "Favored Terrain" the Subclass at Level 1, ao a Forest Ranger or Mountain Ranger would be the organizing principle for the archetype.
I've managed to avoid the five minute workday for a few decades now. It's not hard.I love it when people say this, because it's so funny, it's like "Just design every single adventure for the whole of the rest of time in an extremely narrow and specific way that feels pretty wrong a lot of the time! That'll fix it!". Yeah, I could also fix my foot hurting by chopping it off, sure.
I could see an enhanced familar... maybe based on Worg/skin changer from GoT
Edit: I just realized a dragon sorcerer getting a dragon pet, and a divine soul getting a lantern archon would be cool
I mean, I'm very skeptical that that's a decision you've made rather than down to the behaviour of your players, but not being psychic, I don't know. However I find your "It's not hard" to be a bit fatuous without you giving context.I've managed to avoid the five minute workday for a few decades now. It's not hard.
Well, yeah,it was a system flaw in 3rd edition.I mean, I'm very skeptical that that's a decision you've made rather than down to the behaviour of your players, but not being psychic, I don't know. However I find your "It's not hard" to be a bit fatuous without you giving context.
I largely avoided it until 3E because it wasn't that advantageous and the players weren't interested. But in 3E, it became stupid not to do that, because buffs became so ridiculous and so stackable. In 4E it vanished again, because there was rarely a point. In 5E it's pretty rare (though vastly more common than 4E) because again, there's not as much point. But just saying "write around it" for 3.XE/PF1 players - not helpful.