D&D (2024) How many classes do you want to see this edition?

[Yaarel]

Since "magus" and "mage" are the same thing, I would avoid the term "magus".

Maybe call it a Witchknight or an Eldritch.

 

[Mephista]

Would polymorph strike even work? Like, Polymorph reverses when the target is reduced to 0HP. So, you hit it, transform it, it takes damage and turns back into a normal ... whatever it was before. That sounds like an expensive way to give your enemy extra HP at high levels. I don't like judging a class's potential at levels less than 2% of people play at.

Like, I get it, replace Polymorph with something like Hold Person. But that's still just something akin to paladin smite-spells and how little they get used. So I have to wonder if it would happen in the face of higher dps. Even if Hold Person was considered better, it wouldmean you're worse than soemone that can upcast it and Hold an entire battlefield, and make you a crappy Controller type..

I suppose there's also arguments that this effectively gives you QuickenSpell metamagic at no cost, able to use it the entire day without a resource cost like Sorcerer has to. So that makes this "strong" - personally, I don't see it that way. So, I've got to question just how much fun this is when you'll feel worse than a paladin or even a Valor Bard with Stunning Strike.

 

[Minigiant]

Would polymorph strike even work? Like, Polymorph reverses when the target is reduced to 0HP. So, you hit it, transform it, it takes damage and turns back into a normal ... whatever it was before. That sounds like an expensive way to give your enemy extra HP at high levels. I don't like judging a class's potential at levels less than 2% of people play at.

Like, I get it, replace Polymorph with something like Hold Person. But that's still just something akin to paladin smite-spells and how little they get used. So I have to wonder if it would happen in the face of higher dps. Even if Hold Person was considered better, it wouldmean you're worse than soemone that can upcast it and Hold an entire battlefield, and make you a crappy Controller type..

I suppose there's also arguments that this effectively gives you QuickenSpell metamagic at no cost, able to use it the entire day without a resource cost like Sorcerer has to. So that makes this "strong" - personally, I don't see it that way. So, I've got to question just how much fun this is when you'll feel worse than a paladin or even a Valor Bard with Stunning Strike.

This is why the best way to do it is to make it into it's own spell or class feature.

The Gish hits the Gnoll Packleader with the Gish's Verminmorph strike. The Gnoll takes damage then turns into the bunny statblock in the Gish class description. When the effect is ended or the bunny-gnoll is hit, the gnoll returns to its statblock.

Or the Gish can choose Paralyzing Strike or Slowing Strike or Transposition Strike.

 

[CreamCloud0]

I mentioned what new classes I’d like earlier but neglected to elaborate on what I’d do with the existing ones,
First, fighter upgrades into warlord, simple.

Second barbarian is removed and divided up as subclasses for fighterwarlord(as the ‘simple fighter’ option and champion+, druid, possibly something for monk? and, bear with me here, sorcerer, sorcerer already has a bunch of themes of connecting to wild magic so make one all primal-y have the subclass bump the hit die and say their rage catalyses the wild magic for stuff.

With Barbarian divided up replace the spot with a skirmisher type class, the non-magic ranger that lots of people ask for, the ‘light soldier’ option to the ‘heavy knight’.

Wizard, sorcerer and warlock all stay but some small tweaks to some, wizard refocuses on knowing spell schools, sorcerer focuses on highly thematic builds and spell lists and becomes a CON caster, warlock is good as is.

Bard is dropped down to a half caster but more focus is given to magical secrets and inspiration mechanics, let them really embrace the jack of all trades master of none role.

 

[Yaarel]

This is why the best way to do it is to make it into it's own spell or class feature.

The Gish hits the Gnoll Packleader with the Gish's Verminmorph strike. The Gnoll takes damage then turns into the bunny statblock in the Gish class description. When the effect is ended or the bunny-gnoll is hit, the gnoll returns to its statblock.

Or the Gish can choose Paralyzing Strike or Slowing Strike or Transposition Strike.

The term "smite" could become a technical term that means inflicting a spell effect on a hit using a weapon or unarmed strike.

 

[Minigiant]

The term "smite" could become a technical term that means inflicting a spell effect on a hit using a weapon or unarmed strike.

"Smite" has a bit too much divine flavor to it.

____________________________________

Personally, even before the gish and warlord, the class I think D&D is missing most is the Scholar class.

D&D has several knowledge skills in Nature, Medicine, History, investigation and tools (smith, cook, carpentry, woodcarver) that it doesn't explore fantasy elements of or "just makes into spells"

Fans cannot keep saying "There's too much magic" and "Not everything is a spell" and ignore how a fantastical blacksmith, surgeon, chef, or historian would be a help to some parties.

 

[Yaarel]

"Smite" has a bit too much divine flavor to it.

To me smite means to strike completely, such as being "smitten with love".

But as a mostly archaic vocabulary, I can see how smite might have religious connotations.

Personally, even before the gish and warlord, the class I think D&D is missing most is the Scholar class.

D&D has several knowledge skills in Nature, Medicine, History, investigation and tools (smith, cook, carpentry, woodcarver) that it doesn't explore fantasy elements of or "just makes into spells"

Fans cannot keep saying "There's too much magic" and "Not everything is a spell" and ignore how a fantastical blacksmith, surgeon, chef, or historian would be a help to some parties.

I feel, in a magical setting, skills should be able to check to interact with magic. I use the Arcana skill to allow "spell stunts" that modify the effect of a spell on the fly.

Likewise, an accomplished blacksmith should be able to produce a magical sword − and know what it takes to produce such a sword.

1e has a prominent NPC called a "Sage". This sounds like the Scholar.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

This looks suspiciously like it just plays like a paladin with smites. Like... the whole point is to use arcane blade thing. so, you imbue the attacks with things like magic missile. Or, if you want control, you use color spray.

People already complain that paladin doesn't use spells and just smites, smites smites. So, wouldn't the same thing happen here? These giant spell lists that never get used because people just "magic missile" smite? Maybe use a Shield or Absorb Elements spell, like the current Eldritch Knight does?

Yeah despite being an arcane gish class proponent, 90% of suggestions I see for it are either paladin clones, or people wanting bladesinger/hexblade/paladin all in one class because they have absolutely no concept of balance.

The biggest argument against an arcane gish class are people who want an arcane gish class.

Also no matter how people try to jam it in, 3e and pathfinder spellstrike doesn't work in 5e. It requires so many exceptions and clauses that it's a ruling/balance nightmare. Ranger/Paladin spells like searing smite, ensnaring strike, and lightning arrow are their replacement. They're just barred from all 5e arcane gish subclasses for some reason.

 

[tetrasodium]

Yeah despite being an arcane gish class proponent, 90% of suggestions I see for it are either paladin clones, or people wanting bladesinger/hexblade/paladin all in one class because they have absolutely no concept of balance.

The biggest argument against an arcane gish class are people who want an arcane gish class.

Also no matter how people try to jam it in, 3e and pathfinder spellstrike doesn't work in 5e. It requires so many exceptions and clauses that it's a ruling/balance nightmare. Ranger/Paladin spells like searing smite, ensnaring strike, and lightning arrow are their replacement. They're just barred from all 5e arcane gish subclasses for some reason.

There already is an arcane gish too, it's called a bard .

I feel like a lot of the complaints about warrior group fish type archetypes could be avoided in 6e if extra attack at 5/11 17(?) was shifted to the subclass instead of sitting in the base class. That would even allow no gosh type archetypes like cavalier & such a pretty significant bit of design space to alter thematically with meaningful results. For more traditional warrior group types it does not change anything if they get extra attack A from their base class or archetype.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

There already is an arcane gish too, it's called a bard .

I feel like a lot of the complaints about warrior group fish type archetypes could be avoided in 6e if extra attack at 5/11 17(?) was shifted to the subclass instead of sitting in the base class. That would even allow no gosh type archetypes like cavalier & such a pretty significant bit of design space to alter thematically with meaningful results. For more traditional warrior group types it does not change anything if they get extra attack A from their base class or archetype.

(I mean, I consider Bard as 'occult' rather than arcane. Like in pathfinder).

What I loved so much about the 4e swordmage was the elemental focus. Genasi preferring that class gave it a theme of its own. I've loved the elemental focus from all the way back in the bionicle days, and that class embodied it beyond anything else in dnd ever has.