D&D 5E How many fans want a 5E Warden?

[Tony Vargas]

If it were up to me, I would straight up combine the warden and seeker

Then make it the "I enchant my weapon with nature" class.

Want a controller? Pick Vine Arrow.
Want a defender? Pick Vine Axe.
Want a damage dealer? Pick Lava Arrow.
Want a support? Pick Earth Hammer.
Want a AOE damage? Pick Lightning Arrow.

That's an interesting take. Could the warden's shape-changing also fit into that?

 

[mellored]

Quote Originally Posted by Minigiant View Post
If it were up to me, I would straight up combine the warden and seeker

Then make it the "I enchant my weapon with nature" class.

Want a controller? Pick Vine Arrow.
Want a defender? Pick Vine Axe.
Want a damage dealer? Pick Lava Arrow.
Want a support? Pick Earth Hammer.
Want a AOE damage? Pick Lightning Arrow.

That's an interesting take. Could the warden's shape-changing also fit into that?

If you tweaked it a bit and made it less about the weapon enchantment and more about a personal enchantment.

Investiture of Vines -> Vines sprout from your body and wrap around your weapon. If you hit with your weapon, the target must make a Str saving throw or be restrained. If you used a ranged weapon it has advantage on the save.



Though, i still warden as a barbarian sub-class. "When you rage, select one of the following investiture..."

And seeker as a ranger sub-class. Ensnaring strike, lightning arrow, already exist. Let them recharge spell slots and make a swarm-of-bees arrow spell.

 

[Minigiant]

That's an interesting take. Could the warden's shape-changing also fit into that?

Yeah I guess.

You guys got me caring about classes I don't even... Haha.

Vine Wrath
+1d4 damage, Strength save or be entangled
Vine Might
AC is 11+Dex, climb speed

Lava Wrath
+3d4 fire damage
Lava Might
AC is 13+ Dex (max +2), fire resistance, Stealth Disadvantage

Earth Wrath
+1d4 damage, Strength save or knock prone
Earth Might
AC is 16, speed -15ft, piercing resistance.

You are now Thrall

 

[77IM]

The best fit for the warden, flavor-wise, is ranger ("defender of the natural order" and all that). The ranger is also already a warrior-class, with nature-y stuff in the core class. The only thing it lacks is weird elemental transformation powers -- I seem to recall warden having a lot of "I turn into a tree," "I turn into a dude made of stone" sort of powers. So, that sounds like a ranger subclass too me.

Oath of the Ancients comes close, but Paladin doesn't have much nature-y stuff in the core class, and Paladin already has too much going on to squeeze in any weird elemental transformation powers.

 

[Tony Vargas]

The assumption (and it seems like a fair one) that sub-classes can't 'take away' features from the base class really seems to get in the way of making a new or existing sub-class work (as a substitute for a missing class). Whether you need to take away features to 'make room' for something else, or because they're inappropriate to the concept.

Alternate Rages for Barbarian sub-classes could get you the 4e PH2 Barbarian with it's crazy-magical '____ Rage' invokations, and, with a more defensive/defender & shape-changing 'Rage' a Warden, and maybe the odd Frenzied Berserker or Battlerager, as well...

 

[sleypy]

If only they had considered filling 1/5 of the book with a huge list of manuevers, skills, special abilities and invocations. Then they could have created customized lists based around appropriate concepts for each class. Then subclasses would be able to just append those list to tweak the concepts. That is probably just crazy talk, and way to different for D&D...

 

[Mistwell]

Because curry doesn't have anything to do with my culture and is rude to be offended on someone's behalf?

What does "Taco" in this context having to do with someone's culture or not have anything to do with it being racist? The word itself is not racist. Using it in place of lemon curry as a substitute for one food name for another is not racist, in a poll where it just means "What?" It comes from this Monty Python sketch:

[video=youtube;qKhit2nsoq4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKhit2nsoq4[/video]

 

[MechaTarrasque]

clarify 1

The assumption (and it seems like a fair one) that sub-classes can't 'take away' features from the base class really seems to get in the way of making a new or existing sub-class work. Whether you need to take away features to 'make room' for something else, or because they're inappropriate to the concept.

Alternate Rages for Barbarian sub-classes could get you the 4e PH2 Barbarian with it's crazy-magical '____ Rage' invokations, and, with a more defensive/defender & shape-changing 'Rage' a Warden, and maybe the odd Frenzied Berserker or Battlerager, as well...

If a subclass doesn't fit with the main class features, the subclass shouldn't be a subclass of the class after all (maybe it is a better subclass of a different class or maybe it should just be its own class). That being said, "add a fire aura" to a barbarian when he/she is raging doesn't take away from the existing class feature, nor does "grow fur and claws when you rage."

 

[Umbran]

These terms mean nothing in 5e.

The terms mean things to *PEOPLE*, and last I checked, humans are not edition specific. That is sufficient. Consider it a conversion - the terms don't have to have explicit meaning within the system, to try to get a class that expresses some of what the old class had.

Folks should spend more time in constructive conversation, rather than in destructive conversation. If you aren't interested, then leave the others to their fun.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

No. I hate the concept, but I don't hate the Warden specifically. I don't want splatbook proliferation of classes. Get off my lawn.

;-)