D&D (2024) How quickly should WOTC add new classes?

[Steampunkette]

Another thing about D&D fans and the community is that they (we) cannot agree on what these subclasses are supposed to look like, or what power level is appropriate for a druid, or even what an 'arcane gish' is, etc. We are our own worst enemies.

You talk about the people who want to play a particular version of the Beastmaster or Warlord as if they represent a unified whole, and I doubt that's the case. I think that if you asked 100 people on ENWorld what a "warlord" is supposed to be, you'll get dozens of different answers before it dissolves into an argument.

Before the Paranormal Power Kickstarter came along (thanks again, @Steampunkette ), the only psion I played was an Aberrant Mind Sorcerer that used the optional Spell Points rule in the DMG. It works a lot better than most folks claim...and while a handful of people here and on Reddit still really like that version, the disagreeable majority will have none of it.

Always happy to know it's out there, seeing use! <3

And yeah. Still mad WotC won't make a proper psionic character. Almost want to send them a copy of Paranormal Power and say "This is a way to do it that is unique and engaging!"

But also after the OGL thing... I don't wanna give them anything.

 

[CleverNickName]

And yeah. Still mad WotC won't make a proper psionic character. Almost want to send them a copy of Paranormal Power and say "This is a way to do it that is unique and engaging!"

But also after the OGL thing... I don't wanna give them anything.

Yeah, fair enough. But who knows? Maybe someone at WotC will reach out to you and offer to buy it from you for like a bazillion dollars or something.

 

[Incenjucar]

The time scale here really makes it not worth waiting for. I can't see WotC releasing any new classes except for the Psion within the decade unless something changes or there's a major fantasy property to rip off that hasn't been written yet.

Next edition is 2024. That gives them at least 2 years to coast on sales before customers get antsy. 2026-2028 they pump out your class guides for the more popular classes and one or two species books, and 2028-2030 they get the stragglers and start cramming things into fewer books. 2030.

So, 7 years before we can reasonably expect them to start creating anything fully new.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

The problem about creating new class with special game mechanisms is to sell new sourcebooks style "the complete psionic".

The keys to create a new class:

• Interesting concept. For example incarnae and soulborn from Magic of Incarnum are two examples of failed classes because these were paladine clones with a different game mechanic. The psionic ardent was not only a cleric with psionic powers, but this class had got a great potential to create stories about love-hate relations with the rest of divine spellcasters.
• Right power balance, of course.
• Fun gameplay. The psychic enervation by the psionic wilder wasn't not an interesting class feature, and I wouldn't use it in my game. This could be fixed with the option the penalty would be dazed until the end of the turn. Then here I would dare to risk with the wild surge.

* I miss the martial adept classes(crusader, warblade and swordsage) but the game mechanic about reloading caused the fights to be slower.

 

[mamba]

The real question is why is anyone here even asking this question, when we all know the answer: they'll release new classes as paid dlc / microtransactions for their new VTT

I know no such thing, I expect new classes to appear as frequently as in the past, i.e. almost never

 

[Frozen_Heart]

Hmm if you're going for 4 classes, I wonder if fighter, rogue, caster, and gish would be the best options. Rather than fighter, rogue, mage, and priest.

Gishes play fundamentally differently to half caster / half fighter mixes, so having that as a base which then paladin, ranger, swordmage, artificer, hexblade, and psi-warrior can spring off would be nice to have.

While cleric and druid can go under the caster category.

 

[CleverNickName]

Hmm if you're going for 4 classes, I wonder if fighter, rogue, caster, and gish would be the best options. Rather than fighter, rogue, mage, and priest.

Gishes play fundamentally differently to half caster / half fighter mixes, so having that as a base which then paladin, ranger, swordmage, artificer, hexblade, and psi-warrior can spring off would be nice to have.

While cleric and druid can go under the caster category.

I'm not so sure. If we want a "gish" themed character, with a split focus on martial and magic, I feel like we can get that through multiclassing.

Combining the martial with a full caster would give you that classic "gish" build of a swordmage, hexblade, etc. But combining the Martial base with a half-caster ("Priest") would give you a lower-magic focus more similar to the paladin or ranger.

Another interesting thing we could do: allow multiple subclasses. This would be closer to a "soft" multiclassing, allowing the player to combine similar character concepts and more easily "dial in" certain concepts. For example, a Warrior could choose the Path of the Berserker subclass at 3rd level, and then choose the Way of the Open Hand a level or two later, to get a "Tavern Brawler" sort of vibe.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Until someone at WotC realizes 'gish' means character that uses magic as part of blade craft instead of 'wizard who swords after he fireballs', we're never going to get a really good gish.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

Until someone at WotC realizes 'gish' means character that uses magic as part of blade craft instead of 'wizard who swords after he fireballs', we're never going to get a really good gish.

Doesn't help that 99% of the playerbase also thinks that gish is a bad martial glued to a bad caster with absolutely no mechanics to mix them.

A fighter should hit a lot and do fancy manoeuvres with their sword.
A wizard should blast things with a fireball.
A swordmage should set their sword on fire and hit people with it.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

I'm not so sure. If we want a "gish" themed character, with a split focus on martial and magic, I feel like we can get that through multiclassing.

Combining the martial with a full caster would give you that classic "gish" build of a swordmage, hexblade, etc. But combining the Martial base with a half-caster ("Priest") would give you a lower-magic focus more similar to the paladin or ranger.

Another interesting thing we could do: allow multiple subclasses. This would be closer to a "soft" multiclassing, allowing the player to combine similar character concepts and more easily "dial in" certain concepts. For example, a Warrior could choose the Path of the Berserker subclass at 3rd level, and then choose the Way of the Open Hand a level or two later, to get a "Tavern Brawler" sort of vibe.

Trouble is a multiclassed fighter/wizard can't mix their abilities like a gish should. They hit half as good as a fighter one turn, then they cast half as good as a wizard the next turn.

A gish shouldn't be doing that. A gish should be setting their sword on fire/ice/lightning and hitting people with it.

This is why we have people endlessly demanding gishes despite WotC adding tons of gish subclasses. Because the designers havn't worked out what made the 3e duskblade, the 4e swordmage, and the pathfinder magus actually work.