You can combine a LOT of these into a build-your-own. Most monsters in 5E with any complexity are casters, and you can build that into subclasses. A lot of things have similar features, too. Outsiders like fiends and celestials mostly have special sight and strong defenses, a medusa and a basilisk barely differ, a siren and a harpy vary mainly by terrain, etc. The harder parts are the magic weapon gap and the stat array.
Unless they're going to work on 5.5E for eight more years before launching the PHB, I'm not sure how you think they can spend more time on them.
because they have spells, they become the divine half-caster
fine by me, there is a reason why I did not say where the Ranger goes, and only said if we want the same number of subclasses each, they would end up under Rogue.
By now you should have the answer. I really do not care where it ends up, put it wherever your design says it belongs. Personally I would get rid of it altogether
yes, fine by me. We have 6 categories with the half-casters, if you do not fit any, you either get thrown out or are made to fit. Either is fine
I do not expect them to do this for 5.5
So how do they spend more time with them after they release them? Do you mean they should focus on updating classes for 6E the moment 5.5E drops instead of experimenting with new classes within 5.5E?
that is the question, and also why I landed on 6, to have half-casters as distinct from clerics and mages.
Bulk of the power, no (unless you mean something else by that than me, I mean power and how they get it in the abstract / mechanical things like spell progression), but all of the theme.
you do so for the next release, that is why I said starting for 5.5 now would be too late
They should not have any new classes for 5.5, just like they did not have any for 5e
Power as in for example artificer and ranger subclasses have a lot of 'power' which lets each subclass change up the playstyle a lot. Each artificer subclass feels almost like its own class.
So the "time" thing factors in where?
