5E Jeremy Crawford Discusses the Wild Soul Barbarian and Path of the Astral Self Monk

Parmandur

Legend
Since we are on this...and people are talking about things not even touched upon (or touched lightly upon but not really integrated)...

From 1e

Acrobat
Sohei
Bushi (fighter with scavenging abilities)
Ninja?? (as in the more traditional type)
Yakuza
Shukenja
Wu-jen

Dragonlance

Though they have indicated replacements from SCAG in saying certain paths/archtypes could be replaced as the Dragonlance ones...they never specifically spelled these classes out which were also in AD&D

Knight of Solomnia (Knight of the Crown, Sword, Rose)
Wizard of High Sorcery (Moon phase wizards)
Merchant
Mariner

2e has more than I can count when you take kits into consideration

3e has a few

Duskblade
Factotum
Marshall/Warlord
Beguiler
Spell Thief

This does not touch upon the Prestige classes of which you start getting into the 2e kits again.

So...it may be that his wording was slightly amiss. Probably more of what the main classes they could think of and that had positive response overall have been covered, but not necessarily ALL the main class types that people could name or that they knew about??
See, though, those are all weird and in the weeds concepts, though (Ninja is already in the PHB two different ways, Assassin Rogue and Shadow Monk: maybe a "Ninja Clan" Background for a Kara-Tur setting book would be appropriate, however).
 

Paul Farquhar

Adventurer
How can there be an origin if everything derives from something else?
I didn't say there was any origin. But if you are talking about stories, they all originate at the point when humans became humans.

and then I'll say just because you can't see where the Wild Soul comes from doesn't mean it doesn't come from anything.
True, but I know a lot of things, and the all the people on these forums know more. Coming from something that know one knows is functionally the same as coming from nothing.

Got answers for both of these?
Yes.
 

Parmandur

Legend
Character archetypes descend through various hypostases from the Ideal Forms in the Eternal Mind of the Lunar sphere, and are discovered by attentive game designers who look up from the shadows.

g-duh.
 

GreyLord

Adventurer
What fantasy did the Duskblade and Factotum come from? What mythic tale is that?
Duskblade is basically the Gish. Much like the Eldritch Knight, but more balanced one could say. They do not focus their powers through their blade (so not a bladesinger), but they are much more combat focused than...say the Eldritch Knight in what spells they might cast. Eldritch Knight would be a Fighter/Wizard...while the Duskblade would specifically be the Warrior with Magic amplification or that uses magic in conjunction with Magic.

Another way of saying it would be, while the Eldritch Knight really has the magic increase separately from the way their combat abilities increase, the Duskblade has them increase in conjunction with each other.

The way of looking at it is if you look at the 3e classes, the Eldritch Knight really increases it's wizards spells as a separate leveling (eldritch knight levels separately than your wizard or fighter levels). The Duskblade advances in both continuously and combined.

Think Elrond from the Hobbit movies by Jackson.

The Factotum on the otherhand is one class that has always been hard to capture. The first to actually try to do this was the Bard of 2e. In this, the Bard supposedly could fill in any position as a secondary, but not quite be as good as the original.

This would be the Jack of all trades.

To replicate this type of archtype you'd probably want a class that ultimately gets 3 attacks (so not quite as powerful as the Fighter's number of attacks, but moreso than other classes that get multiple attacks), advance as the secondary casters (such as the Eldritch Knight for Fighter or the Arcane Trickster for the Thief), have the ability to get expertise in two skills eventually, and also have healing powers that are almost as good, but not quite as good, as the Cleric.

The great difficulty with creating a jack of all-trades is the power level. It is very easy to create a very overpowered class, but at the same time, if you don't make it strong enough it really doesn't fill the niche archtype of jack of all trades.
 
I didn't say there was any origin. But if you are talking about stories, they all originate at the point when humans became humans.


True, but I know a lot of things, and the all the people on these forums know more. Coming from something that know one knows is functionally the same as coming from nothing.


Yes.
These are some weird answers.

But where did the stories come from? Where did the ideas come from?

You haven't answered the paradox. Either humans can make new ideas that can resonate with other humans, or they can't. Which is it?
 
Are ideas made, or discovered?

#FullSocrates
The difference doesn't matter.

What I'm ultimately getting at (and why it doesn't matter) is because I find it incredibly arrogant and super anti-creative to say that every fantasy idea has been created already (or discovered) and that new ones can't be created (or discovered).
 

Parmandur

Legend
The difference doesn't matter.

What I'm ultimately getting at (and why it doesn't matter) is because I find it incredibly arrogant and super anti-creative to say that every fantasy idea has been created already (or discovered) and that new ones can't be created (or discovered).
Oh, the difference always matters: foundations are important.

But, there is a wide number of concepts out there. A magical live wire seems a valid concept for the live wire Class.
 
Oh, the difference always matters: foundations are important.

But, there is a wide number of concepts out there. A magical live wire seems a valid concept for the live wire Class.
If the wide number is effectively infinity, then the foundation ceases to matter. Or rather, ceases to matter in from a pragmatic viewpoint. Academically it still has weight
 

Azzy

Cyclone Ranger
Since we are on this...and people are talking about things not even touched upon (or touched lightly upon but not really integrated)...

From 1e

Acrobat
Partially subsumed into the thief class.

It'd make for a decent paladin subclass.

Bushi (fighter with scavenging abilities)
A hack of a class not really based on anything. Bushi is just another term for samurai, if they wanted a "commoner warrior, they should have went with "ashigaru". Should have just been a fighter (so should the samurai have been), so let it be a fighter.

Ninja?? (as in the more traditional type)
Rogue assassin or shadow monk, we've got you covered.

Another class that didn't need to exist. This is a rogue, pick your subclass.

The typo class (it should be "shugenja") that really stretched from its origins. It's presented mostly a cleric/druid crossbreed in its spell list. The spirit aspect could serve as a shamanesque druid subclass.

Wizard with a different spell list.

In retrospect, the 1e OA was really not good and hasn't aged well.
 

Hussar

Legend
That's not what I mean by "storyless". It might be more appropriate to use terminology like "Primal Archetypes". A type of character that is deeply imbedded in shared stories. The noble knight, the devious rogue who may or may not have a heart of gold, the absent minded wizard/professor. The "great leader" is there, but they pretty much always lead from the front, they don't stand at the back telling others what to do (unless they are a villain).

Not everything in 4e was bad, but the idea that "we have to have a support character that doesn't use magic but is just as good at supporting as a magic using character" is a bad idea that arises purely out of game mechanics with no story basis. That's what people have such a hard time making one for 5e. Look at the Law cleric - designed to do the same job but "oh no, it doesn't count because it uses magic".
Huh. Sam Vimes from Discworld makes a pretty darn good warlord archetype. As does Sharpe from Sharpe's Regiment. Cutter from Cook's Black Company. I'm sure I could find more, but, then again, I don't read that much fantasy. I DO read lots of military fiction though. But, then again, since you're insisting that warlords lead from the rear, it shows that you don't really know much about the warlord class. Why would you think that warlords must lead from the rear? ((Other than, well, thousands of years of military history)) Many of the warlords were front line combatants, similar in vein to a cleric.

So, no, there is a huge body of inspiration for the class. The main problem is that there is also an extremely vocal group in the fandom that would lose their collective minds if WotC did something so blatantly as to admit that people liked the warlord and that getting 4e cooties in 5e wouldn't hurt anyone.
 

Hussar

Legend
The thing is that multiple 5E archetypes are already similar to the Warlord. The Banneret and Cavalier especially.
See this is the truly frustrating part. Every single element to have a warlord is already in the game. But because of 4e cooties, 4e fans get left out in the cold to appease a group of “fans”.

I mean it’s so bad that they can’t even ask about it on polls. That’s how much 4e fans have gotten screwed over by edition warriors. Something we’d like to see cannot even be talked about without the edition warriors coming out of the woodwork.

I mean, we’ve seen numerous polls on what classes people would like to see developed from WotC. They’ve had numerous UA articles about new classes. But the elephant in the room just never gets talked about.
 

Paul Farquhar

Adventurer
Huh. Sam Vimes from Discworld makes a pretty darn good warlord archetype.
Really, no. He doesn't go round boosting allies. He's a rogue, probably an Investigative. He fights dirty and has great Perception, Investigation, Insight, Intimidation skills.

As does Sharpe from Sharpe's Regiment.
Battlemaster, quite obviously. Possibly with a level or two of rogue. He does most of the killing stuff himself. I've read most of the novels and seen the TV series.

Many of the warlords were front line combatants, similar in vein to a cleric.
That's because they are clerics, who can magically do the same stuff without magic.
 
Last edited:

Paul Farquhar

Adventurer
Oh, the difference always matters: foundations are important.

But, there is a wide number of concepts out there. A magical live wire seems a valid concept for the live wire Class.
There already is one: Wild Magic Sorcerer. "Magical live wire" fits with sorcerer. what doesn't go together is "magical live wire" and "primitive warrior".

This is what it makes me think of: taking the chassis of a Formula One racing car, attaching tractor wheels to it, and expecting it to be good at racing and ploughing fields.
 

Advertisement

Top