D&D (2024) New Classes for 5e. Is anything missing?

[Parmandur]

Can you build a Witcher in 5e's current class system.

I did a quick search, admittedly ot being overl familiar beyond a handful of episodes, and Eldritch Knight and Ranger seem to be popular suggestions. It's trikes me that Matt Mercer's Blood Hunter is playing in thst space, operating on the assumption that The Last Witch Hunter is an unsuited ripoff.

Eragon?

I only made it through the first two books, but I'm going with Bladesinger and a drzgon NPC friend.

The Knights Radiant (thematically, they're paladins, but ability-wise, almost all of them are Arcane Gishes)?

Not familiar, but "Arcane" isn't a mechanical term in 5E, so I'd say a new PaladinSubclass possibly....?

Isaac and Hector from Castlevania (they cover their weapons in unholy fire that transforms the people they kill with those weapons into demons/undead monsters under their control)?

Warlocks?

Zuko from the last Airbender (a master of dual wielding swords that

Monk.

 

[Parmandur]

@Irlo @Parmandur

If you were tasked to create a Arcane Half Caster, how would you do it? Suppose the High Elves and the Human Magocracy City State both had magic knights to defend against the Roaming Forces of Evil. Besides All weapons, Light and Medium Armor, and half casting up to 5th level spells... what else would you give it?

What would its Magic Spell Sink like Divine Smite or Primeval Awareness?
What else would you give it?

I am, all in good faith, suggesting that I wold make this a Paladin Subclass, perhaps a very bold Subclass. Artificer or Ranger would also work, pros and xons for each.

If you hold a gun to my head about a Class, a mutant hybrid of the Artificer and Paladin

 

[Parmandur]

Oh, and the whole "you can only cast spells when you have tools on hand", and all of the features that go into increasing your usage of tools and creating magic items. An "Arcane Warrior" as a general concept, does not include "magical tinker". You cannot reflavor "you are an expert with tools and cast spells/create magic items with them" in a reasonable manner.

If I'm the DM, I'd letter Artificer's qeapon with which they are proficient count as a material component, similar to the College of Blades. Mightbe enough for a whole non-pet Subclass.

 

[Parmandur]

You end up with a lot of mechanics and flavour for the artificer though. Why is this warrior-mage amazing with every tool they learn, for instance. Magical tinkering, the right tool for the job, you can attune to more magical items for some reason... A refluff just doesn't quite cut it for the story. I'm generally fine with refluffing a few things, but the higher in level you go as an artificer, the less like a warrior-mage you feel.

Lugh, Master of All the Arts, is probably the best Gish I can think of in mythology, frankly. This all fits the concept of a weapon based Gish, since weapons are just tools.

 

[Parmandur]

It’s not significantly less work than just making a damn class, and it still wouldn’t work as well as a purpose built class.

But would it not...? I just don't see it as being as difficult as a ground up build, and gets the ballover the goal line.

 

[Parmandur]

This is why I only post +threads about new classes and the like. If “refluff it” was sufficient…the thread wouldn’t have been posted, and none of us would be trying to propose or build a swordmage class. Obviously.

Yet this is a poll.

 

[Parmandur]

Refluff it how?

Demphasize the tools in play, focus on the mastery of weapons and arcane master over physical matter.

 

[Minigiant]

I am, all in good faith, suggesting that I wold make this a Paladin Subclass, perhaps a very bold Subclass. Artificer or Ranger would also work, pros and xons for each.

If you hold a gun to my head about a Class, a mutant hybrid of the Artificer and Paladin

Paladin is already the 2nd or 3rd most powerful class. Giving it tons of arcane spells would break it.
And there is no point of a mutant Artificer/Paladin. That would be a bad answer with a gun to your head,

It is possible and fine to say you can't think of a unique mechanic or feature for an Arcane Warrior. I'm not pointing a gun to your head.

But when designing a class or subclass, a designer must come up with new ideas. It's the 1980s where game design was in its infancy and rehashing old ideas is passable outside of your own table.

 

[Irlo]

I am, all in good faith, suggesting that I wold make this a Paladin Subclass, perhaps a very bold Subclass. Artificer or Ranger would also work, pros and xons for each.

If you hold a gun to my head about a Class, a mutant hybrid of the Artificer and Paladin

The Paladin chassis would certainly work (for me), but -- completely off the top of my head -- I'd take it a bit farther than a just a new subclass. Re-work the whole spell list with more wizardly options, swap out divine sense for detect magic, replace lay on hands with something else (maybe a reaction to reduce damage?), rename channel divinity to arcane aegis and define a set up new uses suited to the arcane warrior, change the auras to something a bit more flashy. It would depend on what my players wanted, since I'd be designing a class for them rather than for publication.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

But would it not...? I just don't see it as being as difficult as a ground up build, and gets the ballover the goal line.

Building a class isn’t especially difficult, but a subclass, several infusions, several new subclasses, and probably a few variant alt features to replace the “you’re a tinker” stuff, is just as much work.

Yet this is a poll.

Okay. What’s that got to do with my expression frustration at the relentless, dismissive, responses to anyone discussing the idea of a new class?

Demphasize the tools in play, focus on the mastery of weapons and arcane master over physical matter.

So don’t use a significant amount of your class features. That isn’t a tenable attempt at a solution, for many of us.