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

[Frozen_Heart]

One thing I'm pretty adamant about for an arcane gish class, is that it should not have access to spells like fireball, scorching ray, and other blaster spells.

Same reason paladins don't get spirit guardians and rangers don't get lightning bolt. They're not wizard + fighter. They're something else.

 

[jmartkdr2]

What I see is mechanically very similar to paladins and fluff wise effectively an eldritch knight. Also a lot about what they are not (no oaths, no wilderness, no books) and very little about what they are. I'd also like to point out that in 5e arcane/divine divide exist in one fluff box about Forgotten Realms, so I don't think 'arcane paladin' is enough, just like 'divine bard' wouldn't.

Now if in a reboot eldritch knight subclass wouldn't exist, then at least that overlap would be avoided, and perhaps eldritch knight could be it's own class. But it still seems super thin to me. I just don't find this compelling. Mind you, this is very much a preference thing. If enough people finds it compelling, then it could be a class. But then again, I'm not only one here asking these questions nor has WotC added such a class even though they've had plenty of time, so I don't think I'm alone in this.

Personally I would like the class to be defined less by what it is not and by it's relationship with other classes. I want it be something else than just a wizard/fighter multiclass with smoother mechanics. I don't think 'combines fighting with magic' alone is enough, it needs to come with metaphysics and a narrative. I find things like Death Knights and Witchers compelling. They're their own things, not just hybrids of other things and come with an interesting story.

Out of curiosity: would "death knight but the subclass can totally change the magic" work for you? Kinda like how the base warlock fluff doesn't apply to half the Patrons?

 

[Frozen_Heart]

Death Knights and Witchers are both evocative and have a strong theme. The overall augmented to use their powers and fight does provide a unique class story. And the refluffing opportunity is pretty wide too. Could have been done intentionally by an organisation, or by a magic accident, or even the character could have just been born being innately like that.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Out of curiosity: would "death knight but the subclass can totally change the magic" work for you? Kinda like how the base warlock fluff doesn't apply to half the Patrons?

Perhaps. Depends on what exactly we mean by "totally changes the magic." I think some warlock subclasses feel kinda off. I guess I might be fine with "changes the magic quite a bit?" I probably wouldn't make the death knight the base class. If we would start with something more witcher-like as the base base class I.E. "a person changed by some magic ritual to become an arcane super warrior" then we could still have subclasses with quite different flavours. For example, if the ritual is more necromantic flavoured, we can end up with something akin to a death knight. And I guess there could be all sorts of wholesome boring rituals for those who don't like silly edgy stuff.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

I'd also argue that the WoW demon hunter could fall into the category as well.

 

[cbwjm]

I feel like witch would have the same problem ranger already does: it has neither clear flavor nor mechanics, or even a 'thing' that all witches do.

Which isn't to say there isn't a good idea for a class that could be called a witch (it might make a good name for a summoner/pet class).

Yeah, I agree, I'm not 100% sure what the specific flavour/mechanic would be either. I tend to use the current spellcaster classes interchangeably as a witch (sometimes druid fits, sometimes wizard, or warlock, or even cleric), but there does seem to be a lot of people writing up their own versions. I've looked through a few of them, I think they hit a few of the pop culture tropes of witches with the subclasses. It's kind of like the swordmage homebrew classes I see, they all have something different going on with each creator giving a different main feature to them.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

Realised that even Eragorn, a boring and vanilla arcane gish, is augmented too. His link to dragons has changed him which both gives him magic and gives him physical prowess beyond regular humans.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

Yeah, I agree, I'm not 100% sure what the specific flavour/mechanic would be either. I tend to use the current spellcaster classes interchangeably as a witch (sometimes druid fits, sometimes wizard, or warlock, or even cleric), but there does seem to be a lot of people writing up their own versions. I've looked through a few of them, I think they hit a few of the pop culture tropes of witches with the subclasses. It's kind of like the swordmage homebrew classes I see, they all have something different going on with each creator giving a different main feature to them.

Weirdly I think that the current best fit for a witch might be a hexblood artificer alchemist. Especially if you pick the homunculus servant infusion and flavour it as a reanimated crow or something.

 

[Minigiant]

may help to switch the emphasis slightly from "guards" to "specialists." Their responsibilities may include guardianship of important individuals and items but may also include acting as battlefield shock troopers responsible for taking down either non-magical mooks with magic or even magical mooks with anti-magic or martial arms as their talents call for.

In stories with Magic Knight, arcane warriors are guards due to necessity. It's often "Oh Snap, Demon invasion. Brothers, guard the Empress/Prince(ses)/Master. Demetrius and I will engage the enemy" then they fly, teleport, Skyrim, or iceskate headfirst into an enemy. They are often shook troopers with a minor in protection and tanking tools designed to straight duel magical monsters and buffed up casters.

But against it's typically higher magic settings than your Greyhawks and Middle Earth clones

 

[Mind of tempest]

Perhaps. Depends on what exactly we mean by "totally changes the magic." I think some warlock subclasses feel kinda off. I guess I might be fine with "changes the magic quite a bit?" I probably wouldn't make the death knight the base class. If we would start with something more witcher-like as the base base class I.E. "a person changed by some magic ritual to become an arcane super warrior" then we could still have subclasses with quite different flavours. For example, if the ritual is more necromantic flavoured, we can end up with something akin to a death knight. And I guess there could be all sorts of wholesome boring rituals for those who don't like silly edgy stuff.

I'd also argue that the WoW demon hunter could fall into the category as well.

okay, we got two edgy ones we got anything more good guy?
divination could be used for luck manipulation which any fighter worth their salt would kill for.
conjuration could make you an elemental double act?
avoid hell as a theme as devils already have their claws into many things stick with demons and yugoloths