Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="phantomK9" data-source="post: 7677141" data-attributes="member: 6790724">There is some really great discussion of the Shaman class. I agree with a lot of people that it should be its own class. While at a cursory glance it seems that a Warlock subclass might work, the tone of the Warlock is one of subservience, where as I feel the Shaman has a tone more of bonding or working with spirits in order to accomplish spell casting, special abilities.If I were to design a 5e Shaman I would take bits from Barbarian, Cleric and Druid. Definitely should be a full caster with limited weapon and armor proficiency. Spell list should combine bits from both Cleric and Druid focusing on healing, buffing, de-buffing (hexing) and summoning (both creatures and spirits). As they level they should get permanent bonuses in the same way that a Barbarian chooses a spirit totem. The list of special abilities would of course be much more diverse than just three choices, similar to a Warlock's list of special bonuses.Examples include:- physical boosts (armor, damage reduction, advantage on Strength, etc. etc)- vision/perception boosts- boosts to spell damage/duration, etc.- boosts to numbers of creatures/spirits summoned when summoning- etc. (plenty of options here)Sub-classes:- A sub-class that focuses on more spell casting. Gaining more spells or spell slots, expanding the spell list.- A sub-class that focuses on cooperating with more or more powerful spirits. Basically gaining more from the list of special abilities. - A sub-class that focuses on binding spirits into items called "Talismans" allowing for a wide variety of single use magic items.Bottom line. Shaman should be its own thing.</blockquote>

Verification