D&D 5E Should 5e have more classes (Poll and Discussion)?

[Minigiant]

Except this doesn't work. Raven Queen is a god and a warlock patron.

Actually it does.
The higher tier beings can offer the lower tier power paths.
The lower tier beings can't offer the higher tier power paths.

A god can make clerics, warlocks, and sorcerers.
A normal devil can make warlocks and sorcerers. A devil needs divinity like Asmodeus to create clerics.
A normal dragon can only make sorcerers. A dragon has to ascend or transform to make warlocks.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Actually it does.
The higher tier beings can offer the lower tier power paths.
The lower tier beings can't offer the higher tier power paths.

A god can make clerics, warlocks, and sorcerers.
A normal devil can make warlocks and sorcerers. A devil needs divinity like Asmodeus to create clerics.
A normal dragon can only make sorcerers. A dragon has to ascend or transform to make warlocks.

So why does these different methods of granting power produce casters that work mechanically differently whist being roughly of equal power instead of the lower tier ones just being similar but weaker?

 

[DND_Reborn]

Gnomes and halflings should be merged into one species.

Gnomlings? or Halmes?

And would a half(ling)-gnome be a Tiny creature?

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

What is the difference? What is the difference metaphysically? What it is mechanically? And why it needs a new system?

Because psionics should not be spellcasting. That severely limits the potential of psionics.

Battlemaster has some suppoert abilities. Use the similar approach but make all the abilities to nbe support abilities. Stratagems you can choose from instead of manoeuvres. It will work. (Hell, do I really have to write this?)

Yes, they have some support abilities, but they are underwhelming, and a Warlord should focus mostly on supporting.

So you want a paladin except refluff it as arcane? Doesn't sound worthwhile use of designers' time to me. Seriously, there are plenty of gishes to choose from, but if one arbitrarily decides that a thing is always either too hot or too cold or too something you can 'justify' endless amount of classes. But for that there are games like GURPS.

I don't want an arcane paladin subclass as a gish, I already made a homebrew for that. The gish class would not have any of the paladin abilities besides spellcasting. They'd be as different from each other as rangers are from paladins.

How? Why? How bloody many ways to cast spells marginally differently there needs to be?

Why do runes have to be spell?

Witch is literally another word for warlock. At most you need a sublclass with couple of extra spells to do it.

Again, the real world definition of a D&D class or subclass does not have to be exactly the same as the D&D version. Yes, warlocks in real world terms is a male witch, but that's not what it is in D&D terms.

Oracle of the Delphi (you know, the famous one) was literally the high priestess of Apollo. Furthermore, this is the same thing than with the summoner. Oracle is a caster with divination spells, and those spells already exist (just like summoning spells.) If you want a caster who focuses on such magic, you can easily make a subclass for that for the existing caster classes or even more simply just choose such spells. This is like wanting to make a bespoke 'axeman' class whose thing is that they fight with axes.

The Oracle of Delphi did worship Apollo, but fantasy oracles don't have to.

 

[TwoSix]

Gnomlings? or Halmes?

And would a half(ling)-gnome be a Tiny creature?

Honestly, let's just compress all non-human races into one "demihuman" race and let you reskin it the way you want.

 

[Minigiant]

So why does these different methods of granting power produce casters that work mechanically differently whist being roughly of equal power instead of the lower tier ones just being similar but weaker?

Honestly, a third of it is balance, a third is designer laziness, and a final third is design apathy.

Originally sorcerers and warlocks were weaker. Partially because the 3e designers didn't care much about the sorcerer and the warlock didn'tfit right in the rigid 3e system.

I feel the 5e designers didn't care enough to balance and differentiate the sorcerer and warlock to provide a creative concept and structure that would get high marks in the playtest. Same thing happened to the ranger.

 

[Mecheon]

So yeah, I strongly feel that a separate shaman class would be a mistake. Rename druids shamans and call nature clerics druids. That would be pretty accurate.

I had a sleep on it, and pretty much decided on shaman effectively being a merge of warlock and druid. I scrounged about and there is a highly regarded one on the DM's guild that goes down this alley, but I haven't given it a shot myself so can't confirm how well it is in practice, but its certainly the idea I had

Gnomes and halflings should be merged into one species.

Them's fighting words. Gnomes and Halfling archetypes are completely different

Halfling: chill dudes who like to thief, eat, and just, be chilll
Gnome: Magic as hell

Nah. As I have said many times, easy to combine with warlocks. Whether the magical being that gave you your power is your boss or a relative is not a sufficient distinction. A fey pact warlock could just as easily represent fey ancestry etc.

Disagreeing on this two. Honestly, if we could do things over again I'd grab that not-metamagic feat the Loremaster UA had and just, give that to sorcerers. Magic flows through your very veins, you should just be able to change it on the fly and do crazy stuff like that.

5E just, didn't do sorcerers well, but its a completely separate narrative from warlock magic. Its also why a lot of people look towards redoing it to be Con-based, rather than Cha base (well, that and the excess of cha-based classes)

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Honestly, let's just compress all non-human races into one "demihuman" race and let you reskin it the way you want.

That's what the new customisation rule in Tasha's does in practice.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

That's what the new customisation rule in Tasha's does in practice.

Except it doesn't. Lets you move around proficiencies and 3 ability score improvement points. That's it. Now, the discussion is on classes, not races.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Because psionics should not be spellcasting. That severely limits the potential of psionics.

You didn't answer my question. What makes psionics different from magic metaphysically?

Why do runes have to be spell?

I don't know why they have to be anything.

Again, the real world definition of a D&D class or subclass does not have to be exactly the same as the D&D version. Yes, warlocks in real world terms is a male witch, but that's not what it is in D&D terms.

Yet your description sounded like a version of a warlock.

The Oracle of Delphi did worship Apollo, but fantasy oracles don't have to.

And fantasy oracles can have spellbooks.

Seriously, you are just coming up with stuff that already exist in the game, but because you want some word or mechanical minutiae to be slightly different you want to design completely new classes that has 90% overlap with already existing classes. If the designers would have had similar attitude than you, none of the current subclasses would have existed because they would have made each of them into a separate class (or three!)