That would certainly make them more powerful.What if all martial got a stunning strike style ability (requires action instead of single attack and ki).
That would certainly make them more powerful.What if all martial got a stunning strike style ability (requires action instead of single attack and ki).
What is wrong with Eldritch Knight?Glances at Eldritch Knight And be usable? Hard. Very, very hard.
I'm still bucking for a full-on fighter/magic-user class myself.
Pathfinder did this with ACF's, or Alternate Class Features, they predated 5e, and IMO I think they were adapted into 5e for its class archetypes. Its interesting how games can evolve with some competition. I think they work well either way.What if they opened up design space to let subclass features replace class features? Give up your action surge for beast companion, give up second wind for some kind of maneuver your beast could learn to protect allies or take down a weakened opponent. I think it sounds neat.
So each oath is a subclass and also core class features to replace some parts of the fighter hmmmmI think that it could be done if there were some structural changes to allow for Subclasses that could, optionally, have a greater impact on play style. But throw some primal magic at a fighter, give them some skill expertise in survival and stealth, and let them pick a quarry when you roll initiative and give a bonus die of damage against their quarry? Well hell, that’s pretty ranger-y to me.
Paladin may be trickier, but could be pulled off with multiple subclasses. I think a divine half-caster with some supportive abilities would hit most of the beats.
I think it might be possible but I also think tricky is it's name-o. Many but not all of the archetypes/subclasses are really just pre-planned multi-classing by a different name. (4e had some themes which if you used the power swapping a lot will feel like the same / but it was a choice in effect replacing a core class power/feature with one from your theme. 5e does have a pretty flexible multiclassing already but isnt careful of making a level X ability the same potency as another level X ability.Now that I think about it, bump up eldritch knight to half caster arcane progression, then have ranger as half caster primal and Paladin as half caster divine… I like how that ends up looking.
I thought of allowing one to cancel a critical hit by sacrificing the shield (usually a shields straps are what is broken and damaged severely enough it will need repaired) and if the shield is magical it may resist sundering with a saving throw based on their users str ....Some I use are:
*Shields shall be sundered- You get the usual -1 to your AC with a shield. However, any time you take damage, you can opt instead to say your shield absorbed the force of the blow. The shield is shattered and must be discarded, but you don't take any damage from that hit. It's quick, it's easy, and it's valuable.
I think the shifts in paradigm you are using is different enough to make analysis harder... avoiding level dipping I think is important and not assuming people are ok with removing the multiclassingI went ahead and made a mock up of the idea for folding the ranger into the fighter as a subclass, although it uses a different paradigm than current subclasses. Mostly a thought experiment, my commute to work this morning was full of ideas.
![]()
Alternative Subclass System Proof of Concept
Design Goal: Strixhaven is… a bit of a mess, I agree. And I’m not overly interested in the “magical school” flavor that was its main selling point. But man oh man did I love the concept of subclasses that could be used with any, or just multiple, classes. The implementation failed hard in UA, th...docs.google.com

(Dungeons & Dragons)
Rulebook featuring "high magic" options, including a host of new spells.