5E Suggestions For Variant Class Features

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
I’ve proposed some support features for the fighter in another thread, as well as some Enhancement ideas to give them back followers and a “strong hold” of sorts.

What do y’all wanna see?
 
Yes please. Strongholds rule.

My level 3 fighter would love to have a Stronghold, but the DM says it costs 50000 gc, which is approximately 50000 more than the character currently owns.
I don't think that is a good use of a class feature.

If you want to run the sort of game where a character has a stronghold, discuss it with your DM. It may be that they aren't interested in running that sort of game, but if they are, then there are other ways to acquire one - conquest, inheritance, gift of the monarch.
 

vincegetorix

Jewel of the North
On the subject of clerics: trade armor prof. with Armored by Faith: AC 13+Dex, or Add Cha to AC.

I have an houserule that allow bards, paladins and rangers to trade spellcasting for maneuvers with special bonus on maneuver uses.
 
Expand sneak attack to include unarmed attacks. Martial arts characters should be able to use carotid chokes. Oh, and clubs. Whacking someone on the noggin with a club to knock them out is a time honored tradition. I know, I know, not really a class feature.

Expanded poison rules for Assassins would be cool to.
 

Weiley31

Adventurer
The Eldritch Mind invocation NOT being restricted to Tome.

Hell, Talisman seems better as like a unique special item equip and being passive ala the the Rune Knight's Runes instead of having it as a pact option.
 

Esker

Abventuree
Expand sneak attack to include unarmed attacks. Martial arts characters should be able to use carotid chokes. Oh, and clubs. Whacking someone on the noggin with a club to knock them out is a time honored tradition. I know, I know, not really a class feature.
Would you want to see that for all rogues, or should there be a new subclass?
 
Would you want to see that for all rogues, or should there be a new subclass?
All rogues, but I've always had issues with the way they decided to implement the finesse rule. There's absolutely no reason a rapier should be an effective sneak attack weapon and not a club (and don't get me started on rapiers generally). It's a case of mechanics not passing the laugh test. I completely get why they did it, and I understand the boundaries the mechanic is supposed to put in place, I just don't like how they chose to go about it.
 

Esker

Abventuree
All rogues, but I've always had issues with the way they decided to implement the finesse rule. There's absolutely no reason a rapier should be an effective sneak attack weapon and not a club (and don't get me started on rapiers generally). It's a case of mechanics not passing the laugh test. I completely get why they did it, and I understand the boundaries the mechanic is supposed to put in place, I just don't like how they chose to go about it.
Yeah, I guess this is part of the loose concept of what a "sneak attack" is. They made it very easy to trigger so that it could be generally assumed that the rogue would be using it every round, but as a result it winds up not feeling very sneaky. This throws off some DMs who are new to 5e, since the name suggests that it should be a special, occasional thing, but the mechanics aren't consistent with that. I would have liked to see the finesse requirement replaced with something more restrictive (daggers and ranged weapons, maybe) and then give rogues some special facility with daggers to make them a competitive choice (a bonus to hit, maybe, or let them make an offhand attack without requiring a bonus action if both weapons are daggers). Then you could extend the set of weapons that qualify for sneak attack depending on subclass (swashbucklers can use rapiers/shortswords/scimitars, for example).
 

aco175

Adventurer
I would like to see options to give more trained skills. We tend to not use feats in most of my games, so I wonder if at 4th level an option for the ASI is to have only 1 stat boost and gain 1 skill proficiency. Maybe limit it to skills on your class list? Are there other class skills that would be ok to trade for this?
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Yes please. Strongholds rule.

My level 3 fighter would love to have a Stronghold, but the DM says it costs 50000 gc, which is approximately 50000 more than the character currently owns.
See, I tend to award some manner of housing early on as a quest reward.

but the fighter I’m working on would get minor benefits from resting in their home, and downtime activities would have bonuses as well.
 

Thurmas

Explorer
Yeah, I guess this is part of the loose concept of what a "sneak attack" is. They made it very easy to trigger so that it could be generally assumed that the rogue would be using it every round, but as a result it winds up not feeling very sneaky. This throws off some DMs who are new to 5e, since the name suggests that it should be a special, occasional thing, but the mechanics aren't consistent with that. I would have liked to see the finesse requirement replaced with something more restrictive (daggers and ranged weapons, maybe) and then give rogues some special facility with daggers to make them a competitive choice (a bonus to hit, maybe, or let them make an offhand attack without requiring a bonus action if both weapons are daggers). Then you could extend the set of weapons that qualify for sneak attack depending on subclass (swashbucklers can use rapiers/shortswords/scimitars, for example).
I would be happy to see rogue get Fighting Styles at level 2 and Extra Attack at 5 like all martials and Sneak Attack become an Action (not an attack action) with its own requirements and damage (weapon+mod+1d8 per odd level maybe) . I wouldn't mind it being more situational and difficult to pull off, but more damaging when you do. The extra Attack feature and fighting styles give the rogue combat ability for when it can't do streak attack. Plus, you know, the ability to two weapon fight well without multiclassing.
 

GlassJaw

Adventurer
Druid without wild shape, or another spellcasting class that uses the druid's spell list.
Effective Str-based rogue, or a warrior class that has some sneak attack.
Non-"mystic" warrior that uses unarmed attacks.
 
I’ve proposed some support features for the fighter in another thread, as well as some Enhancement ideas to give them back followers and a “strong hold” of sorts.

What do y’all wanna see?
Followers and stronghold...? well, I'll circle back to that...

...but, enhancements for the Fighter. Sure, especially that might help the champion without making it too much more complicated.

  • Extra (Opportunity) Attacks - when you use the Attack Action on your next turn, the first Opportunity Attack you make, before you take your Action on your next turn, doesn't consume your Reaction. If you have two or tree extra attacks, the first two or three OA's don't consume your Reaction.
  • Remarkable Athlete adds it's bonus to Proficient checks, as well as non-proficient.
  • Indomitable grants an automatic save instead of a re-roll.
  • More & better, level-gated, Maneuvers for the BM.
  • Single-class Fighters gain proficient CON saves plus choice of STR & WIS or DEX & CHA
  • ...and something out-of-combat-useful for the other two pillars...

...which brings us back to followers & strongholds.

It'd be quite the undertaking and change the scope of the game, but one could expand the social pillar to include politicking & diplomacy and the exploration pillar to include exploration & colonization. And the combat pillar to a mass battle system, of course.

In the classic game, each class could get into doing things like that - the Fighter could become a feudal Lord, the Wizard have his foreboding tower, the Cleric a temple, the Thief a Guild, etc - so bringing them back is one obvious possibility. But having the party, as a whole, build up a community might also be an interesting way to develop things.
 
Last edited:

Advertisement

Top