D&D 5E What are possible subclasses?

[Sadrik]

They are if you want to... In your campaign, you can link them together so that e.g. a Knight(Fighter) always has the Noble background, or a Thief(Rogue) always has the Thief background.

Merging backgrounds with subclasses would allow more freedom in background design (i.e. we wouldn't need each background to grant exactly 1 trait + 6 proficiencies) but then having them separate allows more freedom in player's design of their own characters (i.e. you can mix'n'match any background with any class).

Not really, I am looking at it from a perspective of campaign design. If you want to have a unique campaign setup, it makes sense to have new backgrounds for players to select. In some cases though subclasses will have to be barred thematically or rewritten to fit in. If they were the same widget it becomes easier for game designer and player.

I want to be able to maximize player opportunity to ingrain their character into the setting. Also, with the base assumptions presented in phb, subclasses as backgrounds you wind up with all kinds of interesting possibilities. A fighter, necromancer. A wizard with magic domain. A rogue with oath of justice. Or the more traditional set ups as well. These are possible otherwise but the crunch backing up the background is important. Subclasses are more crunch and a little background and Backgrounds are more background and a little crunch. Both merged you wind up with more crunch and more background.

 

[Li Shenron]

Not really, I am looking at it from a perspective of campaign design. If you want to have a unique campaign setup, it makes sense to have new backgrounds for players to select. In some cases though subclasses will have to be barred thematically or rewritten to fit in.

I don't understand this. Backgrounds deliver proficiencies, and a mostly downtime-oriented trait. I don't see any case when subclasses would be affected by new backgrounds.

A fighter, necromancer. A wizard with magic domain. A rogue with oath of justice. Or the more traditional set ups as well. These are possible otherwise but the crunch backing up the background is important.

Yeah these are possible in fact, although it might be tricky, but last year at some point when subclasses were introduced, I started a thread to talk about not just mixing different subclasses (as was mentioned by Mearls in the context of the "Advanced" game) but using a class with a subclass from another class. It won't work for many combinations, especially if a non-caster takes a caster's subclass, in which case some serious work is needed (maybe if the PC takes some spellcasting feats, it can still work). This applies with the current backgrounds being their own subsystem.

I'm not sure if you're saying that merging backgrounds to subclasses would help with this, but I think it won't. The main compatibility problem between e.g. a Wizard's subclass and a Fighter's subclass, is that a subclass' features often enhance its base class features, i.e. they are not completely "additive" but requiring some existing features (spellcasting ability, daily slots, known spells). Backgrounds don't really have much to do with this.

Anyway, backgrounds were created separately because the truth is that they were exactly wanted to separate skills from classes (mechanical purpose), and secondarily while they were at it, they also used them to separate society roles from classes i.e. adventuring roles (narrative purpose).

 

[tuxgeo]

Clerics: I would like to see them copy the 3E domain mechanics more closely (as I have said many times before), but with these expressions:
1) armor and weapon differences based on the deity, not on the domain;
2) choose two domains per cleric, not one; and know the spell of each level the cleric can cast for each of those two domains;
3) have a dedicated domain spell slot for each casting level that the cleric can cast; and those slots can only be used to cast domain spells.

With such a scheme, they might need to get rid of the ability of all clerics to gain access to all spells. I'm thinking particularly that clerics of the Good domain should not be able to cast spells of the Evil domain.

Druids: These characters are not nearly as diversified as Clerics are. Instead, Druids all worship nearly all of the same things: Truth, Knowledge, Guidance, Nature (including Astronomy), and Fitting the Lesson to the Audience.
(Example of how that might be expressed in-game: Ouroboros says: the cycle of polar tilt is roughly 25,000 years long, but the actual length varies from cycle to cycle; and within that time frame, a populace will vacillate from querulous to raving to satisfied to timid to uncertain, and many other values beyond -- therefore, the "Truth" that they need to hear from their Druids will vary from epoch to epoch; so you mustn't write anything down, because those writings will always be the old, unneeded lessons that the people find in the old manuscripts, before those manuscripts manage to crumble to dust.)

Edit: What does that mean for Druid subclasses? Simply this: Druid subclasses are for mechanical differences -- things such as wildshaping, animal companions, summoning, social leadership and adjudication, etc.

 

[Sadrik]

I don't understand this. Backgrounds deliver proficiencies, and a mostly downtime-oriented trait. I don't see any case when subclasses would be affected by new backgrounds.

not affected by backgrounds but by settings...

Yeah these are possible in fact, although it might be tricky, but last year at some point when subclasses were introduced, I started a thread to talk about not just mixing different subclasses (as was mentioned by Mearls in the context of the "Advanced" game) but using a class with a subclass from another class. It won't work for many combinations, especially if a non-caster takes a caster's subclass, in which case some serious work is needed (maybe if the PC takes some spellcasting feats, it can still work). This applies with the current backgrounds being their own subsystem.

I'm not sure if you're saying that merging backgrounds to subclasses would help with this, but I think it won't. The main compatibility problem between e.g. a Wizard's subclass and a Fighter's subclass, is that a subclass' features often enhance its base class features, i.e. they are not completely "additive" but requiring some existing features (spellcasting ability, daily slots, known spells). Backgrounds don't really have much to do with this.

Anyway, backgrounds were created separately because the truth is that they were exactly wanted to separate skills from classes (mechanical purpose), and secondarily while they were at it, they also used them to separate society roles from classes i.e. adventuring roles (narrative purpose).

This is true you need some way to deal with the additive nature of spellcasting. There are some creative ways of doing just that. So that is not an issue for me. Ultimately my lament is that subclasses and backgrounds operate in very similar design space, moving them together, would have been good to reduce if not altogether eliminate overlap. Prime example: Background: Guild Thief, Class: Rogue(Thief). Of course ymmv.

 

[Li Shenron]

not affected by backgrounds but by settings...

...

Ultimately my lament is that subclasses and backgrounds operate in very similar design space, moving them together, would have been good to reduce if not altogether eliminate overlap. Prime example: Background: Guild Thief, Class: Rogue(Thief). Of course ymmv.

Maybe I'm starting to get your point... are you concerned by narrative overlap?

Mechanically, backgrounds and subclasses are mostly separate. Backgrounds are very clearly defined: 3 skills + 3 tools/languages + 1 downtime trait. Subclasses are totally open, their feature could be literally anything, including possibly skills, tools/languages and downtime traits. Currently this is probably not the case, but it could be, thus I say "mostly" separate.

Narratively, backgrounds are still fairly well defined. Designers usually say "a background is what you were before becoming an adventurer". This could be the case if your campaign approach is that PC are heroes who stopped being normal members of society, and moved on to being full-time adventurers. But there is another take, that PC don't stop being members of society, adventures may be spaced by months or even years, and in the meantime the PCs are still "working" or covering another role in society. IMHO this second view is more solid, in other words it's better to say "a background is what you are when not adventuring", because (a) you do get better at your proficiencies, suggesting you don't stop using them even if they may never show up during an adventure, and (b) the second view incorporates the first as a special case more easily than the other way around.

But then the question is, what are subclasses narratively? And that's not at all defined... at least, they can be different things for different classes, but there might be subclasses of the same class representing very different things (hard to say now since currently we get only 2-3 per class), and even one single subclass can have different interpretation e.g. does the Arcane Tradition: School of Illusion represent being a member of an actual school? A network? Having studied under an expert mentor? Or just happened to fancy illusion spells more than others?

Indeed there are some overlapping names, like you mentioned "Thief" is both a background and a Rogue's subclass. As a background IMO it's totally fine, it does represent a society role, a job, or a way to earn your living (even tho it's probably illegal). As such, all current background fit this view neatly! As a subclass, it serves the mechanical purpose of allowing a Rogue player to shift towards stealth & thieving abilities (with focus on adventuring), without necessarily asking her to be a Thief in the social sense.

I think there's room for all these in the game, the overlapping is more narrative than mechanical, it doesn't really bother me, but perhaps at least names and labels could be improved.

 

[koga305]

My thoughts:

Barbarian

• Path of the Berserker = Simple, classic rage-focused barbarian
• Path of the Totem Warrior = Animal-themed barbarian with more options
• Path of the Warden = Druid, defense-focused abilities with light shapeshifting in Rage (replicates the Warden class from 4E)

Bard

• College of Valor = Warlord/combat-leader bard
• College of Wit = Performing/enchantment-focused bard, closer to classic Bard archetypes
• College of Knowledge* (heh) = Bardic knowledge, gains bonus spells and skills
• College of Bladesong* = Personal combat abilities, bard-themed gish

Cleric

• Life Domain = support/healing cleric, closest to classic archetype
• Light Domain = "laser cleric," focused on offensive spells
• War Domain = Battle/self-buff Cleric; "a fighter with divine spells"
• Storm Domain = Hybrid battle/casting cleric, battlefield control and personal combat
• Magic/Knowledge Domain = Because some Clerics just want to play Wizards. Arcane magic and antimagic, with perhaps a side of divination.
• Freedom/Trickery Domain = Illusion magic and light Rogue abilities.
• Death Domain = Necromancy and some personal combat abilities.

Druid

• Circle of the Land = Casting/battlefield control druid, themed around a location
• Circle of the Moon = "Wildshape for combat" druid
• Circle of the Pack* = The "Beastmaster Druid," focused on a singular or multiple animal companion(s)

Fighter

• Path of the Weaponmaster = Maneuver/"dirty trick" Fighter
• Path of the Warrior = "Simple Fighter," crit-fisher
• Path of the Duelist = The Dex-fighter. Alternatively, add themed maneuvers/abilities to the Weaponmaster.
• Path of the Archer = The ranged fighter. Alternatively, modify the Weaponmaster so ranged maneuvers are viable.
• Path of the Warlord = Action-granting, temporary hit points, and ally-buffing. Martial healing optional.
• Path of the Eldritch Knight = Fighter/Wizard multiclassing support; perhaps some limited spellcasting or self-buffing (Enchant Weapon? Fly 1/day?). It'd be cool if this was stand-alone to make a "Mystical Fighter."
• Path of the Mythic Hero =This stretches things a bit, but the classic beyond-the-limits-of-the-mortal-form character. Beowulf. Achilles. Feats of strength, iron skin... (obviously requires DM approval)

Mage

• School of Enchantment = Protecting self and effectively casting enchantments
• School of Evocation = "Blaster wizard," deals more damage effectively
• School of Illusion = Casting illusions for self-protection and to greater effect
• School of Abjuration = Party support, personal defense. The "barrier warrior." Perhaps an ability to "imprison" enemies?
• School of Conjuration = Summoning-focused.
• School of Divination = Scrying, seeing into the future, avoiding attacks (a reverse True Strike, perhaps?)
• School of Necromancy = Some undead creation, life-draining, perhaps even limited self-healing.
• School of Transmutation = Polymorph/buffing out the wazoo.

Monk

• Way of the Four Elements = Water/Earth/Air/Firebender, monk with more choices
• Way of the Open Hand = Classic "martial artist" monk, fewer choices
• Way of the Spirits* = Even more supernatural abilities - walking over coals, "Aura Vision," perhaps some self-healing.

Paladin

• Oath of Devotion = Classic paladin, focused on protection and smiting evil
• Oath of Vengeance = Focused on hunting down lone enemies, replicates the Avenger from 4E
• Oath of the Blackguard = The anti-paladin. Focused on disease/debuffing

Ranger

• Path of the Colossus Slayer = Focused on fighting single targets with lots of HP and area attacks (dragons, giants)
• Path of the Horde Breaker = Focused on fighting many small enemies (most likely humanoids)
• Path of the Witch Hunter = Focused on taking down spellcasting enemies - maybe with an innate Dispel Magic/Antimagic Field?
• Path of the Undead Stalker* = Hunts undead, with some things similar to the Cleric.

Rogue

• Assassination = Infiltration and killing single targets
• Thievery = "Classic Rogue," sneaking, stealing, and moving effectively
• Treasure Hunting = Finding traps, appraising, dodging rolling boulders... the classic Indiana Jones style.
• Spying = Your classic "Urban Rogue." Deceit, information-gathering, etc.

*I'm not the best at names - also, some are borrowed from others' ideas. Hopefully you get the idea anyway.