D&D 5E What are possible subclasses?

[1of3]

I thought about what could make possible further subclasses for each of the classes in the playtest. It occured to me that the classes are quite different in that manner.

At the top of the list we have the cleric. We can easily imagine a cleric domain for anything but waste disposal. Magic Domain, Moon Domain, Fire Domain. The only problem is giving these concepts interesting and thematically fitting mechanics.

Next are Monks. We can choose any colorful discription for a natural phenomenon, add "Style" and proceed with the mechanics. Crouching Tiger Style, Moon over Water Style. Kung-Fu fiction offers plenty of inspiration.

Next there is the Ranger. The Favored Enemies are quite transparent. I can easily imagine a Witch Hunter, an Undead Stalker and a Faerie Catcher. As long as there are creature types to go with, I can make a Ranger subclass - in theory.

Then we have Druids. Unlike the with Cleric and Monk the relation between the thematic concepts behind the Circles and their mechanic representation is rather week. The crew at Wizards probably started with a Shapeshifting Druid and a Spellcasting Druid and then invented the names of Moon and Land for it. I find it hard to come up with any further. Maybe a Circle of the Blight for fallen druids, in the way of Toxic Shamans in Shadowrun. Maybe a subclass focusing on summoning. Maybe one focusing on healing.

Then we have Mages and Rogues. There are some clear expectations on what subclasses for these classes could be, but unlike the Cleric or the Ranger they do not operate on the semantic level but in the way of traditional archetypes for these classes. I can imagine Thugs, Acrobats and a travelling kind of character for Rogues (think Han Solo or Julio Scoundrél from OotS).

And certainly we want Abjurers, Conjurers and Diviners for Mage. I can also imagine a Bladesong class feature, trading Wizardry for a little martial ability and less spell selection. That would make for some nice variability with Wizard Abjurers and Bladesinger Abjurers etc.

From than on, I'm at a loss. Best is probably Fighters, altough there isn't a clear indication of what Fighter subclass is. At least we know from the playtest, what it's not. It's not about some quasi historic image of fighters, so no Knights, Gladiators, Samurai. That was shot down by public demand. It probably shouldn't be about weapon types either, because those rest in the first level option and and feats.

With Barbarian, Paladin and Bard I have no idea at all.

 

[ppaladin123]

The bard currently has a warrior skald subclass and one based on expnded song/performance skill. There will probably be a "magician" version that focuses more on spells eventually.

Som of the subclasses are going to be designed for multiclass too, I think. I remember reading about some fighter subclass feature that would make it easier and thematic to multiclass to mage.

You can check pathfinder's SRD for class archetypes....there are dozens...that might eventually find their way into 5e as subclasses.

 

[Lokiare]

I could see at least 2 sub-classes for the Wizard that would make different play styles viable in 5E:

The Traditionalist
Must match each prepared spell to a spell slot, can prepare the same spell over and over in different slots. Cantrips must be prepared in a similar way with them able to memorize a number of cantrips equal to their level + their Intelligence modifier. They gain an additional slot per spell level. They give up flexibility in order to gain more casting times of daily spells.

The Aedu

The Aedu pronounced "eye dew" are a sect of magicians that have extensively studied the ability to recapture spent energy before it dissipates. To this end certain spells can be repeated after a 2 minute 'recharge' where they reabsorb the energy from a spent spell. Each time they level up they gain one spell. They prepare spells as normal, but can only prepare 1 spell per spell level. They start with 2 cantrips that they can cast and recover every 6 seconds, one 1st level spell they can recover with a 2 minute recharge, and one 1st level spell they cannot recover. At early levels they seem extra powerful, but this soon dwindles as they are less versatile and more restricted than other Wizards. They can choose from the following spells at each level:

1st (starting)
Rechargeable Spells (pick one): They can pick any 1st level spell that does not require concentration and does not have a duration other than instantaneous.
Non-Rechargeable Spells (pick one): They can pick any 1st level spell.
2nd (utility)
Either choose a rechargeable spell or a non-rechargeable spell (using the level 1 information) from this list: Alarm, Comprehend Languages, Detect Magic, Disguise Self, Feather Fall, Find Familiar, Grease, Gust of Wind, Identify, Long Strider
3rd (rechargeable)
Choose a rechargeable spell of 2nd level or lower.
5th (non-Rechargeable)
Choose a non-rechargeable spell of 3rd level or lower.
6th (utility)
Choose either one of the spells from the 2nd level utility list above or Arcane Lock, Gentle Repose, Knock, Rope Trick, Spider Climb
7th (rechargeable)
Choose a level 4th or lower rechargeable spell
9th (non-rechargeable)
Choose a level 5th or lower non-rechargeable spell
10th (utility)
Choose a utility spell from the 2nd or 6th level or Contact Other Plane, Pass Wall, Scrying, Seeming, Teleportation Circle, True Seeing, Wall of Stone
11th (bonus feat, rechargeable)
Choose a bonus feat from the following list: Arcane Archer, Arcane Initiate, Lore Master, Magic Adept, Improved Magic Adept, Superior Magic Adept. You must meet all prerequisites for the feat you choose. Also gain a 6th level or lower rechargeable spell.
12th (utility)
Choose a utility spell from the 2nd, 6th, or 10th level utility spell lists above or Arcane Gate, Greater Dispel Magic, Move Earth.
13th (rechargeable)
Replace a rechargeable, non-utility spell you know for one of 7th level or lower.
15th (non-rechargeable)
Replace a non-rechargeable non-utility spell you know for one of 8th level or lower.
16th (utility)
Choose a utility spell from the 2nd, 6th, 10th, or 12th level utility list or Etherealness, Plane Shift, Teleport, Clone.
17th (rechargeable)
Replace a rechargeable spell for another rechargeable spell of 9th level or lower.
19th (non-rechargeable)
Replace a non-rechargeable non-utility spell for another non-rechargeable spell of 9th level or lower.
20th (non-rechargeable)
Choose a non-rechargeable non-utility spell of 9th level or lower.

Due to the way these Wizards recycle the spells energies, they lose arcane recovery and they cannot apply their Proficiency bonus to rechargeable spells. Which makes it easier for targets to resist their spells.

 

[Mistwell]

Probably a swashbuckler sub-class for rogue

 

[DMZ2112]

I thought about what could make possible further subclasses for each of the classes in the playtest. It occured to me that the classes are quite different in that manner.

I have to say that I don't think the developers are going about this right thus far, but it is hardly a dealbreaker for me. I tend to think that subclasses ought to build outward from an aspect of their parent class, not introduce novel concepts that have nothing to do with the other subclasses.

I think the fighter is coming together properly. I like the distinctions and core similarities between two-weapon, great-weapon, and shield fighters; that feels like a natural division. By contrast, I don't particularly care for the cleric strategy, which is going to result in dozens of "subclasses" and substantial overlap between many of them.

At the top of the list we have the cleric. We can easily imagine a cleric domain for anything but waste disposal. Magic Domain, Moon Domain, Fire Domain. The only problem is giving these concepts interesting and thematically fitting mechanics.

The only question I have for you is, "Should domains and subclasses be the same thing?" I agree that this is the simplest path forward, and it seems to be the one the developers are pursuing, but for my part I have reservations.

Some gods are easy. It's hard to envision a priest of Tempus who is not a warpriest, or a priest of Ilmater who is not a healer. But should being a priest of Amaunator lock me into being a "sun-priest," with all that entails, rather than giving me the option of focusing on burning heat versus soothing light? I feel pretty strongly that subclasses ought to be based on class mechanics, rather than fluff -- there's no bottom to that particular rabbit hole.

Next are Monks. We can choose any colorful discription for a natural phenomenon, add "Style" and proceed with the mechanics. Crouching Tiger Style, Moon over Water Style. Kung-Fu fiction offers plenty of inspiration.

Again, I'm thinking "fast monk," "strong monk," "tough monk," and "spiritual monk." Leave the flavor to the players and dungeon masters.

Next there is the Ranger. The Favored Enemies are quite transparent. I can easily imagine a Witch Hunter, an Undead Stalker and a Faerie Catcher. As long as there are creature types to go with, I can make a Ranger subclass - in theory.

As long as these categories are kept broad in scope and finite in number, I agree that this seems to be the way to go, allowing the ranged/melee balance of the ranger to be determined by "the best weapon for the job," so to speak. There should be no appreciable difference in the RAW between a wight hunter and a ghoul hunter.

Then we have Druids. Unlike the with Cleric and Monk the relation between the thematic concepts behind the Circles and their mechanic representation is rather week. The crew at Wizards probably started with a Shapeshifting Druid and a Spellcasting Druid and then invented the names of Moon and Land for it. I find it hard to come up with any further. Maybe a Circle of the Blight for fallen druids, in the way of Toxic Shamans in Shadowrun. Maybe a subclass focusing on summoning. Maybe one focusing on healing.

This is in line with my thinking.

Then we have Mages and Rogues. There are some clear expectations on what subclasses for these classes could be, but unlike the Cleric or the Ranger they do not operate on the semantic level but in the way of traditional archetypes for these classes. I can imagine Thugs, Acrobats and a travelling kind of character for Rogues (think Han Solo or Julio Scoundrél from OotS).

I think "traditional archetypes" is a good byword for this process -- for all classes, not just mages and rogues.

With Barbarian, Paladin and Bard I have no idea at all.

I stand by my original assertion that the barbarian really ought to be a fighter subclass, but assuming that it will once again be its own beast (so to speak), the obvious route is totem animals. I object to paladins as a standalone class in any system that also includes warpriests, but again, the obvious route here is to provide customization options at least for the four extreme alignments and possibly even for the five true alignments. And I've never liked the performance-based bard, but he is as simple as codifying the differences between vocalists, orators, actors, and different instrumentalists.

Again, I'm not espousing these ideas; they're just where I expect the developers to go.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

With Barbarian, Paladin and Bard I have no idea at all.

Paladin is easy, just pick champion of X ideal/concept. While Chivalry, Vengeance and Tyranny are more common concepts, other concepts might be things like Liberty, Enlightenment, Madness, or Elements.

Barbarian probably goes down the different totem/environment route, even if there's the singular (Beast) Totem Warrior subclass already. The storm, ancestors, the land, brawlers or part of the 4e Warden class could go here.

Bard, there's certainly room for the more magical bard, the 4e Ardent (which isn't strong enough to be it's own class, even if Psions are), and some of the prestige class concepts like Sublime Chord, Dirgesinger and Seeker of the Song.

 

[Jester David]

If you consider a "subclass" something that could make a good Pathfinder archetype there are dozens. But let's go with the big ones.
It helps that a lot of the previous "build" options (two-weapon fighting, great weapons, etc) are just stuff you can take.

Barbarian
* Path of the Skinwalker. The bear-zerker. Natural attacks and claws, and thick skin
* Path of the Thane. Battlecries and magic shouts.
* Path of the Elements. Tied to elemental power of nature, fire and earth, and such.
* Path of the Juggernaut. Generates temp hp and just hard to put down.

Bard
* College of Magic. More magical ability and spell singing
* College of Deception. Based on illusions, shadows, and trickery.
* College of Enchantment. Ensnaring the mind, charming people.
* College of Dirges. Depress people, herald the dead. Dark stuff.

Cleric
Knowledge and Nature were mentioned in the package but not released. Those are easy domains. Others would include:

* Unlife. Energy draining and raising the dead.
* Weather. Storms and cold and lightning.
* Darkness. The opposite of light. Blackness and cold.

Druid
* Circle of the Weather. Summon storms, air, and the like
* Circle of the Shaman. Specializes in summoning help (spirits to justify use in dungeons)
* Circle of the Beast. Animal companion (s)
* Circle of the Blight. Dark druid. Destroys nature that is out of control.

Fighter
Fighters are hard because their two subclasses are entirely mechanical in design, lacking any flavour. There's the simple fighter (warrior) and the maneuver fighter (weaponmaster). It's hard to know if the design should add more flavour or just provide variations on simple/complex. This is actually problematic as it means flavourful versions of the fighter have to "pick a side" and choose to go complex or simple.
As such, it's easiest to just add fighter subclasses that add mechanics to the mix.

* Path of the Swordmage. Minor magical talent. Better multiclassing with wizard.
* Path of the Battlerager. Even more temporary hp. Possibly take damage to deal extra damage.
* Path of the Shield. Protection focused, blocking blows, shield bash, etc.
* Path of the Knight. Lance and mounted combat.

Monk
* Way of the Tool. Weapon using monk. Possibly squeeze zen archer in here as well.
* Way of Drunken Boxing. Drunken master.
* Way of the Animal. Tiger style, monkey style, etc. Possibly changing between styles based on the situation.
* Way of Improvisation. Improvised weapons. Really, the "Way of Jackie Chan"

Paladin
* Oath of Sanctuary. Protection and defending people, negating damage or taking hits instead.
* Oath of Justice. Hunting down the wicked. Retaliating to damage inflicted, tracking opponents.
* Oath of Order. My way or the highway. Tyranny when done wrong. All about law and anti-chaos.

Ranger
Favoured enemies are a little flavour weak right now, with the giant slaying and dragon slaying stuffed together. There's only a handful of options left: undead, fiends, elementals, criminal scum (urban ranger), beasts, and aberrations.
Other variants would include:
* Beast Master. Lotsa pets (only one combat related).
* Shapeshifter. Spirit of the animal.

Rogue
* Acrobat. Lots of dodging, avoiding attacks, and stunting.
* Detective. Investigating and tracking.
* Spy. Disguises and lying, stealth and deception. Possibly some poison use.
* Trapper. Setting up traps and reappropriating bits of disabled traps.
* Sniper. The bow using rogue. Haley from Order of the Stick.
* Arcane Trickster. Magic using rogue.

Wizard
* School of Abjuration. Protection and buffing. Creating barriers.
* School of Conjuration. This one likely has a couple sub-focuses: summoning or teleporting
* School of Transmutation. Changing the nature of objects. Polymorphing, changing matter, self-buffing
* School of Divination. Predicting the future, seeing what is elsewhere.
* School of Necromancy. Nuff said.

 

[Minigiant]

Well since the Favored Enemy subclass system is already nearly identical to my own Favored Enemy idea, I had ideas for ranger subclasses for rangers for years. There's Mage Killer (elemental resistance, save bonuses, magic damage). Spy Hunter (faux sneeak attack, perception bonuses, trap disarm). Evil stalker (restance from fiend and undead damage types, defence against multiple attacks).

As for Monks, I'd love to see style based of fighting character. Who doesn't want to Yoga Fire a gnoll or Dragon Punch a dragon?

 

[Jester David]

I'd rename "mage killer" into "witch hunter" but that's a solid subclass idea.

 

[howandwhy99]

I think of subclasses as vastly more campaign specific. I like it that a player can make up their whole entire class, but I would suggest playing a core class first and then aiming to specialize within it first for what they want. That way players get a big picture view before trying the unique, but less capable as generalists subclasses.

Fighter Subclasses:
- Roman legionnaires who focus on shield walls and spear
- Flying Van der Hoovers who somersault over opponents while attacking them
- Shipcatchers (for aquatic races) who chase and capture seagoing vessels from within the water.
- Juggers from Blood of Heroes