D&D 5E What classes do you want added to 5e?

[Minigiant]

Personally, I'd do it as a feat.

ARMOR OF FAITH

Prerequisite: Must be able to cast one spell

When wearing no armor and not holding a shield, your AC is equal to 12 + Your Wisdom modifier
When wearing light armor and not holding a shield, you can use your Charisma instead of your Dexterity to determine your AC.


Since a 1st level PC in 4th edition is a 4th level PC in 5th edition, it's should be a fair trade for a Feat. The DM could also trade away your medium and heavy armor for the feat. The truth is MAD is the only problem.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I've yet to see anything in 5e that results in loss of power. A cleric could worship a god, gain access to a domain, and then tell said god to bugger off without any loss of power. I think more than in previous editions, gods in 5e are little more than fluff.

One of the many valid complaints leveled at 3.x (and earlier) was that the game would prescribe or proscribe certain behaviors as a way to 'balance' the abilities of the character. The sound bite version was 'you can't balanced mechanical advantages with RP limitations' or words to that effect. 5e isn't consistent about it, but what you describe could be an attempt to address that sort of complaint.

 

[MwaO]

I'd like a complex, non-caster based, melee PC for whom the majority of their actions are not "I roll to hit, I roll to hit, I roll to hit, I roll to hit. I roll for damage. I roll for damage. I roll for damage. I roll for damage."

 

[Tony Vargas]

I'd like a complex, non-caster based, melee PC for whom the majority of their actions are not "I roll to hit, I roll to hit, I roll to hit, I roll to hit. I roll for damage. I roll for damage. I roll for damage. I roll for damage."

Just non-caster or not supernatural at all? If the former, and you don't mind the 'orientalist' (thank you [MENTION=82132]Cyber-Dave[/MENTION]) flavor, the Monk could do it for you. Not as complex a melee type as the 13A Monk, but not just a beatstick - no, I'm not using that word - not simplistic.

Otherwise, yeah, we could use another class or three like that. There aren't even a lot of candidates from past editions. The Warlord's been mentioned. The 4e fighter had so many maneuvers (the Battlemaster barely scratches the surface), and the 3.5 fighter was so customizable, you could probably devote a whole class to doing each of them justice. The 3.5 Knight didn't do that much, the 3.5 Scout was pretty cool but a skirmisher, don't know if that'd fit your idea of 'melee type,' Bo9S shaded into supernatural-but-not-casting... oh, 1e had the Cavalier - in 5e 'just' a Noble Fighter (Champion, probably, so no help there).

If they go through with PrCs, that opens up some space... Tactical Soldier, Orders of Knighthood, Military Commanders, &c...

 

[ChrisCarlson]

I'd like a complex, non-caster based, melee PC for whom the majority of their actions are not "I roll to hit, I roll to hit, I roll to hit, I roll to hit. I roll for damage. I roll for damage. I roll for damage. I roll for damage."

Like what? What are some things you would like this proposed PC to do?

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Like what? What are some things you would like this proposed PC to do?

Buffing, healing, and battlefield control.

 

[AtomicPope]

I'd like a complex, non-caster based, melee PC for whom the majority of their actions are not "I roll to hit, I roll to hit, I roll to hit, I roll to hit. I roll for damage. I roll for damage. I roll for damage. I roll for damage."

Then play a Battlemaster or Monk.

 

[ChrisCarlson]

Buffing, healing, and battlefield control.

Thanks, MwaO, but those are still extremely vague. Again, like what?

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Thanks, MwaO, but those are still extremely vague. Again, like what?

Since I don't see those as being "extremely" vague, would you mind giving an example of the kind of answer you seek? Because "what a character does" is, itself, a fairly vague question. To be clear, I don't mean give an answer *for* MwaO, just give an example answer of a thing you would expect a particular class (hypothetical or otherwise) to "do."

 

[MwaO]

Just non-caster or not supernatural at all? If the former, and you don't mind the 'orientalist' (thank you [MENTION=82132]Cyber-Dave[/MENTION]) flavor, the Monk could do it for you. Not as complex a melee type as the 13A Monk, but not just a beatstick - no, I'm not using that word - not simplistic.

Yeah, Monk and Battlemaster aren't what I'd regard as being complex. They tend to have a best action for their uses of ki points/maneuvers - and the only real way around that is to burn them faster.

A Battlemaster who could use a maneuver every round of every combat might get interesting - do a different one each round and have more chance of success - keep repeating a maneuver and have less chance might get interesting. So try to keep tripping someone and you're better than someone untrained in doing so, but on the 2nd attempt, the other guy might have advantage on the saving throw.