Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Undrave" data-source="post: 8608908" data-attributes="member: 7015698">So, this is just a fun thought exercise, based on what we’ve all learned since the release of the game.Let’s say you get to work on the 5.5 PHB and you’re allowed to completely change the way the various classes work. You can’t change any of the game’s core mechanics like the math of bounded accuracy, the conflict resolution, the XP charts, proficiency bonus, skills, weapons and armor classifications, etc. But you can change what kind of stuff each class gets, with no obligation to make it backward compatible with the previously published material, except adventures. Basically, the concept is that you get to remake the classes from scratch.My question is thus, what guiding concept and fundamental changes would you want to put into places for each of the core classes? In broad strokes terms?Barbarian: Only thing I would change in the PHB Barbarian is to remake the Berzerker so it’s no longer awful, while still being very simple. I’d also make the Ancestral Guardian Barbarian one of the PHB subclass.Bard: I think what bards need are ‘song’ spells that are basically powerful buffs that need an action to maintain longer than a turn. Making these exclusives to the class would give it the ‘bardic song’ feel that some folks felt was missing. Would also make Toll the Dead a PHB spells for Bard and Cleric.Cleric: I’d rework the Trickery Cleric so it has a clearer game plan and a stronger flavor in combat. The Cleric is just a very boring class to me, but I don’t know if there’s a big need to remake it.Druid: Maybe buff the Circle of Land a little so it’s a better comparison to the Circle of the Moon. Maybe add a subclass that trades its Wild Shape for a companion for that Shaman flavor.Fighter: I’d probably rebuild it from the ground up. I’ve been saying for a while that a Fighter should just be a Warlord dressed up as a Fighter. There’s a couple maneuvers from the Battlemaster that should just be things the Fighter can do (sans bonus damage) at will, such as the Goading Attack or Distracting Attack. I think these maneuvers could be the real ‘fighting styles’ and what we have right now be ‘gear specialization’ or something. The Champion would get more of those passive bonuses and be renamed ‘Weapon Master’, and the extended crit would just be one of the options any Fighter can pick (I would make it so it only works with one of the three types of weapon damage, your choice). Eldtrich Knight would be reworked so it’s not so focused on Evocation and more on Abjuration as that makes way more sense. Action Surge and Second Wind would probably be moved to the ‘Prof. per day’ model instead of short rest based. Also, some skill-based buff would be nice.Monk: This class is another I would rebuild from the ground up. As it is, it feels like a pile of legacy feature with no coherent game plan. The whole ‘monks lockdown casters’ thing is more of an emergent gameplay element than a real design goal, IMO. I’d probably survey monk players before working on a new Monk.Paladin: We discussed this in another thread, but instead of being a spellcaster that trades slots for Smites, the Smite would be the based feature and you could trade them for ‘Miracles’. The options available would improve in level and be expended by your Oath, giving them much stronger flavor in the process.Ranger: I don’t have enough experience with that one to really speak up, but I would include the improvements from Tasha’s for sure. Also make it so they have 3 subclass in the book.Rogue: One thing I would do, for sure, is codify ‘Expertise’ as a thing so I can hand it out to various characters without having to write the whole damn explanation every time. Would save on page count. I think what I would do is give an optional alternative to Thieves’ Cant and make the Swashbuckler a core subclass. Maybe cut the Arcane Trickster and Assassin and merge their feel into a shadow themed caster subclass? Just so there’s three subclasses.Sorcerer: If it’s not possible to bring back the playtest sorcerer( who manifests their ancestry more the more they use up their points), I would, at the very least, rework the Wild Magic subclass. Instead of the dumb random system, it would be a push your luck type of mechanic where you can try to get strong effect at the cost of rolling on the wild magic surge table. And the more you do it, the more dice you roll (with only the highest result counting). That way the player can feel more involved and it’s more interesting than being basically dependent of the DM’s whims. I’d obviously add a third subclass, but I’m not sure who would be the best pick. Celestial? Probably the most basic.Warlock: Not much to say… maybe buff the Pact of the Blade so Hexblade isn’t needed?Wizard: The current subclasses are terrible and boring. Giving them 8 subclasses was just ridiculous. I think the base class shouldn’t get as many free spells known as it currently does and with less variety in the spell list, with the Subclass making up the difference with more thematic free spells. For subclasses I’d have the Academic, who picks a school specialty, gets the cheaper copying ability, and gets a bunch of free spells known from their specialty then I’d keep a version of the Diviner as a more support subclass that studies to tap into the power of the Astral Plane (I love the Diviner’s ‘roll in advance’ ability) and gets some Clerical spells thrown into their spell list, and finally the Lorehunter (or Archeologist) as a sort of rogue-ish subclass with abilities and spell well suited for dungeon exploration and a little more toughness and endurance than a normal Wizard (the 'I get dirty to find old spell books' Wizard).Yeah I let my imagination run wild a little… your turn folks!</blockquote>

Verification