G
Guest 6801328
Guest
Ok, man. If you think I'm setting up a strawman because I need to, and that I'm being disingenuous because of an ulterior motive, you keep telling yourself that. Peace out.
D&D 5E Which classes would you like to see added to D&D 5e, if any? (check all that apply)
- Thread starter Slit518
- Start date
Ok, man. If you think I'm setting up a strawman because I need to, and that I'm being disingenuous because of an ulterior motive, you keep telling yourself that. Peace out.
Waterbizkit
Explorer
So I usually read an entire thread before posting, you never know who's going to have already touched on a point you want to make or said something you'd like to address outside of the OP... but then I realized this was essentially eight pages of people going back & forth about the Warlord and decided I probably wasn't missing much if I just jump in and give my response to the OP. 
Anyway, so looking at the list... really? This is the kind of stuff that leads to the kind of bloat that most people seem to despise from previous editions. It's like picking words out of a hat and then trying to make whatever it is you've picked a class "just because". The Gladiator, Jester, Pirate and Prophet? Backgrounds. Hell, two of them already exists as backgrounds and you could argue that the Jester is already there in all but name between the Entertainer and maybe the Courtier. What does a "Jester" class actually bring to the game? Other than bloat I mean. Same with the rest of them really.
We already have a Knight, a Ninja and a Samurai. The Knight you can even argue they doubled down on because not only did we just get the Cavalier, but it has existed as a background since the edition came out. The Ninja has also been here the whole time, it's called The Way of the Shadow Monk, and if you don't think that's the case I don't know what to tell you... I've got brand spanking new players to the game looking at that Monk archetype and saying "Sweet! A Ninja!" If they get it, I don't know who possibly couldn't. And the Samurai we also just got.
The rest of it? Artificer I could actually see. I mean they tried it, if I recall, as a sub-class of the Wizard and that wasn't especially well received. So eventually, whenever it is they start releasing Eberron material they'll need an Artificer. Mystic is in the same boat really for whenever it is they want to start releasing material that strongly focuses on psionics. Warlord, no comment. Whatever else on that list I missed, maybe a sub-class at best. And they really don't need an arcane half-caster in my opinion by the way. Spitting out a new class just to fill a perceived gap in the "half-caster" line-up is exactly what we don't need as far as I'm concerned.
Anyway, I voted "other" because it's the only choice that made any sense to me within the context of all the other options. I was sorely tempted to vote "All of the Above" since it's at the top of the list, hilarious, and didn't come with the loaded nonsense of "None, it's perfect the way it is!" Bottom-line, I think we could probably use two or three more full classes if they truly fill a void that needs it. But half of what's on this poll list reads like a grab-bag of random things we really don't need, and it's that kind of stuff that'll lead to a bloated system... in my opinion of course.
Anyway, so looking at the list... really? This is the kind of stuff that leads to the kind of bloat that most people seem to despise from previous editions. It's like picking words out of a hat and then trying to make whatever it is you've picked a class "just because". The Gladiator, Jester, Pirate and Prophet? Backgrounds. Hell, two of them already exists as backgrounds and you could argue that the Jester is already there in all but name between the Entertainer and maybe the Courtier. What does a "Jester" class actually bring to the game? Other than bloat I mean. Same with the rest of them really.
We already have a Knight, a Ninja and a Samurai. The Knight you can even argue they doubled down on because not only did we just get the Cavalier, but it has existed as a background since the edition came out. The Ninja has also been here the whole time, it's called The Way of the Shadow Monk, and if you don't think that's the case I don't know what to tell you... I've got brand spanking new players to the game looking at that Monk archetype and saying "Sweet! A Ninja!" If they get it, I don't know who possibly couldn't. And the Samurai we also just got.
The rest of it? Artificer I could actually see. I mean they tried it, if I recall, as a sub-class of the Wizard and that wasn't especially well received. So eventually, whenever it is they start releasing Eberron material they'll need an Artificer. Mystic is in the same boat really for whenever it is they want to start releasing material that strongly focuses on psionics. Warlord, no comment. Whatever else on that list I missed, maybe a sub-class at best. And they really don't need an arcane half-caster in my opinion by the way. Spitting out a new class just to fill a perceived gap in the "half-caster" line-up is exactly what we don't need as far as I'm concerned.
Anyway, I voted "other" because it's the only choice that made any sense to me within the context of all the other options. I was sorely tempted to vote "All of the Above" since it's at the top of the list, hilarious, and didn't come with the loaded nonsense of "None, it's perfect the way it is!" Bottom-line, I think we could probably use two or three more full classes if they truly fill a void that needs it. But half of what's on this poll list reads like a grab-bag of random things we really don't need, and it's that kind of stuff that'll lead to a bloated system... in my opinion of course.
TerraDave
5ever, or until 2024
Thats part of the problem
G
Guest 6801328
Guest
"Mystic" would be a great name for the base class for Witches, Shaman, Witch Doctors, and Medicine Men. Shame to waste it on Psions.
Artificier, alchemist, shaman, and witch could be constructed as subclasses of a gadgeteer style class. This class would build/bind magical energies to a token that either provides a small constant effect or a larger single-use effect. Map the number of daily effects to something like a Wizard's daily spell pool and allow the gadgeteer to renew/replace one effect per long rest as the base ability.
Quickleaf
Legend
What I'd like to see most of all are new Fighter sub-classes. The existing ones just don't inspire, and it says something that two of those have to use magic (Eldritch Knight and Arcane Archer). I'd rather see things like "gladiator", "knight", and "warlord" turned into Fighter sub-classes.
After that, I'd like to see a Sorcerer re-design (similar to what they've been doing for Rangers) with a different take on Sorcerer sub-classes that makes them entirely distinct from the Warlock's patrons-by-monster-type.
Then, at the bottom of my list, I'd be willing to buy into new classes like an Artificer/Alchemist or Shaman/Witch or Mystic/Psion IF (and only if) they were well-done and filled a unique niche both narratively and games mechanics-wise.
Arilyn
Hero
I love having lots of classes. It's kind of the point of having a "Lego" style game like DnD. GMs can always tailor their world by allowing certain classes, which is tricky to do if there aren't many to begin with. Nobody is going to love them all, but you never know when your "hated" class turns out to be perfect for your latest character concept. In fact, since the archetype design can be a little restricting, I think a lot of concepts would be better served as complete classes.
This isn't going to break the game, as long as they are designed with some care.
This isn't going to break the game, as long as they are designed with some care.
Slit518
Adventurer
I don't understand all the Warlord hate.
I played 4th edition once, at a con, many, many, many years ago, and never got into it.
If they introduced a 5th edition style Warlord class to the game, I would be fine with it.
If I didn't like the class, I wouldn't have to play it, or have to allow players to choose it.
People who don't like it could do the same.
Also, Google "Famous Warlords" to get an idea of what a Warlord is and who some were.
By the way, an Artificer is literally just an inventor. Though, they do practice different crafts. An example would be Tubal-Cain, an artificer of brass & iron.
At least I didn't ask if we should have a Factotum class, right?
I played 4th edition once, at a con, many, many, many years ago, and never got into it.
If they introduced a 5th edition style Warlord class to the game, I would be fine with it.
If I didn't like the class, I wouldn't have to play it, or have to allow players to choose it.
People who don't like it could do the same.
Also, Google "Famous Warlords" to get an idea of what a Warlord is and who some were.
By the way, an Artificer is literally just an inventor. Though, they do practice different crafts. An example would be Tubal-Cain, an artificer of brass & iron.
At least I didn't ask if we should have a Factotum class, right?
G
Guest 6801328
Guest
Not if you play Adventurer's League.
Most (all?) of my comments are offered with AL in mind. The way I see it, non-AL players and DMs can make up their own stuff, get it from Patreon and DMsGuild, etc. They don't need classes to be official.
But making classes official effectively imposes them on DMs who participate in AL.
Exactly. It's a terrible class name.
Honestly I'd be more ok with a Warlord class that was an actual warlord.
Abilities:
- Summon Loyal Thugs
- Execute Rival
- Commit Atrocity
- Siphon Gold to Offshore Account
Last edited by a moderator:
Sacrosanct
Legend
Why do some people take it as a personal affront to them if others don’t like, or couldn’t care less about a warlord class existing? Get some perspective people, jeez. The hyperbole doesn’t help. Who are these people who “come hell or high water” are trying to keep the warlord not a class? Just because you didn’t get what you want how you wanted it doesn’t mean there is some vast conspiracy against you. None of us are that important, sorry.
5e has already given a nod to the warlord. Both as not one but TWO subclasses, and in mechanics and feats. Is it just because there isn’t a dedicated class with that name? Over the many discussions about this class over the past few years, it is pointedly clear that even warlord fans can’t agree what they’d like to see as a class. We’ve had literally dozens of variations and everyone argues about it. The 4e warlord will never exist in 5e. It can’t. The mechanics are different. So stop demanding it.
I’m not against a warlord class, but if I was on the WoTC team, I would avoid it like the plague because I just know whatever we would put out would be met with a ton of hostility and complaints if history is any indicator. Honestly, I think warlord fans are their own worst enemy here, because it seems more than a few are vocal and frequent with their irrational and unfair hyperbolic accusations. That’s important because as a third party and as a game designer, if I see a fan base who acts like that, just makes me want to avoid making the class because I have more important things to do than put up myself right in the line of fire for that kind of drama.
5e has already given a nod to the warlord. Both as not one but TWO subclasses, and in mechanics and feats. Is it just because there isn’t a dedicated class with that name? Over the many discussions about this class over the past few years, it is pointedly clear that even warlord fans can’t agree what they’d like to see as a class. We’ve had literally dozens of variations and everyone argues about it. The 4e warlord will never exist in 5e. It can’t. The mechanics are different. So stop demanding it.
I’m not against a warlord class, but if I was on the WoTC team, I would avoid it like the plague because I just know whatever we would put out would be met with a ton of hostility and complaints if history is any indicator. Honestly, I think warlord fans are their own worst enemy here, because it seems more than a few are vocal and frequent with their irrational and unfair hyperbolic accusations. That’s important because as a third party and as a game designer, if I see a fan base who acts like that, just makes me want to avoid making the class because I have more important things to do than put up myself right in the line of fire for that kind of drama.
