D&D General why do we not have an armourless half caster?

[Parmandur]

you act like most people even get short rests you rest on the spell caster's time and you know it.

I don't know it, because that is not my experience, nor the reported standard expectation of the game after extensive playtesting. However, WotC does seem to be working to close the gap and make Short Rest abilities tied to Proficiency Die instead, and I expect that will extend to Monks and Warlocks so that tables who faul to oro ide their Short Rests don't see them get shortchanged.

Monks who get their Short Rests (the assumption the game) have the same resources pool, precisely, as a Paladin or Ranger.

Accept it, don't accept it, it is still the answer to your original question from rhe POV of the designers of the game.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Yeah, I think something like this might work:

 

[Immoralkickass]

I could say the same for clerics. Why do we not have armorless clerics? You know, the more priestly type who smites evil with holy light, and focus more on their divine magic than martial prowess. I thought Twilight Clerics should be the the one since its stated that they like to wear nightgowns. But for some reason they got heavy armour proficiency too.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Eldritch Knight that feels like a fighter enhancing their attacks with magic.

A Half-caster class is the only guaranteed solution, thiugh frankly there’s no reason the EK couldn’t have been an answer.

It’s honestly odd to me how often WotC has missed the mark on this.

It really isn't odd. A half-caster would be one of the worst solutions to implement this concept. WotC probably spotted this as well.

A warrior-type that enhances attacks with magic would probably want to to that regularly, at least almost every round. A helf-caster does not have the slots to sustain this. You would need either a full caster, or a magical non-caster that uses non-spell abilities on its attacks.

you do realise all most no tables use casting material anymore it is just logistics which most people do not play role-playing games for.

What is your source for this please? It has certainly not been my experience.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I could say the same for clerics. Why do we not have armorless clerics? You know, the more priestly type who smites evil with holy light, and focus more on their divine magic than martial prowess. I thought Twilight Clerics should be the the one since its stated that they like to wear nightgowns. But for some reason they got heavy armour proficiency too.

It's not that hard to do. The trick is you don't remove the ability to wear medium armour (which would be too easy to put back in 5e anyway), you just give them an ability which is better. The easiest one would be a subclass that gives Unarmored Defense at level 3. But you could do it within existing rules with lineage or feats.

 

[Minigiant]

I could say the same for clerics. Why do we not have armorless clerics? You know, the more priestly type who smites evil with holy light, and focus more on their divine magic than martial prowess. I thought Twilight Clerics should be the the one since its stated that they like to wear nightgowns. But for some reason they got heavy armour proficiency too.

My hope is for 6e clerics to have 2 choices like Warlocks.

Domain that grants a Channel Divinity, extra spells, and domain associated buff.
Priest type which gets the option of the Oracle (2nd domain), Inquisitor (medium armor, cantrips buffed), Medic (heavy armor, heals buffed), and War Priest (martial weapons and heavy armor)

This way you can do clerics that match a setting's style within the same domain. Like lighter Storm clerics in Pirate campaigns or heavier Light priests.

 

[Blue Orange]

Remember how all tech a couple years ago skipped 9 to get to 10 so they could put X's on their packages?

No way WotC is going to not use the 5 for the 50th anniversary.

Oh, with Windows it was worse than that. Older legacy software kept looking for 'Windows 9*' to find 'Windows 95' and 'Windows 98' , so there were all kinds of conflicts with Windows 9. So they just went straight to Windows 10.

 

[Yaarel]

the barbarian is like the eldritch knight, not a half caster but has magic they are quarter casters or something.
and I highly doubt we will ever get a half-caster monk to get off the ground as people likely conflicting ideas of what a monk should even be ends up rendering that unlikely.

I want it far more customisable with a separation of martial arts from subclasses to make them far more dynamic per combination.

If able to rethink the Fighter class, I would split it into two separate classes:

The heavy-infantry "Knight", with heavy armor and high-damage weapons.

The light-infantry "Skirmisher", with no armor or light, high athleticism and speed.

Then gish concepts like Paladin and Eldritch Knight, would be Knight archetypes. Gish concepts like Monk, Barbarian, Psi Warrior, and Ranger would be Skirmisher archetypes.

Of course, there are nonmagic archetypes too. Like Champion, Samurai, Warlord, and Cavalier for Knight. There are Scout, Battle Master, "Dex Fighter", and "Athlete" for Skirmisher.