PDA

View Full Version : what sub-classes do you want/expect to appear?



killerjag
2014-07-09, 12:31 AM
Besides the ones already confirmed by the playtest, what kind of sub-class do you think we're going to in the PHB and future supplements?

Sartharina
2014-07-09, 12:57 AM
I can't even recall all the subclasses from the playtest (Which are not necessarily confirmed - we've had all subclasses reworked).

For the Cleric, they've already outlined the other domains.

For the Rogue, I'm hoping for a Strength-favoring Rogue that has tremendous flexibility with Sneak Attacks (Isolating/first strike Sneak Attacks, trade SA damage for Ambush-feat like abilities and other dirty tricks) and can SA with any weapon they are proficient with, sort of like how the Thief is seemingly all about the Cunning Action.

Inevitability
2014-07-09, 04:27 AM
Fighter: The brawler. Fights with his bare hands and improvised weapons, uses strength and dexterity. Maybe a few maneuvers like that playtest fighter subclass got.

Noldo
2014-07-09, 06:58 AM
Unfortunately I expect that sooner or later there will be a wizard subclass based on possibility to maintain multiple "Concentration" spells simultaneously - whether this will wreck the original power level or not will be seen.

T.G. Oskar
2014-07-09, 07:11 AM
Cleric has domains and Wizard has schools of magic, so most likely you won't see many subclasses for them. Wizard will definitely get Illusionist (maybe with the Bard's capstone of getting 5 spells from any class, since the original Illusionist ended up getting 1st level Magic User spells on AD&D 1e) and Necromancer.

For the Fighter, there's the Weapon Master (or whatever name they give it) that adds the maneuvers and Expertise/Supremacy dice planned originally for them. Most definitely a Brawler, and maybe a Battlerager (rage like a Barbarian without being one!). Going with the idea of the Brawler, maybe a "super-specialization" set of sub-classes, one for each Fighting Style (Archer Fighter, Dual Weapon Fighter, Great Weapon Fighter, Shield Fighter...) Have to see if they plan to keep the Marshal/Warlord as a separate class, or if they intend to make it a sub-class of the Fighter. OH, and Cavalier. Even though Cavalier is probably a Sub-Class of Paladin just to hammer on the irony.

As for Rogue...there's the Thief, there'll be the Assassin, so probably the Bandit (the STR-focused archetype) and the Acrobat (harkening to the days of the Thief-Acrobat), focusing on Athletics and Acrobatics. Perhaps the Swashbuckler as well, to make the Rogue stronger at melee while keeping Sneak Attack, and also grant a third way to provide 2 stats to AC with Canny Defense.

For other classes...well, in one of the playtest packets Paladins had Blackguard and "Green Warden" as subclasses, so it'd be nice to see them in one way or another rather than domain-like Oaths.

Squirrel_Dude
2014-07-09, 07:42 AM
Rogue: Ninja
Fighter: Samurai
Something: Shugenja

And other classic Oriental Adventures classes just for flavor's sake.

A Stray Cat
2014-07-09, 07:52 AM
Ranger: archer, dual wielder?

Yuki Akuma
2014-07-09, 07:58 AM
I fully expect a Fighter and/or Rogue subclass that gets spells. Just because.

No I haven't seen the playtest so I don't know if those already exist or not.

Inevitability
2014-07-09, 08:11 AM
I fully expect a Fighter and/or Rogue subclass that gets spells. Just because.

No I haven't seen the playtest so I don't know if those already exist or not.

Meh, I don't see that is coming. 5e seems to have no 'cross-over' classes, most likely to prevent people from taking over too much of another classes' roles.

Chaosvii7
2014-07-09, 08:22 AM
Mentioned it somewhere else, but I'd very much like a Blood Mage subclass for either Sorcerer or Warlock. Other than that, I hope that Bards still get a bardic college that gives them Warlord-like abilities. I LOVED the playtest Bard but they said they'd taken it apart and reconstructed it into something entirely new. I'm still 99% guaranteed to love it unconditionally because it's a Bard and I am a Bard at heart, but the Bard fantasy has always been the character that borders the territories of spell, sword, and song, and the new Bard sounds all about the spell and song, but nothing like the sword.

obryn
2014-07-09, 08:47 AM
I fully expect a Fighter and/or Rogue subclass that gets spells. Just because.

Meh, I don't see that is coming. 5e seems to have no 'cross-over' classes, most likely to prevent people from taking over too much of another classes' roles.
I can guarantee those are coming, because I've seen at least the Eldritch Knight. :smallsmile: There is, I believe, a Spellthief sort, too.

e:

As for Warlord-Fighter, the mighty Warlord has been reduced to two Maneuvers for the Weapon Master Fighter. One lets a buddy attack, and another gives Temp HPs.

Stuff to expect:
(1) Lots of subclasses for Wizards, since there'll be one for each kind of spell
(2) Lots for Clerics, because of domains

So it's good that those poor spellcasters will finally get the flexibility they so sorely need.

Yorrin
2014-07-09, 09:49 AM
I can guarantee those are coming, because I've seen at least the Eldritch Knight. :smallsmile: There is, I believe, a Spellthief sort, too.

e:

As for Warlord-Fighter, the mighty Warlord has been reduced to two Maneuvers for the Weapon Master Fighter. One lets a buddy attack, and another gives Temp HPs.

Stuff to expect:
(1) Lots of subclasses for Wizards, since there'll be one for each kind of spell
(2) Lots for Clerics, because of domains

So it's good that those poor spellcasters will finally get the flexibility they so sorely need.

Eldritch Knight and Spellthief make me happy. Martial with a splash of magic is my favorite :smallbiggrin:

And good for those poor neglected spellcasters. They really did need more options.

killerjag
2014-07-09, 10:30 AM
Ranger: archer, dual wielder?

The ranger sub-classes in the playtest were based on his favored enemy. So I expect his subs to be dragon hunter, giant hunter, demon hunter, manhunter, etc.

rlc
2014-07-09, 11:43 AM
Although the word is that they've changed some specifics, this article (http://theindiedragon.com/dd-next-classes-previewing-the-bard) talks about two bard colleges, which I'm guessing will have a subclass each. However, I have an idea for another one that might sound silly at first, but hear me out.
I want a rock star inspired bard with longer performances, louder music and some extra song/spell slots. It can be more of a generalist Than the two colleges, but still specializing in performances.

Particle_Man
2014-07-09, 11:44 AM
I want to see how they handle the illusionist (because illusion adjudication is always tricky) and the assassin (as it is hard to balance the "one shot you are dead" death attack because either it is far too deadly on one end or it is a joke on the other). I also want to see how they handle multi-classing, as that also been tricky to balance.

That said, I think that the 5e crew is up to the challenge. I am quite impressed with basic so far.

Sartharina
2014-07-09, 12:06 PM
Ranger: archer, dual wielder?

Hopefully not. Those are fighting styles like the FIghter's, from the playtest. I wish rangers would have TWF AND Archery Switch-hitting become default, instead of "Choose to suck at one or the other"

Rangers from the playtest got HordeBreaker and Single-Target Smasher subclasses in the playtest.


A ranger subclass I'd love to see but know will never happen is the "Power Ranger", which focuses on causing random explosions, jumping and posing all over the battlefield, and summoning giant mecha. And synergize with each other, so that a part of all Power Rangers is viable but completely different from normal D&D gameplay.

pwykersotz
2014-07-09, 12:19 PM
A ranger subclass I'd love to see but know will never happen is the "Power Ranger", which focuses on causing random explosions, jumping and posing all over the battlefield, and summoning giant mecha. And synergize with each other, so that a part of all Power Rangers is viable but completely different from normal D&D gameplay.

Now I need this. I didn't realize I did until now.

m4th
2014-07-09, 12:29 PM
Rogue: The Expert.
Other subclasses expand the rogues Bonus Action (thief), damage dealt (assassin), fighting style (thug), or movement (acrobat). The Expert is the consummate professional, expanding their expertise to cover all proficiencies, including any tools they are proficient in. An Expert who is proficient with the disguise kit is visually indistinguishable from their mark, and an Expert who is proficient with the poisoner's kit is the equal of any assassin when it comes to creating and handling deadly poisons.

Wizard: The Scholar
The Scholar focuses on the acquisition of arcane knowledge instead of the mastery of a single school. A Scholar gains additional spells with each level, spends less time and money scribing new spells, may cast certain spells as rituals that are not listed as ritual spells in the description.

Fighter: The Commander
A front-line melee combatant that bolsters their allies, granting them extra actions and healing that other Fighters may only use for themselves.


Hopefully not. Those are fighting styles like the FIghter's, from the playtest. I wish rangers would have TWF AND Archery Switch-hitting become default, instead of "Choose to suck at one or the other"

Rangers from the playtest got HordeBreaker and Single-Target Smasher subclasses in the playtest.


A ranger subclass I'd love to see but know will never happen is the "Power Ranger", which focuses on causing random explosions, jumping and posing all over the battlefield, and summoning giant mecha. And synergize with each other, so that a part of all Power Rangers is viable but completely different from normal D&D gameplay.

+1 for Ranger: Go Go Power, but only if they have one player control them in combat and another player control them in social situations.

PracticalM
2014-07-09, 12:45 PM
My son really likes the Spirit Shaman so I hope there is some sub class for dealing with spirits (fey, elementals, and incorporal undead)

m4th
2014-07-09, 01:39 PM
My son really likes the Spirit Shaman so I hope there is some sub class for dealing with spirits (fey, elementals, and incorporal undead)

In the playtest, one of the druid circles (subclasses) was a nature caster who forwent some of their shapshifting prowess to gain additional casting ability. It might not be enough on its own to match a Spirit Shaman, but if you change the flavor of the conjuration and healing spell descriptions, you could easily say that you summon earth spirits instead of badgers, water spirits instead of healing, and maleficent spirits instead of harmful spells.

I could also see a warlock subclass that was reflavored to spirits, but warlocks aren't in the playtest or basic, so who knows.

Person_Man
2014-07-09, 02:40 PM
Based on the Basic rules, my understanding is that subclass options are gained a set of standardized levels.

Cleric gains a Divine Domain spells/powers at level 1 and additional ways to use Channel Divinity at levels 2, 6, 8, and 17. The Cleric Domains in the PHB will be Knowledge, Life, Light, Nature, Tempest, Trickery, and War.

Fighter gains a Martial Archetype that grants him abilities at level 3, 7, 10, 15, and 17. The Champion Archetype in the Basic rules is very cruddy, so I'm hoping they chose it for the Basic rules because it was simple, and that it's not the baseline of Fighter resources for the other Archetypes.

Rogue gains Roguish (a word I hate) Archetypes at levels 3, 9, 13, and 17. The Thief Archetype is 3/4 garbage (with the 17th level ability to gain 2 turns on the first round of any combat without the need for any Rests between them being the exception).

Wizard chooses an Arcane Tradition, which grants you different abilities at levels 2, 6, 10, and 14. There's likely to be an Arcane Tradition for each of the 8 schools of magic (Evoker, Enchanter, Transmuter, etc) and we know Wild Mage is in the Player's Handbook as well from a leaked page. Like 3.X Metamagic, some of the Arcane Traditions are likely to be very powerful by virtue of the fact that they modify magic, which is basically an encounter winning button in every edition but 4E.

We know that the confirmed PHB classes include all of the 3.5 base classes (Barbarian, Bard, Cleric, Druid, Fighter, Monk, Paladin, Ranger, Rogue, Sorcerer, Wizard) plus Warlock are in the PHB. (and there might be one or two more I'm forgetting). Based on the Cleric and Wizard it looks like there are going to be around 7-9ish subclass options for each class. So my guess is that there are going to be around 80-100 subclass options, and the character creation rules will be around 80%+ of the PHB. Which is freaking ridiculous.

"Subclass" is a poor description though, because it's not like 2E subclasses (which truly were entirely different classes) or 3.5 (where prestige classes were often entirely different from the base classes). Most/all subclasses will share 3/4ish of the same class features with their base class. It's more like a slightly more standardized version of Pathfinder's Archetypes, which makes perfect sense, because the design of 5E overall is very similar to 3.5 with a few 2E elements worked in.

obryn
2014-07-09, 02:57 PM
So my guess is that there are going to be around 80-100 subclass options, and the character creation rules will be around 80%+ of the PHB. Which is freaking ridiculous.
Races take up pages 17-44 (maybe 43), so 25-30 pages just for that.

Subclasses can be pretty easily condensed, though, most classes (especially those outside the Core 4) will probably have 2 to start with. I mean, the Champion can fit into about 1/4 of the page...

e: Lovin the art tho.

http://i.imgur.com/XSG1M9b.jpg

Yorrin
2014-07-09, 03:56 PM
Based on the Cleric and Wizard it looks like there are going to be around 7-9ish subclass options for each class. So my guess is that there are going to be around 80-100 subclass options

I think this is the biggest flaw in your analysis. I think Clerics and Wizards will have more "subclasses" than anyone else, at least at first. I'd guess no more than 4-5 each for most of the others. And I think the Druid, Barbarian, and Monk from the playtest are all good examples of having several options within a single subclass, which might be used to make up for that.

Ilorin Lorati
2014-07-09, 06:19 PM
e: Lovin the art tho.

http://i.imgur.com/XSG1M9b.jpg


Violet, is that you? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rat_Queens)

Sartharina
2014-07-10, 02:05 AM
Rogue gains Roguish (a word I hate) Archetypes at levels 3, 9, 13, and 17. The Thief Archetype is 3/4 garbage (with the 17th level ability to gain 2 turns on the first round of any combat without the need for any Rests between them being the exception).I'm sorry... this does not compute at all.

Thief bonus at 3 allows the rogue to open locks and disarm/rejig traps as what amounts to a minor action in D&D Next instead of a minute action, as well as allowing him to use all sorts of items as well as minor actions - or take critical items from enemies without significant cost to his resources (Move, snatch macguffin, disengage, use rest of movement to get out of dodge!). It also gives you unlimited vertical mobility.

Thief bonus at 9 is... underwhelming, but not garbage. It makes stealth significantly more reliable.

Thief bonus at 13, combined with his bonus at 3, makes him hands-down the best magic item user in the game. If he has the money and tools, he can outcast a wizard.

At 17, he's master of the action economy.

Person_Man
2014-07-10, 09:17 AM
I think this is the biggest flaw in your analysis. I think Clerics and Wizards will have more "subclasses" than anyone else, at least at first. I'd guess no more than 4-5 each for most of the others. And I think the Druid, Barbarian, and Monk from the playtest are all good examples of having several options within a single subclass, which might be used to make up for that.

OK, so we know there are 7 Cleric domains/subclasses and will probably be around 9 Wizard subclasses (one for each school of magic plus the Wild Mage). If the remaining 10 base classes each have 4 or 5 subclasses, then that's still around 56-66ish different subclass options for players to sift through. And then anyone who wants to play a spellcaster is going to have around 6-12ish spells per spell level (including cantrips) to figure out.

I've got no problem with lots of subclass options in splat books. But it seems to that 5E is basically going to be around 80% character creation, and that creating a character is going to be a laborious process.



I'm sorry... this does not compute at all.

Thief bonus at 3 allows the rogue to open locks and disarm/rejig traps as what amounts to a minor action in D&D Next instead of a minute action, as well as allowing him to use all sorts of items as well as minor actions - or take critical items from enemies without significant cost to his resources (Move, snatch macguffin, disengage, use rest of movement to get out of dodge!). It also gives you unlimited vertical mobility.

Thief bonus at 9 is... underwhelming, but not garbage. It makes stealth significantly more reliable.

Thief bonus at 13, combined with his bonus at 3, makes him hands-down the best magic item user in the game. If he has the money and tools, he can outcast a wizard.

At 17, he's master of the action economy.

I fully admitted that the 17 level ability is excellent.

The Thief subclass Skill stuff is not very useful at the levels at which they are gained. Who cares if you can Climb quickly or Jump an additional 5 feet? Who cares if you can disarm a trap as a bonus action when combat only lasts 1-2 rounds? Just don't walk on the trap and kill your enemy as quickly as possible. Who cares if you have Advantage on Stealth at 9th level if you move slowly when Invisibility exists?

The usefulness of the subclass is their ability to use magic items as a Bonus Action, and possibly to use some magic items that other players can't use.

The usefulness of magic items is dependent entirely on the DM, because players can't purchase reusable magic items. And even then, players are limited to using a small number of magic items. So if the DM hands the Rogue a Wand of Awesomeness which can't be used by players of other classes or races for some reason, and if the Wand of Awesomeness is more awesome then having three passive bonus magic items, and if that Wand of Awesomeness doesn't have very limited charges or some other drawback that makes it impractical, and if spellcasters don't have some kind of superior "overchannel wand" or other magic item subclass ability, then yes, being able to use the Wand of Awesomeness as a Bonus Action would indeed be a big deal. But that's a lot of if's.

Yorrin
2014-07-10, 09:26 AM
The Thief subclass Skill stuff is not very useful at the levels at which they are gained. Who cares if you can Climb quickly or Jump an additional 5 feet? Who cares if you can disarm a trap as a bonus action when combat only lasts 1-2 rounds? Just don't walk on the trap and kill your enemy as quickly as possible. Who cares if you have Advantage on Stealth at 9th level if you move slowly when Invisibility exists?

Come now, you're not usually given to this type of hyperbole. Jumping an additional five feet can be a huge boon, "just don't walk on the trap" is often simply not possible, and advantage on stealth is always a good thing. Because a caster with fairly limited spell slots is not going to want to waste those slots helping a party member with something that he can already do, he'll instead save those big guns for battlefield control or scry-n-die or your tactic of choice.

RedWarlock
2014-07-10, 03:03 PM
Pretty sure the Wild Mage is going to be under Sorcerer, not Wizard.

HeadlessMermaid
2014-07-10, 03:25 PM
Who cares if you can disarm a trap as a bonus action when combat only lasts 1-2 rounds?
Wait, it does? I stayed away from playtesting, but for some reason I thought that combat would last a lot longer than that. That's important, what do the playtesters say?

Sartharina
2014-07-10, 03:27 PM
Wait, it does? I stayed away from playtesting, but for some reason I thought that combat would last a lot longer than that. That's important, what do the playtesters say?The lower the level, the shorter the encounter. Even then, it's always been closer to 5 (Very fast) rounds for me.

Inevitability
2014-07-13, 12:49 PM
I'd also love an alchemy-focused class. Maybe as wizard subclass, though rogue wouldn't make no sense either.

pwykersotz
2014-07-13, 01:56 PM
I'd also love an alchemy-focused class. Maybe as wizard subclass, though rogue wouldn't make no sense either.

I agree, good alchemy rules would be amazing.

Kuulvheysoon
2014-07-13, 05:17 PM
I'm more curious about the Monk sub-classes. What could they be? Different martial arts styles ( la Monk Variant: Fighting Styles from Unearthed Arcana from 3.5e?)

rlc
2014-07-13, 06:14 PM
I'm more curious about the Monk sub-classes. What could they be? Different martial arts styles ( la Monk Variant: Fighting Styles from Unearthed Arcana from 3.5e?)

...do i get to use the wu tang school method?

obryn
2014-07-13, 07:01 PM
I'm more curious about the Monk sub-classes. What could they be? Different martial arts styles ( la Monk Variant: Fighting Styles from Unearthed Arcana from 3.5e?)
I believe one is a more traditional martial artist, while the other is more like a Bender from Avatar. :smallsmile:

Kuulvheysoon
2014-07-13, 07:11 PM
I believe one is a more traditional martial artist, while the other is more like a Bender from Avatar. :smallsmile:

...that's all kinds of awesome. Now, if we can just get a soulknife expy, I'll be all set for monkishness.

pwykersotz
2014-07-13, 07:34 PM
I believe one is a more traditional martial artist, while the other is more like a Bender from Avatar. :smallsmile:

I super hope you're right on this. That would be awesome!

obryn
2014-07-13, 08:07 PM
I super hope you're right on this. That would be awesome!
Well, it was in an earlier playtest, so cross your fingers!

Rater202
2014-07-14, 12:29 AM
I'd like to see a Wizard/Druid/Sorcerer/Warlock/etc Subclass that involves, essentially, the character having a swarm of cat-sized critters fallowing them around to do their bidding.