Xanathar's Guide - Official Videos describing Confirmed Subclasses

[Foxhound438]

Mearls: "I like designing unique mechanics, so this is the Arcane Archer's thing, nobody else gets it."

HOW MANY THINGS HAVE YOU GIVEN VERSIONS OF THE BATTLEMASTER MANEUVERS & SUPERIORITY DICE, MIKE?! HOW MANY?!

I think JC said in the cavalier video (samurai maybe?) that no one liked that practice and so they are finally going to stop.

[Easy_Lee]

Mearls: "I like designing unique mechanics, so this is the Arcane Archer's thing, nobody else gets it."

HOW MANY THINGS HAVE YOU GIVEN VERSIONS OF THE BATTLEMASTER MANEUVERS & SUPERIORITY DICE, MIKE?! HOW MANY?!

This is presumably why they're dropping those maneuvers from the Cavalier.

[DracoKnight]

This is presumably why they're dropping those maneuvers from the Cavalier.

It's exactly why they dropped them from the Cavalier.

[jaappleton]

I think JC said in the cavalier video (samurai maybe?) that no one liked that practice and so they are finally going to stop.

Spell-less Ranger (In fairness, designed by Rodney Thompson, not MM)
Fighter: Scout
Fighter: Monster Slayer
Fighter: Cavalier (multiple versions, I believe!)

That's just what I can recall off the top of my head.

It was just such... a lazy crutch.

I'm glad it's finally gone.

[DracoKnight]

Spell-less Ranger (In fairness, designed by Rodney Thompson, not MM)
Fighter: Scout
Fighter: Monster Slayer
Fighter: Cavalier (multiple versions, I believe!)

That's just what I can recall off the top of my head.

It was just such... a lazy crutch.

I'm glad it's finally gone.

I'm right there with you. Sup Dice are the Battle Master's thing. I'm glad they stopped handing it out to every new Fighter. It'd be like handing out the Champion's expanded crit range to a Warlock at 1st-level...oh, wait.

DISCLAIMER: I do love the Hexblade as a patron option, as I'm sure everyone's noticed, but that one aspect bothers me a lot. And Hexblade's Curse should totally apply only to melee weapon attacks.

[rbstr]

Mearls: "I like designing unique mechanics, so this is the Arcane Archer's thing, nobody else gets it."

HOW MANY THINGS HAVE YOU GIVEN VERSIONS OF THE BATTLEMASTER MANEUVERS & SUPERIORITY DICE, MIKE?! HOW MANY?!

Unfortunate, because I feel like "Magical fighting class without just giving them spellcasting" is something that should be expanded. I think you could build a really cool class on that.

[jaappleton]

Unfortunate, because I feel like "Magical fighting class without just giving them spellcasting" is something that should be expanded. I think you could build a really cool class on that.

The Arcane Archer is a great start toward that.

[DracoKnight]

Unfortunate, because I feel like "Magical fighting class without just giving them spellcasting" is something that should be expanded. I think you could build a really cool class on that.

I...may or may not be working on this exact thing right now

[Mortis_Elrod]

DISCLAIMER: I do love the Hexblade as a patron option, as I'm sure everyone's noticed, but that one aspect bothers me a lot. And Hexblade's Curse should totally apply only to melee weapon attacks.

Let's not take away my Hexbow options. Reduce it to weapon attacks.

[jaappleton]

Let's not take away my Hexbow options. Reduce it to weapon attacks.

Fair enough.

[DracoKnight]

Let's not take away my Hexbow options. Reduce it to weapon attacks.

Valid point, I guess.

[Spiritchaser]

Valid point, I guess.

I have no problem with this. Makes perfect sense to me

Edit: seems so obvious I feel a bit daft for not doing this to the rules before I let the table’s warlock run with them.

Ah well

[Mortis_Elrod]

I have no problem with this. Makes perfect sense to me

Edit: seems so obvious I feel a bit daft for not doing this to the rules before I let the table’s warlock run with them.

Ah well

Currently one of my favorite builds 12 levels of HexBow and then 8 levels into whatever kind of archer (rogue/ranger/arcane archer etc)

[Spiritchaser]

Currently one of my favorite builds 12 levels of HexBow and then 8 levels into whatever kind of archer (rogue/ranger/arcane archer etc)

I have a STR>CHA>CON GWM F1/ hexblade bladelock at my table who loves the versatility. His eldritch blast does not need to be as powerful it could become. Right now it’s not a huge deal as his CHA could be higher, but that’ll change soon. This is a change I need to seriously consider making.

[Millstone85]

I am both happy and disappointed.

I like the idea of a gish who knows how to put temporary enchantments on the equipment they use, as distinct from one who juggles between spellcasting and martial stuff.

But that should cover all armors and weapons, not just ammunition. Especially when spellcasting is mostly a ranged business already.

My fear is that the arcane archer, the forge cleric and the artificer will all come close but no cigar.

Edit: Another hope would be a half-psionicist.

[Unoriginal]

Mearls: "I like designing unique mechanics, so this is the Arcane Archer's thing, nobody else gets it."

HOW MANY THINGS HAVE YOU GIVEN VERSIONS OF THE BATTLEMASTER MANEUVERS & SUPERIORITY DICE, MIKE?! HOW MANY?!

He said the team thought people would be interested in seeing this mechanic expanded, and that they'll drop it due to negative feedback.

IMO the superiority dice were fine to share, but the manoeuvres would have needed to be nearly 100% different each time.

[Temperjoke]

He said the team thought people would be interested in seeing this mechanic expanded, and that they'll drop it due to negative feedback.

IMO the superiority dice were fine to share, but the manoeuvres would have needed to be nearly 100% different each time.

Yeah, I don't mind the idea of superiority dice being the Fighter class thing, even though the other PHB subclasses didn't have them, but each of the classes would need different things to do with them, kinda like how fighters, rangers, and paladins all have slightly different versions of Fighting Style.

[Beechgnome]

Yeah, I don't mind the idea of superiority dice being the Fighter class thing, even though the other PHB subclasses didn't have them, but each of the classes would need different things to do with them, kinda like how fighters, rangers, and paladins all have slightly different versions of Fighting Style.

I thought there was room for a superiority-dice style rogue that focuses on dirty fighting, with different manoeuvres to blind, hamstring and the like. I had toyed with the idea while building a homebrew Rogue subclass based on the old Yakusa class from 1E, but eventually abandoned it for the same reason the others don't work: I want to steal trip attack and feint and half of the battle master moves. And then it feels too similar.

[Millstone85]

It is too late for that sort of design, but I wouldn't have minded if the PHB had got a whole chapter on martial maneuvers just like there is one on magic spells, and all martial and/or magic subclasses would have referenced those.

[Dudu]

Do we have any idea of the mechanics somewhere?

All I see on the videos are flavor talk and some core notion of how the subclass should work. Like cavalier locking foes.

For the cavalier, for example, I was expecting an active form of tanking, that wasn't dodge. Something like, "raise shields" and you get temp HP for a round. And while you're in that stance you can make some unique reactions and perhaps even increase your threatening area.

[Temperjoke]

Do we have any idea of the mechanics somewhere?

All I see on the videos are flavor talk and some core notion of how the subclass should work. Like cavalier locking foes.

For the cavalier, for example, I was expecting an active form of tanking, that wasn't dodge. Something like, "raise shields" and you get temp HP for a round. And while you're in that stance you can make some unique reactions and perhaps even increase your threatening area.

Nah, these releases are basically teaser trailers, they won't release real details because they want people to buy the book that's coming out. But these classes were in UA articles, so you can cross reference the videos with the UA articles to get a sense of it. But no concrete details.

[guachi]

Ugghh....

They should have made superiority dice a main component of the Fighter and not a niche of one subclass. What a failed opportunity. I liked the superiority dice on the Scout. Especially because they gave it extra uses for it that the Battlemaster didn't have.

Every class and its little brother gets spell slots. But God forbid you give superiority dice to anything but the Battlemaster

My desire for this book drops further and further. Of the confirmed subclasses so far the only one I actually like is the Forge Cleric. The rest look like left overs.

[Millstone85]

Some of the links in the OP are now redundant.
The playlist doesn't get updated as soon as the video is released, but it does get updated.

[Saiga]

It is too late for that sort of design, but I wouldn't have minded if the PHB had got a whole chapter on martial maneuvers just like there is one on magic spells, and all martial and/or magic subclasses would have referenced those.

I agree. I'm glad the cavalier had superiority dice removed, because I feel like they weren't handled in an interesting way. But I think it would have worked if at least Fighters had martial maneuvers as a core class concept, so that each subclass using didn't have to have half it's features dedicated to just added superiority dice to the class.

D&D Next playtest actually had 'Martial Dice' and lists of martial maneuvers by class that were much like spell lists - it seemed like a good way to be similar to 4E's "everyone has special abilities" without making martials and spellcasters play the same. I wish they had kept that for all classes, it would have been great. It also probably would have made the original half-caster Bard work better, Martial Dice could have been combined with their Inspiration Dice for more flexibility.

[Easy_Lee]

I agree. I'm glad the cavalier had superiority dice removed, because I feel like they weren't handled in an interesting way. But I think it would have worked if at least Fighters had martial maneuvers as a core class concept, so that each subclass using didn't have to have half it's features dedicated to just added superiority dice to the class.

D&D Next playtest actually had 'Martial Dice' and lists of martial maneuvers by class that were much like spell lists - it seemed like a good way to be similar to 4E's "everyone has special abilities" without making martials and spellcasters play the same. I wish they had kept that for all classes, it would have been great. It also probably would have made the original half-caster Bard work better, Martial Dice could have been combined with their Inspiration Dice for more flexibility.

Consistency of design is definitely not a 5e strong point. My impression is they tried too hard to make it like 3.5e and not like 4e without fully understanding what people did and didn't like about each. Overall, WotC did well with 5e. But it's hard not to get a just a little dismayed thinking about what could have been.

Off topic, but rogues have this even more than fighters do. The base class doesn't add a single consumable feature until level 20.

[Unoriginal]

Eh, the Fighter is good as it is. It seems a lot of people really don't like the Superiority Dice outside of the Battlemaster, for some reasons, though.

[jaappleton]

Eh, the Fighter is good as it is. It seems a lot of people really don't like the Superiority Dice outside of the Battlemaster, for some reasons, though.

To use it as often as they have for previous UAs, it seemed to me like it was becoming a lazy design crutch. That’s my criticism of it. Battlemaster is fine. I just wish the archetypes they tried the Superiority Dice on got something more unique.

Ah, what could’ve been.

[Hrugner]

To use it as often as they have for previous UAs, it seemed to me like it was becoming a lazy design crutch. That’s my criticism of it. Battlemaster is fine. I just wish the archetypes they tried the Superiority Dice on got something more unique.

That's pretty much it. You'd get this archetype full of battlemaster maneuvers and instantly start wondering either "Is this better at its stated goal than just playing a battlemaster" or "why didn't they just give these maneuvers to the battlemaster.

[Saiga]

Eh, the Fighter is good as it is. It seems a lot of people really don't like the Superiority Dice outside of the Battlemaster, for some reasons, though.

I think that's only because of the way it's handled. That it ended up being Battlemaster-exclusive in the PHB makes it awkward to put to other subclasses while still having room for unique mechanics. Superiority dice eats up a lot of subclass 'budget', so to speak.

I do think the Fighter is good as it is, just that having dice as a core feature would work best for subclasses that used it. I'm fine with current Fighter with just Battlemaster, or a hypothetical Fighter with superiority dice as a core and multiple subclasses using that resource.

[Thunderbird]

For some reason I thought the Shadow Sorcerer wouldn't make it. A pleasant surprise.
Now looking forward to the Hexblade.