D&D 5e Subclass Contest Chat Thread

[SleeplessWriter]

Hm. I think I'll probably get a little inventive here and go for ranger. I'm thinking it'll probably be sort of a guide, maybe even helping its allies fight its favored enemy better, too. This'll be fun to try.

[MoleMage]

So will we be keeping just the single chat thread for every contest then?

For the subclass contest, yes. Entries are small enough, and the contest length short enough, that containing them all in one thread seems to have worked thus far. The Base Class Contest will have new chats for each contest.

[Man_Over_Game]

I'm torn between making a Ranger Marshal (teaches by example, can issue commands, and even cast his Self-cast spells on allies), or the Ardent Bard (is effectively a Super-Empath, feels the emotions of others, and others feel his emotions. He uses this to manipulate people into fighting better).

Which would you rather see?

[sengmeng]

I'm torn between making a Ranger Marshal (teaches by example, can issue commands, and even cast his Self-cast spells on allies), or the Ardent Bard (is effectively a Super-Empath, feels the emotions of others, and others feel his emotions. He uses this to manipulate people into fighting better).

Which would you rather see?

Just personally, I feel the bard is already the most leaderlike class, and "bard but more bardier" isn't as interesting to me as tacking strong leadership qualities on any other class. I guess what I mean is that if you go bard, it has to be totally unique and nearly perfect.

[nickl_2000]

I'm torn between making a Ranger Marshal (teaches by example, can issue commands, and even cast his Self-cast spells on allies), or the Ardent Bard (is effectively a Super-Empath, feels the emotions of others, and others feel his emotions. He uses this to manipulate people into fighting better).

Which would you rather see?

I would personally prefer to see a Ranger subclass, but I love a good Ranger subclass that makes the class itself more interested.

[Man_Over_Game]

Just personally, I feel the bard is already the most leaderlike class, and "bard but more bardier" isn't as interesting to me as tacking strong leadership qualities on any other class. I guess what I mean is that if you go bard, it has to be totally unique and nearly perfect.

Those are some great points. The Ardent would focus on a sort of..."passive" style of leadership, where he kind of inspires a...cult, in a way?

Things like
"
Proficiency in medium armor and shields

Bardic Shock: When you are attacked by an enemy, you can spend your Reaction and use one of your Bardic Inspiration die to have an ally within 30 feet of you spend their reaction to attack the creature that attacked you. Your ally adds your Bardic Inspiration die to the damage of their attack.

Feedback Strike: When an ally within 30 feet is attacked by a creature that's adjacent to you, you can split the ally's pain between those nearby by spending your Reaction. Reduce the damage your ally takes by a value up to your Proficiency modifier, and deal that much damage as Psychic damage to both you and the triggering enemy.
"

The idea is directly stolen from the 4e's Ardent, which is a Charisma-based Psionic character that receives and emits emotional auras. The Ardent feels what you feel, but you also feel what the Ardent feels. You and the Ardent always feel the same thing, but it's not always obvious who's influencing who.

I would personally prefer to see a Ranger subclass, but I love a good Ranger subclass that makes the class itself more interested.

I'm not 100% sure how I'd implement it, but I'd probably do things like allowing allies to use an ally's values for checks while in favored terrain, and providing benefits for communicating over long distances. A Marshal would allow players to split up safely while still using everyone's stats for skills and such, as an in-game way of "preparing for the heist".

For example, a Fighter is split off in the party, but the Ranger is a Marshal. When the Fighter encounters an old temple, he uses the Druid's Religion check to determine the information, as a mechanical way of saying the Druid informed the party of what temples would be in the area, and what they'd look like. Or the Fighter uses the Ranger's stealth skill to Hide, because the Ranger informed the Fighter of the best ways of sneaking in the region without the bulky armor getting in the way. Things like that.

In combat, the Marshal would "Mark" an enemy that he missed (or he can choose to miss). The next attack by an ally against the Marked enemy is made with Advantage, and the enemy does not benefit from 1/2 or 3/4 cover while Marked.

[moonfly7]

Those are some great points. The Ardent would focus on a sort of..."passive" style of leadership, where he kind of inspires a...cult, in a way?

Things like
"
Proficiency in medium armor and shields

Bardic Shock: When you are attacked by an enemy, you can spend your Reaction and use one of your Bardic Inspiration die to have an ally within 30 feet of you spend their reaction to attack the creature that attacked you. Your ally adds your Bardic Inspiration die to the damage of their attack.

Feedback Strike: When an ally within 30 feet is attacked by a creature that's adjacent to you, you can split the ally's pain between those nearby by spending your Reaction. Reduce the damage your ally takes by a value up to your Proficiency modifier, and deal that much damage as Psychic damage to both you and the triggering enemy.
"

The idea is directly stolen from the 4e's Ardent, which is a Charisma-based Psionic character that receives and emits emotional auras. The Ardent feels what you feel, but you also feel what the Ardent feels. A sort of medium for emotions, in a way.



I'm not 100% sure how I'd implement it, but I'd probably do things like allowing allies to use an ally's values for checks while in favored terrain, and providing benefits for communicating over long distances. A Marshal would allow players to split up safely while still using everyone's stats for skills and such, as an in-game way of "preparing for the heist".

For example, a Fighter is split off in the party, but the Ranger is a Marshal. When the Fighter encounters an old temple, he uses the Druid's Religion check to determine the information, as a mechanical way of saying the Druid informed the party of what temples would be in the area, and what they'd look like. Or the Fighter uses the Ranger's stealth skill to Hide, because the Ranger informed the Fighter of the best ways of sneaking in the region without the bulky armor getting in the way. Things like that.

In combat, the Marshal would "Mark" an enemy that he missed (or he can choose to miss). The next attack by an ally against the Marked enemy is made with Advantage, and the enemy does not benefit from 1/2 or 3/4 cover while Marked.

Love the Ranger Marshal subclass idea, but I do agree with the above statement about the bard, it feels like the obvious choice. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but if you want to take on a bigger challenge, and possibly gain more votes, I'd go with Ranger. Although your bard idea seems above the norm, so you never know.

As for my entry, I'd love feedback about the Vestige pact for the warlock when I get the actual features up.

[sengmeng]

I thought I'd try to make a wizard into a leader, and I guess that led naturally to a certain monochromatic spellslinger coming to mind.

The School of Grey Tactics is up.

I'm open to more Battle Secret ideas, especially some that may have feats as prerequisites.

[Crisis21]

A somewhat different interpretation of the theme, the College of the Pied Piper is up.

[RickAsWritten]

I took the "Follow Me" name of the contest quite literally and created: Monk - The Way of the Swift End. It is a monk that loves to go first and can inspire and assist its allies when it does. Great leaders don't have to lead from the front, but this one does.

Let me know what you think and if there are any rough spots that need ironed out.

Thanks,

RaW

[nickl_2000]

I have the initial draft up and out for the Cleric Domain of Middle Management. I tried to find the balance of funny/fun and an actual playable subclass.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/shows...36&postcount=4

[moonfly7]

I'm some with the first draft of the vestige warlock pact, please PEACH and give me better names for the last two features.

[MoleMage]

Had a ruling request, sharing the answer with the general chat thread:

Are we allowed to talk about our subclass entries on other parts of the forum?

For example, if I create a subclass that didn't exist before the contest, can I ask for opinions outside of the contest chat?

Ruling: You can talk about parts of it outside the contest, but not share the subclass itself. For example, if you were trying to decide between two ways to model an ability, you could make a thread about that ability and discuss the pros and cons of the ability, but you couldn't share the subclass's other abilities.

EDIT: Addendum: Discussing potential concepts in general terms (should I make an Aura Bard or a Royal Sorcerer?) without specific information is also fine.

[Man_Over_Game]

Love the Ranger Marshal subclass idea, but I do agree with the above statement about the bard, it feels like the obvious choice. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but if you want to take on a bigger challenge, and possibly gain more votes, I'd go with Ranger. Although your bard idea seems above the norm, so you never know.

As for my entry, I'd love feedback about the Vestige pact for the warlock when I get the actual features up.

I'm kinda upset at myself. I just realized that my Ardent Bard has almost identical concepts to the Redemption Paladin (if slightly different mechanics). That is, you could easily reflavor the Redemption Paladin to be an Ardent.

Guess I'm making the Marshal Ranger!

[sengmeng]

Feedback

Vestige Patron
I like the concept; dead gods with a bit of influence left is a great warlock patron. The abilities are unique and powerful (maybe too powerful; I'm pretty bad with balance and they're putting out alarm bells). I don't think automatically that dead god = leader, but I guess they want to be worshipped and obeyed, so it fits well enough. Go over your verbiage though; some places a couple typos made it so I'm just guessing at the intended mechanics.

Middle Management Domain
Overall, it works on a humor, theme, and balance level, but I'd tighten up my wording and also specify a few places where rulings/exploits aren't quite clear, most notably, No You Can't Leave Work Early: does this still work if twice your cleric level is less than the damage received, and does it remove status effects that render someone unconscious? Does it stop death from damage? Unrelated: I'd rather the abilities be named with corporate buzzwords (Synergy! Networking! Solution oriented! Entrepreneurial spirit!) but that's a very minor thing to worry about.

College of the Pied Piper
I like that it does what it promises: Porting the legend of the Pied Piper into 5e D&D. Seems balanced, and useful, but I'm having trouble picturing the campaign where this is someone's character, except as a villain.

Way of the Swift End
There's a lot of wall of text here. I'd try to tighten the wording, maybe even change the mechanics to something simpler just to cut down on the words. An example: "Any ally that acts after you in initiative order and uses at least 5 feet of their walking speed gains a bonus to their speed equal to the bonus movement granted to you in the Unarmored Movement section of the Monk table divided by two (rounded up to the nearest multiple of 5) for the next minute."

Why not: "Any ally after you in initiative order gains half your unarmored speed bonus for the next minute."

I'm not sure if there's some reason that it's overpowered to gain a movement boost when you don't move, but that seems to be all that you're preventing with all those extra qualifiers.

I like the idea and it seems like I'd probably allow it in my game, but right now it's just not fun to read,

[Man_Over_Game]

@Segev: It's probably best if you make any kind of communication that isn't an admission on this thread.

As to whether miniomancy is on the table, I'd certainly think so!

[MoleMage]

@Segev: It's probably best if you make any kind of communication that isn't an admission on this thread.

As to whether miniomancy is on the table, I'd certainly think so!

The rule of thumb is that theme adherence is a soft rule. If you feel like it fits and could explain why, the entry won't be disqualified. That said, if reviewers start complaining about lack of theme adherence, you might want to listen, because they're going to be voters in a few weeks.

In this specific query about minionmancy, I think you're solidly within theme.

[Crisis21]

Hey, if my Pied Piper is in-theme, I see no reason why minionmancy wouldn't be.

College of the Pied Piper
I like that it does what it promises: Porting the legend of the Pied Piper into 5e D&D. Seems balanced, and useful, but I'm having trouble picturing the campaign where this is someone's character, except as a villain.

All too often, the tools of the hero and the tools of the villain are interchangeable. It's all in how you use them.

[theVoidWatches]

Put up my Oath of Royalty properly. The capstone may not be balanced, but it's a capstone. I feel pretty good about the rest right now - on the other hand, it's also 2am right now, so we'll see how I feel in the morning.

[nickl_2000]

Middle Management Domain
Overall, it works on a humor, theme, and balance level, but I'd tighten up my wording and also specify a few places where rulings/exploits aren't quite clear, most notably, No You Can't Leave Work Early: does this still work if twice your cleric level is less than the damage received, and does it remove status effects that render someone unconscious? Does it stop death from damage? Unrelated: I'd rather the abilities be named with corporate buzzwords (Synergy! Networking! Solution oriented! Entrepreneurial spirit!) but that's a very minor thing to worry about.

Thanks for the comments. Since it's a first draft, I have lots of tightening to do on the wording. My working progress is usually to get my ideas down first, and then mess with the word repeatedly to clean it up for brevity and clarity. Also, the reaction is after someone is knocked unconscious, so whether it's from a sleep spell or dropping to 0 HP, or whatever other reason it happens after the damage has been applied.

I do like your idea of buzzwords, it adds to the feeling of the subclass.

[RickAsWritten]

Way of the Swift End
There's a lot of wall of text here. I'd try to tighten the wording, maybe even change the mechanics to something simpler just to cut down on the words. An example: "Any ally that acts after you in initiative order and uses at least 5 feet of their walking speed gains a bonus to their speed equal to the bonus movement granted to you in the Unarmored Movement section of the Monk table divided by two (rounded up to the nearest multiple of 5) for the next minute."

Why not: "Any ally after you in initiative order gains half your unarmored speed bonus for the next minute."

I'm not sure if there's some reason that it's overpowered to gain a movement boost when you don't move, but that seems to be all that you're preventing with all those extra qualifiers.

I like the idea and it seems like I'd probably allow it in my game, but right now it's just not fun to read,

Its a first draft so there will be some revisions and I'll try to parse it down some. That specific clause is in their for a reason though. What I am preventing here is players spamming Held Actions to get the free movement bonus.

Scenario:
Initiative is rolled.
Swift Monk is 3rd in initiative order.
The two players that rolled higher in initiative state that they hold their attack until after the Swift Monk goes.
They now get the speed bonus.

Since you cannot use a Held Action to move, this extra bit of wording prevents abuse. Now is that an egregious abuse of rules? No...but this subclass is all about going first and rushing in to danger, so it helps it stay true to the theme.

[sengmeng]

Its a first draft so there will be some revisions and I'll try to parse it down some. That specific clause is in their for a reason though. What I am preventing here is players spamming Held Actions to get the free movement bonus.

Scenario:
Initiative is rolled.
Swift Monk is 3rd in initiative order.
The two players that rolled higher in initiative state that they hold their attack until after the Swift Monk goes.
They now get the speed bonus.

Since you cannot use a Held Action to move, this extra bit of wording prevents abuse. Now is that an egregious abuse of rules? No...but this subclass is all about going first and rushing in to danger, so it helps it stay true to the theme.

I don't see anything that indicates you can't benefit by holding your action. If that's what you want to avoid, say they have to roll lower than the Swift Monk. Or just say, you cannot benefit from this if you use held action. And look for places where you can eliminate some words; "at least 5 feet of movement" is implied by "moves".

[nickl_2000]

Spoiler: Oath of Royalty

Show

Oath Spells
I'm not sure about a Paladin getting Spirit Guardian, it seems pretty powerful for an already powerful class in my mind. Also, you have 3 spells at level 17.

Channel Divinity - I'm not sure about Inspiring Presence, it is just so close to the college of glamour ability. It does allow AoOs and happens less often, but should gives more temp HP so I think balance is fine. I personally wouldn't mind seeing something a little more differentiated from the bard ability here.
I really like Leader of Men though, this is a pretty powerful ability and could certainly be used all the time. Give that this channel divinity option is there, you could make the other one more of a niche ability if you wanted to.

Aura of Leadership - This is an interesting take on the aura since it isn't directly combat related like more. It seems incredibly powerful at first, but isn't as much as you think on it more. Considering that Paladin's only get 4 skill prof it isn't as overpowered as I initially though. Although, one thing to consider is how to treat skills that the Paladin has expertise in (multiclassing into bard/rogue or feats).

King's Touch - "next time they move out of your Aura of Grandeur" what is the aura of grandeur? I don't see that anywhere. This same reference is in your Divine Right ability.

Divine Right - Something feels off on this one. Maybe it's that nearly all other Paladin level 20 abilities are for X amount of time. I do also worry about breaking bounded accuracy with the +1s you can grant to other players, especially since you can grant temp HP extremely easily out of combat. On the other hand it's a 20th level ability. So god like powerful is almost expected.

Spoiler: The Vestige

Show

I really like the concept of a lost dead god as a warlock patron in return for gaining more followers.
Spell List - Phew that's a powerful, powerful spell list for a Warlock. Between the aura's and Aid being able to be upcast it makes a heck of a support character. Also, I'm not really a fan of another class getting half caster spells before the half-casters do. That is a personal thing more than a balance thing though.

As I say -This one is pretty broken when it comes to bounded accuracy and multiclassing. Can you imagine a Paladin dipping into warlock to get an immediate +3 or +4 to all attack rolls and saving through? Or even crazier, a Level 6 Paladin/Level 1 Vestige Warlck getting 2x Charisma Mod to saving throws? You would rarely ever fail a saving throw. If you want this ability, it really needs to be a capstone and even then it may be to powerful. It certainly shouldn't be a level 1 ability.

As I Do - So do they gain this when if they rest within 30 feet and keep it, or when they are within 30 feet like an aura? Does this apply to you too?
Also, there are some pretty powerful options here. Giving Devil's sight to everyone is great. What about invocations that allow you to cast a spell, what's the casting stat for attack/DC? What about invocations that require a certain pact, can you use those (think improved pact weapon)? What happens with spell casting invocations that let you cast a spell once per long rest and you switch to a different invocation during a short rest?
Overall this is a pretty interesting ability, but it is rife with questions and clarifications that are needed.

Out Of One - 30 feet of casting or 30 feet of you? Also this could pretty dangerous in the amount of damage you are giving to others. We are level 11, at the end of a long rest I cast Hex. Now the PAM fighter who gets 4 attacks in a round is getting an extra 1d6 for each attack. This really, really adds up. Since hex affects one or more creatures it's a legit choice here.

Perfect Harmony - Holy cow, your melee friends are going to love this. Especially since you make an attack roll for each EB ray. This seems broken good, even for a capstone.

Spoiler: College of the Pied Piper

Show

Bonus Proficiencies - I feel like one of these should be in a pipe based instrument. Panflute, flute, etc. You are a piper after all.

Charming Song - Do you select a creature on learning this ability or on using this ability? Also, this is pretty odd from a standards perspective. Most of the time at 3rd level you gain an additional use of your bardic inspiration.
How long can you play the song for?
Why not just make a creature who succeeds on the save immune to it until the finish a long rest? That is more standard.

Spoiler: School of Grey Tactics

Show

Rallying Spell - Is there an end to how long the chance for advantage lasts? Do they choose when to use it or is it the next one? The wording needs to be tightened up as well here. The whole if this then this, blocks are confusing.

Inspiring Spell - So now you get advantage on a d20 roll, 1d6 added to it, and temp hp? Seems like a lot at level 6 to me, seems like it may also cause issues with bounded accuracy.

Greater Inspiration - Compounding more on bounded accuracy. Can they have this and bardic inspiration at the same time?

Chromatic Apotheosis - Are the abilities here only when you are knocked to 0 HP, or all the time?

Spoiler: Battle Secrets

Show

Insightful Defense - You can get to 15 AC? That's mage armor +2 dex. Doesn't seem all that great to me
Martial Student - Wizard aren't proficient with all simple weapons. May want to make this both simple and martial.
Martial Focus - I don't see the need for damaging after rolling initiative. Just let the wizard make a weapon a focus. You aren't wearing shields anyways where isn't a big deal.
Arcane Strike - This eliminate the disadvantage on a ranged spell attack, is that a problem? Also, what happens with a magical weapon? Does it give a bonus to hit?
Ancient Tactics - Give expertise in history. It won't break anything, but makes it more flavorful
Overall, check your names in here. Spell Ambush, Spellsniper, and Arcane Archer are either exact or really close to other abilities in the books. This will lead to confusion.

Spoiler: Monk – Way of the Swift End

Show

Marked for a Swift End - Should say 1 Ki point instead of a ki point. How often does the free dodge trigger? When does this end if the creature doesn't die?

Follow, with Haste - How long does this last? It also may be simpler to just say how much of a speed bonus they get.

Danger at the Fore - Simplify this. "If you are included within the area of effect of a trap, you may use your reaction to ..." Don't worry about being the first or anything like that. It's an added complications.

The End Brought About - So, you could potentially heal 100 HPs for 3 Ki cost? That's pretty darn powerful, but at a large risk I suppose.

I will comment more as I see others added/finished.

[RickAsWritten]

I don't see anything that indicates you can't benefit by holding your action. If that's what you want to avoid, say they have to roll lower than the Swift Monk. Or just say, you cannot benefit from this if you use held action. And look for places where you can eliminate some words; "at least 5 feet of movement" is implied by "moves".

The "uses at least 5 feet of movement" part explicitly limits it. If you hold your action, you cannot move (only attack or cast a spell), and thus won't have used 5 feet of movement.

Thanks for the input though. I'll give 'er another run through this afternoon and try to shorten it up.

[sengmeng]

The "uses at least 5 feet of movement" part explicitly limits it. If you hold your action, you cannot move (only attack or cast a spell), and thus won't have used 5 feet of movement.

Thanks for the input though. I'll give 'er another run through this afternoon and try to shorten it up.

I may have to go over the held action rulea, but doesn't it change your initiative order, and isn't being after the monk the operative statement here? The point is, I was (and apparently am still) confused.

[RickAsWritten]

I may have to go over the held action rulea, but doesn't it change your initiative order, and isn't being after the monk the operative statement here? The point is, I was (and apparently am still) confused.

Mmm, that's a good point. They may act after the monk but their turn is still technically before it because on the next round it reverts to the original initiative order. I'll play around with the wording. Maybe change "acts after" to "takes their turn after."

As for movement with held actions, as far as I know it's not allowed, but a lot of DM's will let it slide.

[Crisis21]

Mmm, that's a good point. They may act after the monk but their turn is still technically before it because on the next round it reverts to the original initiative order. I'll play around with the wording. Maybe change "acts after" to "takes their turn after."

As for movement with held actions, as far as I know it's not allowed, but a lot of DM's will let it slide.

Personal opinion, but I'm not a fan of penalizing characters for 'daring' to roll higher on initiative. If there's a way for a character to hold their turn so the Monk goes first, then I honestly think you should allow them to gain the benefit of the feature by doing so.

[RickAsWritten]

Personal opinion, but I'm not a fan of penalizing characters for 'daring' to roll higher on initiative. If there's a way for a character to hold their turn so the Monk goes first, then I honestly think you should allow them to gain the benefit of the feature by doing so.

I agree. I don't think I should be penalizing anyone at all. I'm gonna do an entire rewrite of that ability.

[moonfly7]

I'm doing a complete overhaul of the Vestige's Hand, adding more flavor and making it its own thing, not just a semi-flavored contest monkey. Please tell me what you think of the changes I've made so far, and please leave suggestions as to any changes I need to make.
Also, just a note, I know that at least the second to last feature is overpowered as crap, I'm working on alternatives.

[nickl_2000]

caught up in the last page with most comments on most of the subclasses so far.