Quote Originally Posted by stoutstien View Post
The issue with this approach is what already happens. You end up with super vague and wishy-washy mechanics to allow them to work on different settings. something something spectral intangible thingy.

It allows them to pump out uncommitted content because it's way easier then trying to come up with something whole cloth. Though subclasses are innately pretty easy to design because they are closed loops.
I'd really rather not open this rusty/expired/stale/mummified can of worms yet again, so I'll just say I disagree with this "issue" completely and move on.

Quote Originally Posted by Witty Username View Post
Alot of things in 5e existed in prior editions but got shoehorned into a particular class.
Metamagic is probably the one that most annoys me, but there are others scattered through the game, for better and for worse.

Battlerager I don't specificly remember but in 3.5 spiked guantlets and armor just existed without needing to be a class feature, and some of this existed as worldbuilding background prior to that.
As I recall bladesinger was contextually a fighter/mage multiclass back in AD&D but my memory is foggy.
Bladesinger was a prestige class in Complete Warrior back in 3.5. Back then, it seemed more aimed at bards (fittingly enough), as that was one of the few classes that could attain all the skill, BAB and spellcasting requirements in time. But it only progressed casting at half the rate, which for a Bard would be even worse as they were already 2/3 casters in that edition.

They retooled it to be a wizard subclass despite the name, and created College of Swords Bard for the Bard instead.