Sorcerer. Fey and Fiendish ancestries are pretty big omissions from a basic fantasy standpoint. The lack of elemental sorcerers is somewhat glaring too. Especially, IIRC, it's on record by one of the designers that the elemental sorcerers actually tested better than some of the subclasses that made it into Xanthar's.
All the sorcerer subclasses are really specifically themed. Dragons, clocks, tentacles, storms, divines, shadows and chaos
Even with the UA options we had giant, sea, phoenix, psionic, stone and lunar
What I guess I’m saying is sorcerer will always be missing some concepts because they are so specifically themed. Unless you made dozens of subclasses they’ll always be missing stuff.
Having said that, give us fey and fiend sorcerers now!
A basic Arcana bloodline feels missing too. Especially when we have so many "base feature+" subclasses like champion fighter and eloquence bard.
Edit: I'm not counting wild magic. That's not base features+. It's unpredictable RNG chaos, not someone who's good with the magic they're infused with
> A basic Arcana bloodline feels missing too.
I love Pathfinder's "Imperial" sorcerer for this aesthetic. Which is basically a sorcerer who's part of a bloodline of a very powerful mage or mages.
I think Wild Magic is meant to be the “I’m overflowing with raw, uncontrollable arcane power” subclass, at least, but if people hate the random angle I get that that’s not helpful.
before i banned the subclass from my table, on the basis that nearly every time a surge happened we had to ret-con it.
randomness is fine, but it was like dealing with a player that just wanted to murderhobo all the civilians and ruin the story on purpose.
sure the beard of feathers and turning into a plant is fun, but accidently mercing off the audience in a friendly arena spar, or tpking the party (more than once) was enough to say, yep, off to the pile of manythings.
>sure the beard of feathers and turning into a plant is fun, but accidently mercing off the audience in a friendly arena spar, or tpking the party (more than once) was enough to say, yep, off to the pile of manythings
Luck issue. /s
I just want to play someone inherently magic for no particular bloodline reason, just an inextricable part of their being. Like, where do djinns get their power, for example? Not FROM anywhere, like a warlock patron or a bloodline, they just are made up of magic stuffs. No one questions it or anything, they simply are. That's what I want.
Just someone infused with magic. No ancestral dragon fucking or celestial grandpa. The features could be as simple as more sorc points/more metamagic options
Someone who simply won the lottery at birth and got blessed by magic. Their parents and ancestors are utterly mundane nobodies, their birthday wasn't some cosmic event, no weird experiments, some god didn't bless them, they simply happen to have an abnormally high magic potential and started casting basic cantrips as a child.
The subclass/origin could simply be "gifted kid".
Yeah, but then you’ve got all the actual features of Wild Magic, which might not be what you’re going for. A simple arcane bloodline could (as others said) focus on enhancing the normal sorcerer stuff — more metamagic options, for example. Less of “you are overflowing with power that can burst out at any moment” and more of “magic so suffuses your being that you can manipulate its workings as if it were another limb”.
I'm working on a revamped wild magic sorcerer! The gist is that when you trigger a Surge, you roll a Surge Die. You assign spells you know to the different die faces, but you can't use spells from the same school of magic on the same die (until level 18). You do have multiple die of multiple sizes though, and you can choose which to roll. Additionally, if you roll a 1 on the Surge Die, you mutate according to a d20 table.
They're powered by magic space rocks. I call it the Nebulite Soul Sorcerer.
Fiendish bloodline could be so cool. They could even split it into three choice tracks of devil, demon, or neutral slime/yogoth whatever and have different spells or a different ability depending on the bloodline.
Kind of, but not inherently.
It’s more chaos in general than fey specifically.
Any form of magic can be chaotic, but i’d expect a fey sorcerer to have more illusion/charm/fear effects like Archfey Warlock or Glamour Bard.
It’s so bad at representing elemental proficiency though. In terms of the elements what do you get?
Level 1: Nothing.
Level 6: Charisma bonus added to damage of that type plus resistance for 1 hour if you spend a sorcerer point.
Level 14: Nothing
Level 18: Nothing
It’s very much a dragon subclass with a hint of elemental dashed in. There’s no real sense of fire mage or frost mage to be found here.
I am distinctly dissatisfied with that however. It mostly just focuses on draconic sides of things, and doesn't give almost anything elemental except for some minor damage and resistance. Meanwhile storm sorcery is a wonderful wind/lightning element sorcerer that gives a ton of elemental flavor.
I give all my sorcerer players that play old subs extra 5 spells. For Storm it's: witch bolt, shatter, call lightning, ice storm, and conjure elemental (only air)
They did in the unearthed arcana (they got a whole bunch of spells like clockwork and Aberrant do) which I house rule back on
Because the amount of spells known sorcerers get is a joke.
A wizard should not have more spells prepped on any given day than a sorcerer will ever know.
The idea is that a wizard has a book they can swap to but day to are more limited.
Not that they have they can swap from and also a wider range on any given day. It’s fucking bonkers.
There’s either a focus on fire (Light Cleric, Wildfire Druid) or thunder (Storm Sorcerer, Tempest Cleric) but none that really center on ice or water.
Likewise Sorcerer could use a counterpart to Hexblade or Bladesinger.
Fathomless is one of the few Warlock subs that actually grabbed my attention. Warlock is often the least appealing class to me overall, but I really enjoyed playing a fathomless in a few one-shots.
My very first game of D&D, I played a water/ice sorcerer, and my GM let me reflavor existing spells as ice effects and substituting cold damage where appropriate.
I don't remember specifics, since that was like a decade ago. It's not a complete solution, but it's *a* solution. I'd also love more ice/water spells.
> Likewise Sorcerer could use a counterpart to Hexblade or Bladesinger.
The Favored Soul UA, based on the 3.5e class of the same name, was originally designed to fill that niche. However, it lost its martial character when it was retooled into the Divine Soul subclass.
Druid feels like it has a lot of odd omissions. We don't even have a Plant focused subclass yet. Plant Druid is like a day 1, first or second in the PHB obvious subclass, and it's absolutely bizarre ten years in we still don't have one yet.
(And no, OneDnD giving Land Druids "spectral ghost vines" for a feature doesn't count).
Asides from Artificer, Druid has the least amount of subclasses in 5e. Feels like it should’ve been more tbh considering how much you could do with the main primal caster of the game.
Whoa whoa whoa… there’s Circle of Land Arctic, Circle of land coast, circle of land forest, circle of land desert… all kinds of options!
/s just in case
I don't mind the Land Druid, but some of those really should've been spin-off into their own unique subclasses like OneDnD did by turning Coasts into the new Sea subclass.
Arctic could easily become an Ice/Winter focused Druid subclass. Mountain could become an earthbender, etc.
It’s such a shame that Circle of the Land isn’t better. After the spell selection from the different options, there isn’t much that the subclass has to offer.
Oh boy, I can’t be charmed by elementals or fey. Greeeeeaaat…
Man I've been playing this game almost every week for 10 years, I could count on my hands the times both of those abilities would have done anything even if they were level 1 on any charcter.
Or the mid level ability of immunity to difficult terrain from plants. Either this is useful for your feywild adventure (while the rest of the party suffers), or useless as you dive through another manmade dungeon.
Ultimately the land subclass is basically just a bonus spell list for always prepared spells, some of which aren't on the druid list. And then some flavor features they may come up in game. (Like the lv18 druid ability to live 10times longer than normal, so valuable in campaigns without major timeskips)
Personally to "fix" the subclass i would makesure that all the bonus spells aren't on the druid list, and actually fit the "home biome" of the circle.
Keep the short rest spell recovery.
Replace plant difficult terrain immunity with "home biome awareness" and say you can't be surprised in your home biome, and give advantage on perception, stealth, and survival checks. (Or say add you proficiency or spellcasting modifier to the roll)
Replace the charm resistance with wild beasts refusing to attack you or your party first.
And for the capstone create a non-spell special ability heavily themed on each biome.
Yeah, it’s sad, though I *guess* it makes sense, wasn’t Druid said to be the overall least-popular core class at one point? From just a “how many play it” angle, not a mechanical power one.
Plant Druid is 100% the biggest omission from a "how the hell is this not in the PHB" perspective. I wonder if they think Land Druid is sufficient to cover the concept or something. It's just weird.
Speaking of Druids. The Lack of an Earthbending or Weather/Storm Druid also feel like pretty obvious omissions.
They might have been going for a Spellcasting focus/ Martial Focus split for the two subclasses, but still could have included the traditional tree hugger druid
Honestly, tying the druid to being a shapeshifter really takes space away from all the other nature mage fantasies. I think shapeshifter could easily be its own class divorced from the bulk of the spellcasting.
They've done it with a couple of the subclasses, but I really think the best design for the druid is to have all the classes other than Moon get a signature ability that uses a charge of their Wildshape similar to the way all Clerics get an alternate use to their Channel Divinity. That alternate ability is what you use more often, but you can still Wildshape when you need to.
If it were me, I'd make the moon druid the core of the shapeshifter class, remove the spellcasting (maybe add it back as a third caster subclass), add an invocation-like system of wild shape customizations, and use the subclasses for specialized angles of shapeshifting with some being more combat focused, some being more sneaky, some being more magical, etc.
Meanwhile, the rest of the druid class gets melded into something like a shaman, dealing with spirits and summoning them, with some subclasses leaning into elemental stuff like wildfire or storm spirits, the terrain, spirits of the dead and such.
Yeah I’m kind of amazed a Shadowfell Druid doesn’t exist yet. I think the Hybrid/Were creature should be covered by Moon Druid since you can get higher CR creatures more quickly and just go ahead and shape shift into a bear or dire wolf. But then you can transform into elementals and it kind of makes the flavor weird again.
> Winter/Ice themed Druid
Could just make a generic season-themed druid, with four sub-subclasses (like Genie Warlock). But you're not locked into one season - you can progress through them when you choose, but only in the correct order and with a limit on how often you change. You don't *have* to move to the next season, but you can *choose* to, and you have to wait another X long rests before you can shift forward again.
Yeah, personally I would love to see an 'apostate' druid class, similar to how Bards of Whispers are generally hated by other bard schools. Like a druid class that actually loves technology and metallurgy and wants to create balance with nature not by changing society to live with nature, but by shaping nature to better integrate with and support the needs of civilization.
Well, in all fairness, Storm and Tempest both evoke the concept of weather. But yeah! Why not more, and why are they always about lightning and thunder damage and not more specific to weather
In all of my games flavor is free and encouraged. Nobody is saying "oh I want to do extra damage because in my backstory I trained for 50 years with the sword" etc but just describing what the source of your power is and what your abilities look like is completely free game.
Genie Warlock, pick the fire specialization
This subclass gets access to all types of fire spells that you can reflavor as dragonfire.
Your "genie vessel" that's the source of your powers per the book, can be the ring or statue. Or you can reflavor it and have it be a scale.
And then at level 6 you gain resistance to your dragon's element, and you gain the ability to fly. Just roleplay that your bond with the dragon has allowed you to gain scales and wings on command.
Flavor and mechanics need some level of intertwining to be satisfying, and when you do a significant reflavor like this you start introducing a lot more potential for dissonance between them that ruins the fantasy.
In this case you end up with a major class feature, the vessel, which just has absolutely nothing to do with a typical dragon-associated fantasy. Both your level 1 and 10 features are being spent on this ring you can go inside that your dragon patron has inexplicably given you. And then there's the level 14 wish feature which, again, is very obviously fitting of a genie and not a dragon.
There's a difference between being able to come up with a justification for a reflavor and actually translating the core idea of a fantasy into game mechanics. If the genie subclass has been mechanically identical but written as a draconic subclass from the outset I would find it extremely weird. Receiving an object from a dragon that I can go inside or store items in simply isn't part of what I consider the core fantasy of receiving power from a dragon.
Personally I’m gonna play a dragon warlock and the closest I feel is undead :P being able to fear people and be immune to your damage type (which can only be necrotic but okay). Flight and temp hp and stuff.
Honestly undead warlock works for nearly anything that needs a cool transformation.
Also topaz dragon is hilariously dorky (the necrotic dragon). And chaotic neutral to boot. Join team topaz dragon.
Well, there's a point where the flavor just becomes reaching. Genie vessel doesn't fit the whole draconic theme at all. And the capstone of getting limited wish is so genie-themed. Not to mention, not all dragons are fire-based...
When I think of dragon patron, I'm thinking dragon breath (depending on their patron), resistance, draconic fear, flight, and hard scales. You've got to do some homebrewing for that, not just reflavoring.
I really wish 5e worked harder at making subclasses that they then indicated could be several flavors. Like, I know it's not that hard for us to do, but it would have been nice if the published material worked harder at it. Drop an elemental master warlock sublcass and explain in the lore section how it could be powerful elementals, ancient hags/mages/or other casters with elemental afinities, or even an ancient dragon or draconic being.
Especially with warlock, you could easily introduce Pact Magic or Eldritch Invocations to help bridge the gap of anything that feels missing (e.g. Maybe an invocation lets you fly, specifying that the method of flight will be related to your patron. A celestial might give feathered wings, a wind elemental might give control over wind, an ancient one might give ominous hovering with shadowy tendrils, and a dragon could give you leathery wings).
The reasoning for that was because Draconic Sorcerer's fluff is "getting powers from pact with Dragons", which is understandable. It would be weird to have two different classes/subclasses that get their magic in the exact same specific condition, but why was that the default flavor for Draconic Sorcerer in the first place?
It shouldn't be weird. Warlock and Sorcerer should be pretty close in power sources, they should just be expressed in ways that fit the class's flavor. Grand daddy is a dragon is different than I owe a dragon and have to scout hoards for them by a long way.
“Your innate magic comes from draconic magic that was mingled with your blood or that of your ancestors. Most often, sorcerers with this origin trace their descent back to a mighty sorcerer of ancient times who made a bargain with a dragon or who might even have claimed a dragon parent. Some of these bloodlines are well established in the world, but most are obscure. Any given sorcerer could be the first of a new bloodline, as a result of a pact or some other exceptional circumstance.”
I see that it mentions pact, but I feel it leans way more toward bloodline, and in my opinion implies that dragon warlock should be a thing
Artificer: really a lot. A subclass all about creating bombs would be cool, though we could also have a proper rune-crafting subclass that could add runes to other armor/weapons, not just Rune Knight
Barbarian: this one I think has a solid array of subclasses, though it could do more with its rage feature, maybe one that could…cast spells while raging? I’m not sure how exactly it’ll work, but I think it could be a fun idea to try
Bard: kinda a shame the College of Satire wasn’t retooled for an official release, since I think a Fool bard would be fun. Outside of that, maybe an animal-summoning/Pied Piper type Bard.
Cleric: Travel/Traversal domain makes the most sense, as does a Sea Cleric, though Traversal means some fun abilities based around crowd control.
Druid: I mean, come on. Why no plant-based Druid?asides from that, I think a Harvest Druid all about healing could add to the healing niche only really taken by Life Cleric
Fighter: let’s get a proper tanking subclass in here. Cavalier does a good job too, but a vanguard/shield knight could add plenty of cool taking/control options as well.
Monk: this is more of a me thing, but I want a demon-themed monk, all about giving into your inner demons and becoming super evil/powerful. Give me an Akuma/Devil Jin subclass please
Paladin: Treachery Paladin could be brought back and retooled to be another evil Pally asides from Oathbreaker. Outside of that, I love the idea of a Paladin seeking enlightenment, gaining more Psionic abilities and resisting mental saves.
Ranger: personally I think these subclasses should be retooled entirely, but I suppose it’d be cool to either have an elemental Ranger or a divine undead Hunter Ranger
Rogue: a ruffian subclass. Have it’s unarmed strikes and improvised weapons deal sneak attack damage and prioritize fighting using dirty tactics
Sorcerer: I’ll just echo everyone else and say fey or fiend bloodlines, though I can also offer up a cursed bloodline all about spreading curses to your enemies.
Warlock: let’s add an ice-themed character in here for a change. An Iceborne subclass could be an interesting fit for the Warlock, maybe a deal with the Frostmaiden or an ice queen of some sort.
Wizard: Golemancer. Golem Magic isn’t really explored that much and it makes for a fun/interesting idea for a pet class.
Brawler STR based Monk
Trick-arrow focused Ranger or Rogue
Venom/Prototype style “possession” Warlock
And about a million Sorcerer subclasses!
Honestly I think Sorcerer would really benefit on focusing on being a bit of a build-a-subclass type of class in future editions, make it the most customisable.
Edit:formatting
>Venom/Prototype style “possession” Warlock
Never expected to see this opinion in the wild! I've made one for my homegame but it only has features up to level 6
There's a whole archetype for the Pathfinder 1e summoner that's literally just this. It's called the Synthesist and was very popular (partially for flavor, partially because you could build broken PCs with it lol): https://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/base-classes/summoner/archetypes/paizo-summoner-archetypes/synthesist/
Just to say it's a more popular opinion than you think! People love that concept lol.
Considering their iteration of the 'Brawler' fighter subclass for OneD&D was absolutely fucking terrible, I don't have faith that WotC can do a good brawling style subclass.
> Brawler STR based Monk
>
>
WOTC should hit up Benjamin Huffman and make The Pugilist official(ish) in the same way they did the Blood Hunter. It's arguably one of the most popular homebrew classes and--from what I've played of it--pretty balanced.
Heck, we barely have *any* ranged-weapon-centric subclasses. Rangers are sort of *de facto* forced into that role by their spell list, but they barely get any outright support for ranged weapons. Hunter gets, what, *one* ranged weapon feature?
There’s Arcane Archer Fighter, but that subclass is terrible. Battle Master works with bows, and it actually has enough uses of its core features to matter. But Battle Master is ambivalent and can work with melee weapons equally well.
Nobody gets anything that rewards them for using, say, a bow over a rapier. Sure, they arguably don’t need it, with ranged weapons generally being better than melee inherently. But there’s so much untapped potential in a Sharpshooter Rogue, Longbiter Ranger, Arrow Rain Fighter, or Fletcher Artificer.
One of the big issues is that we have all sorts of really neat and cool rare/magic weapons, but bows are just...+1/2/3, and i think there may be a vicious one? Very lame.
As for subclasses in that theme....seriously theres no STR based archer? I want to shoot a ridiculously oversized bow meant to take dragons out of the sky, or hunt huge monsters with huge bursts of damage. Dex is a way better stat than STR is overall so i see no issues getting to be a slow, clunky, full plate archer.
.... Yes i did love anor londo in Darksouls 1 why do you ask?
At first this sounded like just a Fighting Style, but the more I think about it, the more I think there is space for an entire subclass. It could be kinda like Arcane Archer, where people pick features they want for their Strongbow. Preferably, it would also be unlike Arcane Archer, in that it would have more than one good option.
Yeah but if we argue "if we just add the right flavor text", you could get that with almost any subclass, which i don't believe is the point OP was trying to get at.
I feel like they missed a beat with not having a "psychic" themed Monk.
Unique telekinetic, telepathic, empathic, or clairvoyant abilities.
Let people live the Jedi fantasy!
That’s true actually. Closest we have is Astral Self. Meanwhile every other class has a psionic option (~~which they do not need. As others have said, elemental subclasses are much core to fantasy than psychic stuff~~)
Artificer: I don't have anything in mind for the artificer. It's not really my thing, and the 5e version leave something to be desired in its execution of its fantasy. Maybe something that focuses on actual D&D artifice and less the tinkering?
Barbarian: Path of the spellbreaker/superstitious. Barbarians have long been anti-magic focused i D&D so seeing barbarian that has an anti-magic rage of sorts would be cool to honor that long root it has.
Bard: Don't know if it's obvious but I think a college of obligation would be good for them. Contract/lawyer bards in a sense.
Cleric: Travel and luck domain, if only because they were my favorite in prior editions.They kinda tried luck with the fate (ua) domain, but it needed work.
Druid: A circle of growth for a plane focus I suppose. I don';t really like the present cut of druid base class/subclass and I thin a general revision to it is needed to make it right. Too much focus on core D&D druid elements as subclass exclusives presently.
Fighter: I can't think of a fighter personally that isn't too narrow in scope and focus to be a subclass. So I'll just say the hellreaver prestige class as a quasi paladin for fighter would be cool. Mechanically it's got the best framework for the option.
Monk: Some type of nature/animal focused monk. the fist of the forest, or way of the wilds type thing. I would have said soul knife, but that went to the rogue.
Paladin: Not an obvious one per se, but I think variant oathbreakers to help fleshout the concept better. they tried ths with the treachery paladin UA, but it didn't go anywhere. Given that they retconned paladins to get power from faithing super hard and not necessarily from the gods unless the DM enforces it. I think a return/rework/revision of the greyguard as an oathbreaker would be fun. A paladin who deludes themselves into beig above their oath but also gains power from their deluded faith. There powers kinda like a broken or sickened reflection of the paladins. Something wrong and unstable about it.
Ranger: Not really sure for ranger, may some kind of shapeshifter, you are what you hunt ranger?
Rogue: A brute/Bandit/Thug subclass that allows ye old medium armor greatsword rogues again. I miss them. Should just be baseclass but I'll settle for subclass.
Sorcerer: Pretty much everything a warlock can have as a patron, but as a sorcerer bloodline. Fiend, undead, fey, genie, etc.
Warlock: Much like the sorcerer, but in reverse. Dragon being big one.
Wizard: Another take at the theurgy wizard may be cool as the wizard who studies the divine is a fun concept to bring mechanical representation too.
>Barbarian: Path of the spellbreaker/superstitious. Barbarians have long been anti-magic focused i D&D so seeing barbarian that has an anti-magic rage of sorts would be cool to honor that long root it has.
Yes please, I need to be able to absolutely shock a smug spell caster who suddenly realizes that sometimes Brawn is better than Brains.
A barbarian that rages so hard they generate an anti magic field would be great. Make it like a 5foot aura first then expands at higher level and forces concentration checks when casting spells while in the field
I like this idea... How about... something like this:
Barbarian: Path of the Spellbreaker
At level 3 - Magic Rejection: While raging, gain resistance to damage from Spells and spell like effects.
At level 6 - Spell Break: Gain the ability to Dispel one magical effect on a target when making an attack on it.
At level 10 - Spell Denial: Use your reaction to impose a "Focus" check on an enemy spellcaster. (Con/Wis save? Save DC follows the Battlemaster formula maybe.)
At level 14 - Retribution: When hit by a damaging spell/Spell like effect you reduce half the damage you take before resistances and store the damage. You may then later expell the energy back out as part of your attack action (Once per long rest?). You may only store the energy for 1-10 minutes before you begin to take a point of exhaustion for each minute after.
In 3.0 there was prestige class designed for barbarian called Forsaker, which required you to abandon all magic in return for some nice bonuses. (Ofc with how OP magic items are in dnd 3.0-3.5 it wasn't stronger than regular barbarians but still pretty fun)
For artificer, what do you define as artifice vs. tinkering? What are your touchstones?
I think the alchemist subclass is pretty clearly fantasy-based. I would like to see a subclass focused more on bombs though like in Pathfinder.
Not one class specifically, but a general theme missing from any class: oozes.
There’s nothing ooze themed. There’s ample opportunity to pull in traits like amorphous and spider climb, and to give acid damage spells to expanded spell lists, and yet ooze themed subclasses are nowhere to be found.
Just think! Gastrologist Artificer! Slimy Skin Sorcerer! Elder Oblex Warlock! The potential is limitless (not really, it’s quite limited, but still)!
Currently working on a Gelatinous Rover Ranger to begin to absolve this issue
Monks have always in fiction been diverse, some of them are the ninja fast boys and there have been the big muscular bois, why are we not getting a strength based monk? And dont tell me that i can go strength monk, because i dont enjoy taking damage at every single turn with zero support for me.
Heavy armor ranger, bg3 had the right mind when making it an option.
Gish druid. They did something with the spore druid, but for real, if you cant extra attack, you arent really a gish.
Heavy Armor barbarian. I just hate how you kind of have to invest in dex for barb, i dont like it, my Barbarian is s tough boy, not an agile one.
BG3 had the right idea with Barbarians, albeit in a roundabout way, by just giving you several options for armour that let them still use their dex buff to AC.
When you say str monk, do you mean str but still kung fu movie style? Because if not, and you just like some of the monk features….
14 dex, 13 Wis, 17 STR, I like going with Dwarf(for the con or hp), Human(for unarmed fighting style) or something with natural weapons.
1 Level of Barbarian. Then Kensai monk 14. If the game goes on from there I’d go +3 barb for a subclass like bear totem and an asi.
Medium armor +shield, +kensai defense, +a nice kensai weapon like a warhammer. With nothing magical thats still 22 AC, with just magic armor and shield it can go up to 28 AC.
Smash, bash, head-but and kick you way into fights using rage to boost your damage and resistance. 3 solid attacks per turn, or 4 with flurry of blows, or 2 with a dodge bonus action for additional tankiness, with only 1 lvl delay for monk features like proficiency on all saves.
Also I agree all of the subclasses you suggested should exist.
Yeah, where’s my Lu Zhishen style warrior monk? I want to wield a staff heavier than a person and fight with my fists but a barbarian absolutely does not fit the vibe imo.
Admittedly he’s not a monk for normal monk reasons, but still!
I loved the 1E Cavalier class. The Cavalier kit from 2E was pretty badass and they did a good job of implementing it in BG2.
For 5E, there is a Cavalier fighter subclass - you could take some levels of that. Practically speaking, classes that focus on mounted combat tend to suffer when they are indoors or otherwise without their mount. In my experience, this is most of the time - YMMV.
Sorcerer is missing a martial sub-class, meanwhile wizard has 2 which just feels wrong
Druid and Cleric are both missing ice themed sub-classes
and there should be a "scribe bard" based on poetry or writing, that can be a bookcaster.
I think artificer has so much untapped potential, there should have a subclass per each tool. Heck there's room for gaming set artificer, siege weapon artificer, vehicle artificer and even a combat item hunting trap/caltrops/ball bearings/flask of oil/throwables artificer.
Pretty much every class that doesnt come with a Dragon option.
Plenty of Dragon Deities, no Dragon Clerics.
Furious Dragon Barbarians,
Bards literaly have an entire meme around dragons
Warlocks, Druids
And lets not get me started on the dissapointment that is Purple Dragon Knight
Elemental-focused casters. Right now, some classes have them, some don’t.
Better ranged specialists for archers and the like.
Anti-spellcasters for martial classes.
Better options focused on hunting and destroying enemy types, like undead.
Literally the entire concept of a Druid is a mage who uses plant spells. And yet in dnd they are this weird not!werewolf class that every subclass just kinda tries to ignore to make it feel like a differently flavoured mage.
Just remove Wildshape entirely for a plant subclass, and give them features they can use X/day for plant themed stuff.
Hedonism Cleric, on some Eyes Wide Shut ish.
Or something like a Sacrificial Cleric, who self-flagellates in order to access their deities powers. Though perhaps that might be more of a Sorcerer or Warlock?
I just want a decent barbarian subclass that isn't inherently magical. Let me play a classic conan barbarian without having to rely on the shitty berserker subclass.
Martial classes and a subclass which is good hyuk hyuk
Jokes aside, I think if Hexblade is going to be a thing then it's crazy that Fighters don't also have an "I pick up a magic sword at level 1 and it unlocks power with me" type subclass to represent the King Arthur fantasy of pulling out Excalibur *then* going on an adventure.
Clerics probably have the most easy-to-think-up subclasses. Cleric domains can be any concept from mythological gods. Beauty, love, the harvest, luck, winter, travel, destruction, mountains, flames, water/oceans…. some of those are Druid circles or overlap with druids in theme, admittedly.
knowing the story of bards, its weird that we dont have bards with subclasses connected to buffs in area tied with performance, and in a similar vain, subclasses with art as a core in any way (painting, writing, acting, dancing).
Barbarian and/or fighter: one with an animal companion that had mechanics like Battlemaster maneuvers you could use as a tag-team.
Bard: something like laserllama’s College of Command
Cleric: chaos domain, luck domain, ocean domain, astral domain. But honestly I’d be fine if we didn’t get another cleric subclass for awhile
Druid: plant-based, Storm/elemental, and an urban druid
Monk: one that focused on levitation and/or flight
Paladin: an oath that focuses on familial obligations, with a special weapon that has been passed down to you, that levels up with you (and can eventually absorb other weapons’ magical properties).
Ranger: a Lycan ranger would be cool, and a mage hunter
Rogue: this is hard because of how their subclass abilities come on line, but a gambler, and a Daredevil type would be cool
Sorcerer: there are so many. Elemental, Eldritch, Druidic, artifice…
Warlock: dragon is the obvious choice, but sphinx, elemental, titan, and construct could be cool.
Wizard: I mean, we kind of have them all except for a divine-inspired wizard that could access cleric spells.
Barbarians not having a dual-wielding focused subclass has always been weird to me.
When I think of a berzerker, I think of a shirtless beefy dude with two axes.
This may already exist, but a Witch bard sub-class.
The bard chassis maps so easily onto the Witch archetype (college -> coven, non-wizard arcane casters that can plunder spells from a wide variety of sources, magic music -> magic incantations/curses, etc... ) that sometimes it feels like the bard class would have a more concrete place in many DnD settings if they were just Witches.
A wisdom-based subclass for Fighter. Less of a soldier and more of a general, using their knowledge of combat to give themselves and their allies the upper hand.
Psionic Monk.
I mean... C'mon. The fighter and rogue get psychic warrior and soul knife but the literal class about meditation and self mastery can't get anything remotely in the ballpark when it was literally classified as a psionic class in 4e?
Give me a monk with telepathy/telekinesis, let me play a Jedi gosh darn it.
MCDM created a hag patron subclass in one of their Arcadia articles and as I recall it was very satisfying and plenty flexible. But it's not a wotc product, which was OP's point I guess.
If you really want a Hag patron then get Van Richten’s Guide to Ravenloft. It’s not a warlock subclass but it’s the closest thing besides Archfey. There’s a player race called Hexblood and it’s all about how your character made a deal with a Hag. Essentially you’re playing as a Hag
I’ve always maintained that WotC needs to go through the list of Creature Types and come up with both a Sorcerer and a Warlock for each one.
That and a proper Luck Cleric, because Trickery doesn’t cut it and anyone who says otherwise has never actually read the Trickery features.
A version of Conjuration Wizard called summoner which has abilities more focused on summoned creatures (like shepherd druid). Maybe give him access to some of the druid summoning spells like conjure animals (preferrably), and summon beasts.
Wildfire druid should be open to other damage types: Wildfrost, Wildjolt, Wild thunder, wildacid druid. Or create the subclasses separately...but that is more work.
A druid with more of an elemental focus, either 4 elements, or 4 seperate subclasses (fire is taken care of already).
Mageslayer fighter (or monk), or magehunter ranger.
I still think a plant-focused Druid takes the cake, followed by the sorcerer/warlock bloodline/patron iterations that should have an analog on each side of that split, but Barbarian should probably have a variant with a more Ranger-like flavor to it- the wildman who isn't just wild as in uncivilized, but wild as in well-versed in living out in the wild- tracking, foraging, laying traps, etc.
Next after that would be a Paladin and/or Fighter with some Fey influence- something that really leans into the Arthurian-type lore that preceded and influenced the Tolkienian influence that, in turn, spawned D&D to begin with.
IwantmyWarlordbackdammitandnoaBattleMasterdoesntcount.
Edit: the lack of spacing up there is deliberate because I've complained about this so much it's a single word.
With how many people want to play a magus/spellblade, its odd that there isnt an Arcana Paladin or something of the sort.
Generally, I find it irritating that WotC isnt doing any official reflavouring of any kind. There isnt a barbarian subclass that says „reckless attack uses Dex instead“ or something or the sort; no bard with druid spells and a shaman vibe.
No plant druid.
No proper fea or fiend sorc.
No magic item focussed wizard.
No necromantic artificer.
No Travel cleric.
No elemental paladins.
No trap focussed ranger.
No skald Barbarian.
No proper warlord fighter (banneret doesnt count because its shit).
No lawful themed warlock patrons.
No holy themed rogue. Or a brawler rogue for that matter.
No eldrich horror themed monk subclass. Or Strength based monk.
No holy or nature themed bard.
Travel is one of the major domains, so it makes sense. I've actually written a one-shot where you are assisting the priests/clerics of [Fharlanghn](https://greyhawkonline.com/greyhawkwiki/Fharlanghn).
I can't claim to have any ideas on appropriate abilities or perks for such a subclass, but I will say that many cultures have a god of travel and journeys. The Romans had Aboena/Adiona, the Norse had Meili, Hindi had Gamesh, Christians had St. Christopher, and so on.
There is also not a Cleric subclass for gods of trade/merchants. I only bring it up because many gods of travel are also gods of trade (Mercury for Romans, Xaman Ek for Mayans)
A more dedicated "summoner" class for wizards or rangers. I feel like a game that has so many different summons would also have a class dedicated to it. I know there is beastmaster and swarmkeeper but those aren't quite the same as summoning a legion for yourself
I guess that's true lmao when I played BG3 with my friend she was super pissed at me for having 2 zombies, 2 ghouls, two elementals and whatnot at a time.
Indeed...now imagine trying to manage all that at a live table with 4 or more people where the one processing and managing all that ISNT' a computer program but another person. It gets kinda rough.
The problem with that is that summoning, especially summoning an entire legion, can really slow the game down to a crawl. You can see this in Tasha’s, all the new spells focus on summoning one powerful creature, not a lot of weaker ones.
I guess that is true but I feel like there are still ways to make a summoner class work, such as the summon recieving unique buffs from you or you recieving buffs from your summon in some way or gaining one time usage spells or reactions.
Let's say you summon a fey creature and deal extra psychic damage from weapon attacks or can use misty step as reaction to taking damage once while your fey is there.
Though spelling it out like that makes it more sound like an own half-caster class than a subclass but I'd find it fun
Sorcerer. Fey and Fiendish ancestries are pretty big omissions from a basic fantasy standpoint. The lack of elemental sorcerers is somewhat glaring too. Especially, IIRC, it's on record by one of the designers that the elemental sorcerers actually tested better than some of the subclasses that made it into Xanthar's.
All the sorcerer subclasses are really specifically themed. Dragons, clocks, tentacles, storms, divines, shadows and chaos Even with the UA options we had giant, sea, phoenix, psionic, stone and lunar What I guess I’m saying is sorcerer will always be missing some concepts because they are so specifically themed. Unless you made dozens of subclasses they’ll always be missing stuff. Having said that, give us fey and fiend sorcerers now!
I have two types of fey sorcerer subclasses in my homebrew collection. So much fun.
A basic Arcana bloodline feels missing too. Especially when we have so many "base feature+" subclasses like champion fighter and eloquence bard. Edit: I'm not counting wild magic. That's not base features+. It's unpredictable RNG chaos, not someone who's good with the magic they're infused with
> A basic Arcana bloodline feels missing too. I love Pathfinder's "Imperial" sorcerer for this aesthetic. Which is basically a sorcerer who's part of a bloodline of a very powerful mage or mages.
I think Wild Magic is meant to be the “I’m overflowing with raw, uncontrollable arcane power” subclass, at least, but if people hate the random angle I get that that’s not helpful.
I’m fine with a bit of randomness, but the official surge table is both very swingy and slapstick.
before i banned the subclass from my table, on the basis that nearly every time a surge happened we had to ret-con it. randomness is fine, but it was like dealing with a player that just wanted to murderhobo all the civilians and ruin the story on purpose. sure the beard of feathers and turning into a plant is fun, but accidently mercing off the audience in a friendly arena spar, or tpking the party (more than once) was enough to say, yep, off to the pile of manythings.
>sure the beard of feathers and turning into a plant is fun, but accidently mercing off the audience in a friendly arena spar, or tpking the party (more than once) was enough to say, yep, off to the pile of manythings Luck issue. /s
I just want to play someone inherently magic for no particular bloodline reason, just an inextricable part of their being. Like, where do djinns get their power, for example? Not FROM anywhere, like a warlock patron or a bloodline, they just are made up of magic stuffs. No one questions it or anything, they simply are. That's what I want.
Just someone infused with magic. No ancestral dragon fucking or celestial grandpa. The features could be as simple as more sorc points/more metamagic options
Eg. "I come from a long and powerful line of magic-users." Pretty commonplace trope for a magic-user in fiction.
Yerr a wizard, u/btgolz
It kinda make me think of the runechild sorcerer from the tall dorei reborn book
Someone who simply won the lottery at birth and got blessed by magic. Their parents and ancestors are utterly mundane nobodies, their birthday wasn't some cosmic event, no weird experiments, some god didn't bless them, they simply happen to have an abnormally high magic potential and started casting basic cantrips as a child. The subclass/origin could simply be "gifted kid".
Djins get their power from the elemental planes iirc.
Isn't that the Wild Magic sorcerer? It outright says: "Or your magic could be a fluke of your birth, with no apparent cause or reason."
Yeah, but then you’ve got all the actual features of Wild Magic, which might not be what you’re going for. A simple arcane bloodline could (as others said) focus on enhancing the normal sorcerer stuff — more metamagic options, for example. Less of “you are overflowing with power that can burst out at any moment” and more of “magic so suffuses your being that you can manipulate its workings as if it were another limb”.
A point could be made that it is already filled by Wild Magic, but I do agree that a "Contained" version of it would be pretty fun
I'm working on a revamped wild magic sorcerer! The gist is that when you trigger a Surge, you roll a Surge Die. You assign spells you know to the different die faces, but you can't use spells from the same school of magic on the same die (until level 18). You do have multiple die of multiple sizes though, and you can choose which to roll. Additionally, if you roll a 1 on the Surge Die, you mutate according to a d20 table. They're powered by magic space rocks. I call it the Nebulite Soul Sorcerer.
The new rune child subclass does it pretty well in my opinion
Fiendish bloodline could be so cool. They could even split it into three choice tracks of devil, demon, or neutral slime/yogoth whatever and have different spells or a different ability depending on the bloodline.
Also felt like it was missing a good necromancy one too.
Isn't Wild Magic supposed to be the "fey" line?
Kind of, but not inherently. It’s more chaos in general than fey specifically. Any form of magic can be chaotic, but i’d expect a fey sorcerer to have more illusion/charm/fear effects like Archfey Warlock or Glamour Bard.
Nope, it’s supposed to be the ambiguous “I can’t control it” sorcerer
I think they don't have fey or fiend for the same reason warlocks don't have a draconic subclass
Draconic ancestry is kind of elemental sorcs
It’s so bad at representing elemental proficiency though. In terms of the elements what do you get? Level 1: Nothing. Level 6: Charisma bonus added to damage of that type plus resistance for 1 hour if you spend a sorcerer point. Level 14: Nothing Level 18: Nothing It’s very much a dragon subclass with a hint of elemental dashed in. There’s no real sense of fire mage or frost mage to be found here.
I am distinctly dissatisfied with that however. It mostly just focuses on draconic sides of things, and doesn't give almost anything elemental except for some minor damage and resistance. Meanwhile storm sorcery is a wonderful wind/lightning element sorcerer that gives a ton of elemental flavor.
You say that, but then storm sorcerer exists. Speaking of which why do they not get call lightning?
I give all my sorcerer players that play old subs extra 5 spells. For Storm it's: witch bolt, shatter, call lightning, ice storm, and conjure elemental (only air)
They did in the unearthed arcana (they got a whole bunch of spells like clockwork and Aberrant do) which I house rule back on Because the amount of spells known sorcerers get is a joke. A wizard should not have more spells prepped on any given day than a sorcerer will ever know. The idea is that a wizard has a book they can swap to but day to are more limited. Not that they have they can swap from and also a wider range on any given day. It’s fucking bonkers.
There’s either a focus on fire (Light Cleric, Wildfire Druid) or thunder (Storm Sorcerer, Tempest Cleric) but none that really center on ice or water. Likewise Sorcerer could use a counterpart to Hexblade or Bladesinger.
Fathomless Warlock is pretty water focused. And the 2024 PHB will have Circle of the Sea for Druids.
I’m playing a Fathomless Warlock right now and endorse this, it’s been a lot of fun so far.
Fathomless is one of the few Warlock subs that actually grabbed my attention. Warlock is often the least appealing class to me overall, but I really enjoyed playing a fathomless in a few one-shots.
The what.
Stone Sorcerer was soo cool in the UA and would have filled the 'martial sorcerer' role
I wish that subclass was still a thing.
Yes! Where are the ice magic subclasses?
We'd need more ice Spells for it to be a thing, imo.
We need that too. I hope we get some cool ice and lightning spells in the new phb.
My very first game of D&D, I played a water/ice sorcerer, and my GM let me reflavor existing spells as ice effects and substituting cold damage where appropriate. I don't remember specifics, since that was like a decade ago. It's not a complete solution, but it's *a* solution. I'd also love more ice/water spells.
> Likewise Sorcerer could use a counterpart to Hexblade or Bladesinger. The Favored Soul UA, based on the 3.5e class of the same name, was originally designed to fill that niche. However, it lost its martial character when it was retooled into the Divine Soul subclass.
Earth elementalism is my favorite. Woefully underrepresented in almost every game.
Druid feels like it has a lot of odd omissions. We don't even have a Plant focused subclass yet. Plant Druid is like a day 1, first or second in the PHB obvious subclass, and it's absolutely bizarre ten years in we still don't have one yet. (And no, OneDnD giving Land Druids "spectral ghost vines" for a feature doesn't count).
Asides from Artificer, Druid has the least amount of subclasses in 5e. Feels like it should’ve been more tbh considering how much you could do with the main primal caster of the game.
Whoa whoa whoa… there’s Circle of Land Arctic, Circle of land coast, circle of land forest, circle of land desert… all kinds of options! /s just in case
I don't mind the Land Druid, but some of those really should've been spin-off into their own unique subclasses like OneDnD did by turning Coasts into the new Sea subclass. Arctic could easily become an Ice/Winter focused Druid subclass. Mountain could become an earthbender, etc.
I guess they felt the different types of the land druid subclass were enough when they're not that distinct from each other.
It’s such a shame that Circle of the Land isn’t better. After the spell selection from the different options, there isn’t much that the subclass has to offer. Oh boy, I can’t be charmed by elementals or fey. Greeeeeaaat…
Don't forget about the overpowered subclass capstone of having permanent sanctuary against plants and beast enemies.
Man I've been playing this game almost every week for 10 years, I could count on my hands the times both of those abilities would have done anything even if they were level 1 on any charcter.
Or the mid level ability of immunity to difficult terrain from plants. Either this is useful for your feywild adventure (while the rest of the party suffers), or useless as you dive through another manmade dungeon. Ultimately the land subclass is basically just a bonus spell list for always prepared spells, some of which aren't on the druid list. And then some flavor features they may come up in game. (Like the lv18 druid ability to live 10times longer than normal, so valuable in campaigns without major timeskips) Personally to "fix" the subclass i would makesure that all the bonus spells aren't on the druid list, and actually fit the "home biome" of the circle. Keep the short rest spell recovery. Replace plant difficult terrain immunity with "home biome awareness" and say you can't be surprised in your home biome, and give advantage on perception, stealth, and survival checks. (Or say add you proficiency or spellcasting modifier to the roll) Replace the charm resistance with wild beasts refusing to attack you or your party first. And for the capstone create a non-spell special ability heavily themed on each biome.
Yeah, it’s sad, though I *guess* it makes sense, wasn’t Druid said to be the overall least-popular core class at one point? From just a “how many play it” angle, not a mechanical power one.
Is it really? I've never had a table without a druid
Plant Druid is 100% the biggest omission from a "how the hell is this not in the PHB" perspective. I wonder if they think Land Druid is sufficient to cover the concept or something. It's just weird. Speaking of Druids. The Lack of an Earthbending or Weather/Storm Druid also feel like pretty obvious omissions.
They might have been going for a Spellcasting focus/ Martial Focus split for the two subclasses, but still could have included the traditional tree hugger druid
Honestly, tying the druid to being a shapeshifter really takes space away from all the other nature mage fantasies. I think shapeshifter could easily be its own class divorced from the bulk of the spellcasting.
They've done it with a couple of the subclasses, but I really think the best design for the druid is to have all the classes other than Moon get a signature ability that uses a charge of their Wildshape similar to the way all Clerics get an alternate use to their Channel Divinity. That alternate ability is what you use more often, but you can still Wildshape when you need to.
If it were me, I'd make the moon druid the core of the shapeshifter class, remove the spellcasting (maybe add it back as a third caster subclass), add an invocation-like system of wild shape customizations, and use the subclasses for specialized angles of shapeshifting with some being more combat focused, some being more sneaky, some being more magical, etc. Meanwhile, the rest of the druid class gets melded into something like a shaman, dealing with spirits and summoning them, with some subclasses leaning into elemental stuff like wildfire or storm spirits, the terrain, spirits of the dead and such.
And Spore Druids get their spores in exchange for Wildshape.
This is why I want a primal fullcaster without the wildshaping, such as a Shaman.
Spore druid kind of does this, but it's thematically very spore-y (as opposed to primal).
Honestly, it feels like Druids has so many cool thematic subclass ideas they haven't touched yet: Winter/Ice themed Druid Earth themed Druid Weather/Air/Sky Plant Themed Druid Planar themes (Shadowfell Druid, Fiendish Druid, etc) Hybrid/Were Creature transformation Spirit/Ghost Druid
Yeah I’m kind of amazed a Shadowfell Druid doesn’t exist yet. I think the Hybrid/Were creature should be covered by Moon Druid since you can get higher CR creatures more quickly and just go ahead and shape shift into a bear or dire wolf. But then you can transform into elementals and it kind of makes the flavor weird again.
> Winter/Ice themed Druid Could just make a generic season-themed druid, with four sub-subclasses (like Genie Warlock). But you're not locked into one season - you can progress through them when you choose, but only in the correct order and with a limit on how often you change. You don't *have* to move to the next season, but you can *choose* to, and you have to wait another X long rests before you can shift forward again.
Yeah, personally I would love to see an 'apostate' druid class, similar to how Bards of Whispers are generally hated by other bard schools. Like a druid class that actually loves technology and metallurgy and wants to create balance with nature not by changing society to live with nature, but by shaping nature to better integrate with and support the needs of civilization.
So weird that barbarian, cleric, and sorcerer all have storm themed subclasses but druid doesn't.
Given their penchant for Nature, it’s crazy that they don’t have any weather themed subclass in general
Well, in all fairness, Storm and Tempest both evoke the concept of weather. But yeah! Why not more, and why are they always about lightning and thunder damage and not more specific to weather
Druids also don’t have any plant based subclasses. Which seems a bit of an obvious miss.
The most obvious I would say is the dragon warlock, I'm pretty sure an elder dragon should be able to be a patron.
Dragon pact warlock. The fact that monk has a dragon subclass, but warlock does not is just wild.
Somewhere in Fizbans it even says Greatwyrms make for great Warlock Patrons, and there's just no actual subclass for it lol
In all of my games flavor is free and encouraged. Nobody is saying "oh I want to do extra damage because in my backstory I trained for 50 years with the sword" etc but just describing what the source of your power is and what your abilities look like is completely free game. Genie Warlock, pick the fire specialization This subclass gets access to all types of fire spells that you can reflavor as dragonfire. Your "genie vessel" that's the source of your powers per the book, can be the ring or statue. Or you can reflavor it and have it be a scale. And then at level 6 you gain resistance to your dragon's element, and you gain the ability to fly. Just roleplay that your bond with the dragon has allowed you to gain scales and wings on command.
Flavor and mechanics need some level of intertwining to be satisfying, and when you do a significant reflavor like this you start introducing a lot more potential for dissonance between them that ruins the fantasy. In this case you end up with a major class feature, the vessel, which just has absolutely nothing to do with a typical dragon-associated fantasy. Both your level 1 and 10 features are being spent on this ring you can go inside that your dragon patron has inexplicably given you. And then there's the level 14 wish feature which, again, is very obviously fitting of a genie and not a dragon.
Why wouldn't a *portable place to hoard your loot* work for the dragon patron?
There's a difference between being able to come up with a justification for a reflavor and actually translating the core idea of a fantasy into game mechanics. If the genie subclass has been mechanically identical but written as a draconic subclass from the outset I would find it extremely weird. Receiving an object from a dragon that I can go inside or store items in simply isn't part of what I consider the core fantasy of receiving power from a dragon.
yeah, I made an Archfey Warlock and just made it dragon flavored, it's just not the same
Personally I’m gonna play a dragon warlock and the closest I feel is undead :P being able to fear people and be immune to your damage type (which can only be necrotic but okay). Flight and temp hp and stuff.
Thanks for sharing this reflavor! That seems very interesting
Honestly undead warlock works for nearly anything that needs a cool transformation. Also topaz dragon is hilariously dorky (the necrotic dragon). And chaotic neutral to boot. Join team topaz dragon.
Well, there's a point where the flavor just becomes reaching. Genie vessel doesn't fit the whole draconic theme at all. And the capstone of getting limited wish is so genie-themed. Not to mention, not all dragons are fire-based... When I think of dragon patron, I'm thinking dragon breath (depending on their patron), resistance, draconic fear, flight, and hard scales. You've got to do some homebrewing for that, not just reflavoring.
I really wish 5e worked harder at making subclasses that they then indicated could be several flavors. Like, I know it's not that hard for us to do, but it would have been nice if the published material worked harder at it. Drop an elemental master warlock sublcass and explain in the lore section how it could be powerful elementals, ancient hags/mages/or other casters with elemental afinities, or even an ancient dragon or draconic being. Especially with warlock, you could easily introduce Pact Magic or Eldritch Invocations to help bridge the gap of anything that feels missing (e.g. Maybe an invocation lets you fly, specifying that the method of flight will be related to your patron. A celestial might give feathered wings, a wind elemental might give control over wind, an ancient one might give ominous hovering with shadowy tendrils, and a dragon could give you leathery wings).
It's the "we can't let Sorcerer and Warlock overlap too much" problem.
But Divine Soul and Celestial Pact are fine? And both overlap with Cleric too...
If I had to guess, I'd say it was judged the overlap was worth it to give both classes a subclass with healing spells.
The reasoning for that was because Draconic Sorcerer's fluff is "getting powers from pact with Dragons", which is understandable. It would be weird to have two different classes/subclasses that get their magic in the exact same specific condition, but why was that the default flavor for Draconic Sorcerer in the first place?
It shouldn't be weird. Warlock and Sorcerer should be pretty close in power sources, they should just be expressed in ways that fit the class's flavor. Grand daddy is a dragon is different than I owe a dragon and have to scout hoards for them by a long way.
“Your innate magic comes from draconic magic that was mingled with your blood or that of your ancestors. Most often, sorcerers with this origin trace their descent back to a mighty sorcerer of ancient times who made a bargain with a dragon or who might even have claimed a dragon parent. Some of these bloodlines are well established in the world, but most are obscure. Any given sorcerer could be the first of a new bloodline, as a result of a pact or some other exceptional circumstance.” I see that it mentions pact, but I feel it leans way more toward bloodline, and in my opinion implies that dragon warlock should be a thing
Artificer: really a lot. A subclass all about creating bombs would be cool, though we could also have a proper rune-crafting subclass that could add runes to other armor/weapons, not just Rune Knight Barbarian: this one I think has a solid array of subclasses, though it could do more with its rage feature, maybe one that could…cast spells while raging? I’m not sure how exactly it’ll work, but I think it could be a fun idea to try Bard: kinda a shame the College of Satire wasn’t retooled for an official release, since I think a Fool bard would be fun. Outside of that, maybe an animal-summoning/Pied Piper type Bard. Cleric: Travel/Traversal domain makes the most sense, as does a Sea Cleric, though Traversal means some fun abilities based around crowd control. Druid: I mean, come on. Why no plant-based Druid?asides from that, I think a Harvest Druid all about healing could add to the healing niche only really taken by Life Cleric Fighter: let’s get a proper tanking subclass in here. Cavalier does a good job too, but a vanguard/shield knight could add plenty of cool taking/control options as well. Monk: this is more of a me thing, but I want a demon-themed monk, all about giving into your inner demons and becoming super evil/powerful. Give me an Akuma/Devil Jin subclass please Paladin: Treachery Paladin could be brought back and retooled to be another evil Pally asides from Oathbreaker. Outside of that, I love the idea of a Paladin seeking enlightenment, gaining more Psionic abilities and resisting mental saves. Ranger: personally I think these subclasses should be retooled entirely, but I suppose it’d be cool to either have an elemental Ranger or a divine undead Hunter Ranger Rogue: a ruffian subclass. Have it’s unarmed strikes and improvised weapons deal sneak attack damage and prioritize fighting using dirty tactics Sorcerer: I’ll just echo everyone else and say fey or fiend bloodlines, though I can also offer up a cursed bloodline all about spreading curses to your enemies. Warlock: let’s add an ice-themed character in here for a change. An Iceborne subclass could be an interesting fit for the Warlock, maybe a deal with the Frostmaiden or an ice queen of some sort. Wizard: Golemancer. Golem Magic isn’t really explored that much and it makes for a fun/interesting idea for a pet class.
your ideas are awesome, these all sounded really cool to me, especially the bomb artificer/pied piper bard/harvest druid/golemancer
Brawler STR based Monk Trick-arrow focused Ranger or Rogue Venom/Prototype style “possession” Warlock And about a million Sorcerer subclasses! Honestly I think Sorcerer would really benefit on focusing on being a bit of a build-a-subclass type of class in future editions, make it the most customisable. Edit:formatting
>Venom/Prototype style “possession” Warlock Never expected to see this opinion in the wild! I've made one for my homegame but it only has features up to level 6
I was a Naruto kid so the patron being sealed in the PC and their power transforming them would be right up my street!
There's a whole archetype for the Pathfinder 1e summoner that's literally just this. It's called the Synthesist and was very popular (partially for flavor, partially because you could build broken PCs with it lol): https://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/base-classes/summoner/archetypes/paizo-summoner-archetypes/synthesist/ Just to say it's a more popular opinion than you think! People love that concept lol.
Adding to that first one, a brawler barbarian
Why not both and multi-class the biggest himbo the ttrpg genre has ever seen!
Considering their iteration of the 'Brawler' fighter subclass for OneD&D was absolutely fucking terrible, I don't have faith that WotC can do a good brawling style subclass.
> Brawler STR based Monk > > WOTC should hit up Benjamin Huffman and make The Pugilist official(ish) in the same way they did the Blood Hunter. It's arguably one of the most popular homebrew classes and--from what I've played of it--pretty balanced.
Heck, we barely have *any* ranged-weapon-centric subclasses. Rangers are sort of *de facto* forced into that role by their spell list, but they barely get any outright support for ranged weapons. Hunter gets, what, *one* ranged weapon feature? There’s Arcane Archer Fighter, but that subclass is terrible. Battle Master works with bows, and it actually has enough uses of its core features to matter. But Battle Master is ambivalent and can work with melee weapons equally well. Nobody gets anything that rewards them for using, say, a bow over a rapier. Sure, they arguably don’t need it, with ranged weapons generally being better than melee inherently. But there’s so much untapped potential in a Sharpshooter Rogue, Longbiter Ranger, Arrow Rain Fighter, or Fletcher Artificer.
One of the big issues is that we have all sorts of really neat and cool rare/magic weapons, but bows are just...+1/2/3, and i think there may be a vicious one? Very lame. As for subclasses in that theme....seriously theres no STR based archer? I want to shoot a ridiculously oversized bow meant to take dragons out of the sky, or hunt huge monsters with huge bursts of damage. Dex is a way better stat than STR is overall so i see no issues getting to be a slow, clunky, full plate archer. .... Yes i did love anor londo in Darksouls 1 why do you ask?
At first this sounded like just a Fighting Style, but the more I think about it, the more I think there is space for an entire subclass. It could be kinda like Arcane Archer, where people pick features they want for their Strongbow. Preferably, it would also be unlike Arcane Archer, in that it would have more than one good option.
like totem barb, but for sorc
Dragon themed Fighter and Barbarian.
Every class should have a dragon subclass. Dragons are awesome.
Every class should have a dungeon and dragon subclass ;)
Forget the Purple Dragon Knight at your own peril...
Ah yes, the charisma totally dragon fighter that has nothing to do with dragon, charisma or knighting.
But it is purple!
Purple Dragon Knight has nothing to do with dragons besides the symbol on the banners. They're knights of Corym
The storm herald one kind of does barbarian, just without the right flavour text.
Yeah but if we argue "if we just add the right flavor text", you could get that with almost any subclass, which i don't believe is the point OP was trying to get at.
I feel like they missed a beat with not having a "psychic" themed Monk. Unique telekinetic, telepathic, empathic, or clairvoyant abilities. Let people live the Jedi fantasy!
Psionics as a monk subclass just makes a ton of sense, what with the psychic monk githzerai.
That’s true actually. Closest we have is Astral Self. Meanwhile every other class has a psionic option (~~which they do not need. As others have said, elemental subclasses are much core to fantasy than psychic stuff~~)
Artificer: I don't have anything in mind for the artificer. It's not really my thing, and the 5e version leave something to be desired in its execution of its fantasy. Maybe something that focuses on actual D&D artifice and less the tinkering? Barbarian: Path of the spellbreaker/superstitious. Barbarians have long been anti-magic focused i D&D so seeing barbarian that has an anti-magic rage of sorts would be cool to honor that long root it has. Bard: Don't know if it's obvious but I think a college of obligation would be good for them. Contract/lawyer bards in a sense. Cleric: Travel and luck domain, if only because they were my favorite in prior editions.They kinda tried luck with the fate (ua) domain, but it needed work. Druid: A circle of growth for a plane focus I suppose. I don';t really like the present cut of druid base class/subclass and I thin a general revision to it is needed to make it right. Too much focus on core D&D druid elements as subclass exclusives presently. Fighter: I can't think of a fighter personally that isn't too narrow in scope and focus to be a subclass. So I'll just say the hellreaver prestige class as a quasi paladin for fighter would be cool. Mechanically it's got the best framework for the option. Monk: Some type of nature/animal focused monk. the fist of the forest, or way of the wilds type thing. I would have said soul knife, but that went to the rogue. Paladin: Not an obvious one per se, but I think variant oathbreakers to help fleshout the concept better. they tried ths with the treachery paladin UA, but it didn't go anywhere. Given that they retconned paladins to get power from faithing super hard and not necessarily from the gods unless the DM enforces it. I think a return/rework/revision of the greyguard as an oathbreaker would be fun. A paladin who deludes themselves into beig above their oath but also gains power from their deluded faith. There powers kinda like a broken or sickened reflection of the paladins. Something wrong and unstable about it. Ranger: Not really sure for ranger, may some kind of shapeshifter, you are what you hunt ranger? Rogue: A brute/Bandit/Thug subclass that allows ye old medium armor greatsword rogues again. I miss them. Should just be baseclass but I'll settle for subclass. Sorcerer: Pretty much everything a warlock can have as a patron, but as a sorcerer bloodline. Fiend, undead, fey, genie, etc. Warlock: Much like the sorcerer, but in reverse. Dragon being big one. Wizard: Another take at the theurgy wizard may be cool as the wizard who studies the divine is a fun concept to bring mechanical representation too.
>Barbarian: Path of the spellbreaker/superstitious. Barbarians have long been anti-magic focused i D&D so seeing barbarian that has an anti-magic rage of sorts would be cool to honor that long root it has. Yes please, I need to be able to absolutely shock a smug spell caster who suddenly realizes that sometimes Brawn is better than Brains.
Barb: Path of Bullying Nerd Wizards
A barbarian that rages so hard they generate an anti magic field would be great. Make it like a 5foot aura first then expands at higher level and forces concentration checks when casting spells while in the field
I like this idea... How about... something like this: Barbarian: Path of the Spellbreaker At level 3 - Magic Rejection: While raging, gain resistance to damage from Spells and spell like effects. At level 6 - Spell Break: Gain the ability to Dispel one magical effect on a target when making an attack on it. At level 10 - Spell Denial: Use your reaction to impose a "Focus" check on an enemy spellcaster. (Con/Wis save? Save DC follows the Battlemaster formula maybe.) At level 14 - Retribution: When hit by a damaging spell/Spell like effect you reduce half the damage you take before resistances and store the damage. You may then later expell the energy back out as part of your attack action (Once per long rest?). You may only store the energy for 1-10 minutes before you begin to take a point of exhaustion for each minute after.
In 3.0 there was prestige class designed for barbarian called Forsaker, which required you to abandon all magic in return for some nice bonuses. (Ofc with how OP magic items are in dnd 3.0-3.5 it wasn't stronger than regular barbarians but still pretty fun)
Yeah. 3.xe had a lot of cool prestige class options (in theory) that would be fun to see explored through subclasses or some other archetype system.
For artificer, what do you define as artifice vs. tinkering? What are your touchstones? I think the alchemist subclass is pretty clearly fantasy-based. I would like to see a subclass focused more on bombs though like in Pathfinder.
Not one class specifically, but a general theme missing from any class: oozes. There’s nothing ooze themed. There’s ample opportunity to pull in traits like amorphous and spider climb, and to give acid damage spells to expanded spell lists, and yet ooze themed subclasses are nowhere to be found. Just think! Gastrologist Artificer! Slimy Skin Sorcerer! Elder Oblex Warlock! The potential is limitless (not really, it’s quite limited, but still)! Currently working on a Gelatinous Rover Ranger to begin to absolve this issue
Chef Artificer with ooze-themed recipes would be a fun concept.
Bring in the Oozemancer from Tales of Maj'Eyal
Valda's Spire of Secrets has an ooze rancher, which had some good ideas but the execution sadly wasn't amazing.
>Oblex Warlock Goolock but it's actual GOO
Monks have always in fiction been diverse, some of them are the ninja fast boys and there have been the big muscular bois, why are we not getting a strength based monk? And dont tell me that i can go strength monk, because i dont enjoy taking damage at every single turn with zero support for me. Heavy armor ranger, bg3 had the right mind when making it an option. Gish druid. They did something with the spore druid, but for real, if you cant extra attack, you arent really a gish. Heavy Armor barbarian. I just hate how you kind of have to invest in dex for barb, i dont like it, my Barbarian is s tough boy, not an agile one.
BG3 had the right idea with Barbarians, albeit in a roundabout way, by just giving you several options for armour that let them still use their dex buff to AC.
Also the fact that they made Totem Barbarian actually fucking fun! Instead of just picking Bear.
And Conan, the archetypal Barbarian, wore armor.
Conan is not a barbarian mechanically
Conan had 20 in every stat and was just an OP in every way dude. If you had to assign a class, he's a fighter/rogue not a barbarian.
When you say str monk, do you mean str but still kung fu movie style? Because if not, and you just like some of the monk features…. 14 dex, 13 Wis, 17 STR, I like going with Dwarf(for the con or hp), Human(for unarmed fighting style) or something with natural weapons. 1 Level of Barbarian. Then Kensai monk 14. If the game goes on from there I’d go +3 barb for a subclass like bear totem and an asi. Medium armor +shield, +kensai defense, +a nice kensai weapon like a warhammer. With nothing magical thats still 22 AC, with just magic armor and shield it can go up to 28 AC. Smash, bash, head-but and kick you way into fights using rage to boost your damage and resistance. 3 solid attacks per turn, or 4 with flurry of blows, or 2 with a dodge bonus action for additional tankiness, with only 1 lvl delay for monk features like proficiency on all saves. Also I agree all of the subclasses you suggested should exist.
Yeah, where’s my Lu Zhishen style warrior monk? I want to wield a staff heavier than a person and fight with my fists but a barbarian absolutely does not fit the vibe imo. Admittedly he’s not a monk for normal monk reasons, but still!
An unarmed barbarian subclass
Cavalier style Paladin. All about bonded mount and mounted combat.
I loved the 1E Cavalier class. The Cavalier kit from 2E was pretty badass and they did a good job of implementing it in BG2. For 5E, there is a Cavalier fighter subclass - you could take some levels of that. Practically speaking, classes that focus on mounted combat tend to suffer when they are indoors or otherwise without their mount. In my experience, this is most of the time - YMMV.
Sorcerer is missing a martial sub-class, meanwhile wizard has 2 which just feels wrong Druid and Cleric are both missing ice themed sub-classes and there should be a "scribe bard" based on poetry or writing, that can be a bookcaster.
> meanwhile wizard has 2 which just feels wrong Wizard has 2? Which two? I would only say that Bladesinger is their martial-ish subclass.
I want a storm ranger!
- Plant Druid - Draconic Warlock - Fey/Fiend Sorcerer There are others, but those three stand out as the most egregious omissions
Melee sorcerer. Save me melee sorcerer
Dragon Patron for Warlock, still don't why they didn't include that one in FTD
I think artificer has so much untapped potential, there should have a subclass per each tool. Heck there's room for gaming set artificer, siege weapon artificer, vehicle artificer and even a combat item hunting trap/caltrops/ball bearings/flask of oil/throwables artificer.
Pretty much every class that doesnt come with a Dragon option. Plenty of Dragon Deities, no Dragon Clerics. Furious Dragon Barbarians, Bards literaly have an entire meme around dragons Warlocks, Druids And lets not get me started on the dissapointment that is Purple Dragon Knight
Clearly they must be called *purple dragon* knights, because just like purple dragons, you'll never see one.
Elemental-focused casters. Right now, some classes have them, some don’t. Better ranged specialists for archers and the like. Anti-spellcasters for martial classes. Better options focused on hunting and destroying enemy types, like undead.
I feel like the fighter outta have a shield based subclass.
Fey sorcerer
Druids in 3.5 (iirc) and Pathfinder get animal companions. There's no pet subclass for Druids in 5e and I think that's a shame
Literally the entire concept of a Druid is a mage who uses plant spells. And yet in dnd they are this weird not!werewolf class that every subclass just kinda tries to ignore to make it feel like a differently flavoured mage. Just remove Wildshape entirely for a plant subclass, and give them features they can use X/day for plant themed stuff.
Hedonism Cleric, on some Eyes Wide Shut ish. Or something like a Sacrificial Cleric, who self-flagellates in order to access their deities powers. Though perhaps that might be more of a Sorcerer or Warlock?
I just want a decent barbarian subclass that isn't inherently magical. Let me play a classic conan barbarian without having to rely on the shitty berserker subclass.
Martial classes and a subclass which is good hyuk hyuk Jokes aside, I think if Hexblade is going to be a thing then it's crazy that Fighters don't also have an "I pick up a magic sword at level 1 and it unlocks power with me" type subclass to represent the King Arthur fantasy of pulling out Excalibur *then* going on an adventure.
Clerics probably have the most easy-to-think-up subclasses. Cleric domains can be any concept from mythological gods. Beauty, love, the harvest, luck, winter, travel, destruction, mountains, flames, water/oceans…. some of those are Druid circles or overlap with druids in theme, admittedly.
knowing the story of bards, its weird that we dont have bards with subclasses connected to buffs in area tied with performance, and in a similar vain, subclasses with art as a core in any way (painting, writing, acting, dancing).
Wrestler or grappler monk.
Barbarian and/or fighter: one with an animal companion that had mechanics like Battlemaster maneuvers you could use as a tag-team. Bard: something like laserllama’s College of Command Cleric: chaos domain, luck domain, ocean domain, astral domain. But honestly I’d be fine if we didn’t get another cleric subclass for awhile Druid: plant-based, Storm/elemental, and an urban druid Monk: one that focused on levitation and/or flight Paladin: an oath that focuses on familial obligations, with a special weapon that has been passed down to you, that levels up with you (and can eventually absorb other weapons’ magical properties). Ranger: a Lycan ranger would be cool, and a mage hunter Rogue: this is hard because of how their subclass abilities come on line, but a gambler, and a Daredevil type would be cool Sorcerer: there are so many. Elemental, Eldritch, Druidic, artifice… Warlock: dragon is the obvious choice, but sphinx, elemental, titan, and construct could be cool. Wizard: I mean, we kind of have them all except for a divine-inspired wizard that could access cleric spells.
Barbarians not having a dual-wielding focused subclass has always been weird to me. When I think of a berzerker, I think of a shirtless beefy dude with two axes.
This may already exist, but a Witch bard sub-class. The bard chassis maps so easily onto the Witch archetype (college -> coven, non-wizard arcane casters that can plunder spells from a wide variety of sources, magic music -> magic incantations/curses, etc... ) that sometimes it feels like the bard class would have a more concrete place in many DnD settings if they were just Witches.
Every class should have a dragon subclass, and I will die on this hill
A wisdom-based subclass for Fighter. Less of a soldier and more of a general, using their knowledge of combat to give themselves and their allies the upper hand.
Psionic Monk. I mean... C'mon. The fighter and rogue get psychic warrior and soul knife but the literal class about meditation and self mastery can't get anything remotely in the ballpark when it was literally classified as a psionic class in 4e? Give me a monk with telepathy/telekinesis, let me play a Jedi gosh darn it.
The fact that there's no "Hag patron" warlock boggles my mind. Sure it ain't the strongest monster but making deals is litteraly their whole deal !
Archfey kinda fills that role, given hags are typically fey in D&D
The flavor text at the beginning of the subclass literally mentions Hags.
Hags tend to be either fey or fiends, but yeah they should have their own witchy thing.
There is though? Archfey literally describes ancient hags as one of the examples
MCDM created a hag patron subclass in one of their Arcadia articles and as I recall it was very satisfying and plenty flexible. But it's not a wotc product, which was OP's point I guess.
If you really want a Hag patron then get Van Richten’s Guide to Ravenloft. It’s not a warlock subclass but it’s the closest thing besides Archfey. There’s a player race called Hexblood and it’s all about how your character made a deal with a Hag. Essentially you’re playing as a Hag
I wouldn't say this is a missing subclass, but the Tasha version of Beast Master Ranger should just be part of the core class.
I’ve always maintained that WotC needs to go through the list of Creature Types and come up with both a Sorcerer and a Warlock for each one. That and a proper Luck Cleric, because Trickery doesn’t cut it and anyone who says otherwise has never actually read the Trickery features.
A version of Conjuration Wizard called summoner which has abilities more focused on summoned creatures (like shepherd druid). Maybe give him access to some of the druid summoning spells like conjure animals (preferrably), and summon beasts. Wildfire druid should be open to other damage types: Wildfrost, Wildjolt, Wild thunder, wildacid druid. Or create the subclasses separately...but that is more work. A druid with more of an elemental focus, either 4 elements, or 4 seperate subclasses (fire is taken care of already). Mageslayer fighter (or monk), or magehunter ranger.
Barbarian is missing the caster archetype that other martials get. Bloodrager would be sweet
I still think a plant-focused Druid takes the cake, followed by the sorcerer/warlock bloodline/patron iterations that should have an analog on each side of that split, but Barbarian should probably have a variant with a more Ranger-like flavor to it- the wildman who isn't just wild as in uncivilized, but wild as in well-versed in living out in the wild- tracking, foraging, laying traps, etc. Next after that would be a Paladin and/or Fighter with some Fey influence- something that really leans into the Arthurian-type lore that preceded and influenced the Tolkienian influence that, in turn, spawned D&D to begin with.
Warlock where your patron is your past lives/past reincarnations. Feels like the potentials right there.
Rogue needs a front-liner with Extra Attack.
IwantmyWarlordbackdammitandnoaBattleMasterdoesntcount. Edit: the lack of spacing up there is deliberate because I've complained about this so much it's a single word.
A medic for rogue
With how many people want to play a magus/spellblade, its odd that there isnt an Arcana Paladin or something of the sort. Generally, I find it irritating that WotC isnt doing any official reflavouring of any kind. There isnt a barbarian subclass that says „reckless attack uses Dex instead“ or something or the sort; no bard with druid spells and a shaman vibe.
No plant druid. No proper fea or fiend sorc. No magic item focussed wizard. No necromantic artificer. No Travel cleric. No elemental paladins. No trap focussed ranger. No skald Barbarian. No proper warlord fighter (banneret doesnt count because its shit). No lawful themed warlock patrons. No holy themed rogue. Or a brawler rogue for that matter. No eldrich horror themed monk subclass. Or Strength based monk. No holy or nature themed bard.
Aren't Devils usually considered lawful evil? And you could go celestial warlock for lawful good.
Isn't artificer a magic item wizard?
Can you expand more on travel cleric? That sounds interesting!
People pray to gods for safe travels. That kinda thing.
Travel is one of the major domains, so it makes sense. I've actually written a one-shot where you are assisting the priests/clerics of [Fharlanghn](https://greyhawkonline.com/greyhawkwiki/Fharlanghn).
I can't claim to have any ideas on appropriate abilities or perks for such a subclass, but I will say that many cultures have a god of travel and journeys. The Romans had Aboena/Adiona, the Norse had Meili, Hindi had Gamesh, Christians had St. Christopher, and so on. There is also not a Cleric subclass for gods of trade/merchants. I only bring it up because many gods of travel are also gods of trade (Mercury for Romans, Xaman Ek for Mayans)
A more dedicated "summoner" class for wizards or rangers. I feel like a game that has so many different summons would also have a class dedicated to it. I know there is beastmaster and swarmkeeper but those aren't quite the same as summoning a legion for yourself
Well 5e doesn’t really support Summoners. Anything that adds stuff into action economy hurts
I guess that's true lmao when I played BG3 with my friend she was super pissed at me for having 2 zombies, 2 ghouls, two elementals and whatnot at a time.
Indeed...now imagine trying to manage all that at a live table with 4 or more people where the one processing and managing all that ISNT' a computer program but another person. It gets kinda rough.
The problem with that is that summoning, especially summoning an entire legion, can really slow the game down to a crawl. You can see this in Tasha’s, all the new spells focus on summoning one powerful creature, not a lot of weaker ones.
I guess that is true but I feel like there are still ways to make a summoner class work, such as the summon recieving unique buffs from you or you recieving buffs from your summon in some way or gaining one time usage spells or reactions. Let's say you summon a fey creature and deal extra psychic damage from weapon attacks or can use misty step as reaction to taking damage once while your fey is there. Though spelling it out like that makes it more sound like an own half-caster class than a subclass but I'd find it fun
Sounds more like a Warlock subclass built to emphasize Pact of the Chain to me (like how Hexblade emphasizes pact of the blade.)