PDA

View Full Version : What Do You Want in D&D Next PHB 2?



tbok1992
2013-05-04, 04:27 AM
Yes, I know that D&D Next PHB 1 isn't even out yet, and that the conversation has devolved into petty and angry bickering with 4e fans saying "Death To Mearls For Slaughtering Our Sacred Cows Which We Slaughtered Other Sacred Cows For!" and with 3e fans saying "SUCK IT! SUCK IT! NOW YOU KNOW HOW IT FEELS! ... Ehhh anyway I'll stick to Pathfinder." But I thought it'd be interesting to think of what'd be the best classes and races to put i nthe PHB 2, given that all the classes in all edition's PHB 1s will get in the PHB 1, and explain why. I'll start with the classes:

-Duskblade/Swordmage/Stabwizard- Because Stabwizard is one of those very big archetypes in D&D that is still just a little too non-mainstream for core. I don't think it should be a fighter or a Wizard sub-class thanks to the fact that a good Gish class should ideally be able to synthesize magic and maneuvers into their own new thing rather than just being a fighter with a few spells or a wizard with a blade.

-Invoker/Oracle/Jesus-Sorceror- Basically, I do like the idea of a Divine guy with a more primal, crazy and unreliable link to the gods, and it seems like a solid idea. Though, l I have heard they might roll that idea into the Sorceror, so...

-Factotum- Because it's an awesome fan-favorite class and a very different take on the "Jack-of-all-trades" concept than the Bard, doing it's neat little "pragmatic dungeoneer" thing.

-Artificer- Because it's popular, it's a great concept, and if they don't include it Eberron fans will be piiiiiiiiiiised.

-Swashbuckler-This is because Mearls has said that he didn't want to introduce all new classes unless they fit their own niche, and I think that the Swashbuckler fits into a Martial class/archetype niche that the Fighter and the Rogue never quite felt like they comfortably occupied, IE the quipping; highly mobile but fragile lovable rogue with lots of abilities involving moving and attacking at the same time/more than usual (Ala the 4e Monk) and lots of fancy acrobatics and aerial stunts they can do.

-Shaman- Because, the class hasn't quite had their own cohesive identity, but it is certainly iconic outside of D&D and a good niche for PCs to fill, so I think that it'd be a good one to have in there. Maybe draw more from the 4e "Spirit Companion" one since that one seemed to stick the most.

-Fleshwarper- This is admittedly a weird choice, since it was originally only a prestige class, but I think that it deserves to be a full class, as it covers territory both thematically and mechanically that no other class quite does (IE Magical transhumanist), and it's such a cool concept.

And I didn't do the Binder because I think it'd work better as a subclass of the Warlock ala the 4e Vestige Pact.

Now for the races:

-Aasimar- Because since the PHB is gonna do the Tiefling, it's only fair that its counterpart be included.

-Primal Deva-This'd be 4e's DEva, since I feel they're so different from the Aasimar lore-wise that they should not be a mere sub-race, and they're a great concept to boot. It'd be smart to play up the Primal meets Divine aspects of the race.

-Catfolk- Because Catgirls are a popular nerd thing, they're a prominent race concept-wise, and better them than googirls. Well, better first than Googirls anyway, I'd personally love a googirl/googuy PC race (Slyths, despite being a good try, don't look all that goo-y).

-Thri-Keen- Yes, I know they're more a Dark Sun thing, but they're in pretty much every setting, and they fit quite well too. Plus, they're one of D&D's most interesting ideas for a PC Race, and one of the strangest as well ,so it'd be great for all those Oddball players.

-Changelings & Shifters-Because everyone whines about Warforged despite them being objectively the best thing ever*, and they're another interesting race from Eberron with a great ability that adds so many roleplaying hooks.

-Goliaths- Because they feel like a race that could be truly special, what with their links to stone, their uber-competitive nature, their links to primal power, their brutish; dumber (Yet still playable) relatives (Look it up, in Races of Stone), but they've never quite clicked. Maybe D&D Next would be their chance to make them more iconic.

-Mongrelfolk- Yes, those Mongrelfolk, with the patchwork-y appearance of 2e and earlier's version with the Medium height of the 3e version, fluffed as Tiefling-equivalents for Chaotic Neutral extraplanar creatures to avoid the horrible horrible unfortunate implications of the classic one, randomly rolling for racial abilities at chargen. I think it'd be a great way to reformat an old concept into something fresh and clever.

-Something New- I want 'em to surprise us as well, not just spin their wheels around 'n around. Mike Mearls said he wanted to do a Fey bruiser, so maybe a Kappa PC race would work for that?

-Human Subraces- Not technically a race, but given that there is no room for the subrace mechanic in the current Human stats, I think they might need to make a separate thing for the human derivatives, IE Sea kin, Asherati, Neanderthals, Underfolk, ect. And, given how common human PCs are, I think the PHB 2 would be a perfect place to do it in.

Aaaand that's all I got. What'd your lists be?

*Before you say anything, No. They are magical robots made for magical World War II, your argument is invalid.

Weiser_Cain
2013-05-04, 05:37 AM
I want it all to fit in one book.

Tyrmatt
2013-05-04, 08:56 AM
I'm always a fan of something undead as a player race, either vampiric or generally undead like the Forsaken from the Warcraft and World of Warcraft d20 books. Depending on the setting, they can be interesting assets, liabilities in negotiations or perhaps even a well established "race".

Decent Gobbo races for players too. I'm sick of them being cannon-fodder and poorly adjusted for player use. Give me a tribe of little greenskins with a penchant for fire and general chaos as a dark counterpart to the halfling or gnome.

Always a thumbs up for the Factotum too. Just adjust it down a bit so it can't be super-abused (Gnomish Quickrazor Infinite Action bull**** and so on).

The Warlock as well. With a serious approach to its design it can be that golden sweetspot between Pathfinder's witch and the infinite casting pain in the ass that is the munchkinned 'lock.

Scow2
2013-05-04, 09:06 AM
Decent Gobbo races for players too. I'm sick of them being cannon-fodder and poorly adjusted for player use. Give me a tribe of little greenskins with a penchant for fire and general chaos as a dark counterpart to the halfling or gnome.
I hope they make Gnolls playable, and I second the OP's catfolk race suggestion. There should always be officially-supported fuzzball races, with nice racial features that compete with common races.

Clawhound
2013-05-04, 12:08 PM
I'm for extending ideas from one class to another. For example: Warlocks make deals with powerful being. What do fighters and rogues look like when they make deals with powerful beings?

I see many ways for each class to run in some fun and unique directions with subclasses yet still retain their basic class structure.

What I don't want to see is Knight of Anything.

Eldan
2013-05-04, 01:14 PM
Sooo, what's in the PHB 1, then?

DeltaEmil
2013-05-04, 01:37 PM
Barbarian, Bard, Cleric, Druid, Fighter, Monk, Paladin, Ranger, Rogue, Sorcerer, Wizard.

With subclasses to make a warlord fighter, an assassin rogue or a warden paladin.

tbok1992
2013-05-04, 02:52 PM
Barbarian, Bard, Cleric, Druid, Fighter, Monk, Paladin, Ranger, Rogue, Sorcerer, Wizard.

With subclasses to make a warlord fighter, an assassin rogue or a warden paladin.

You forgot Warlock. And for races, they've confirmed that every race in every PHB1 is gonna make it in, including Dragonborn and Tieflings (With Tieflings getting subraces based on the various different classes of fiend)

And I didn't include the monster races because I think they're probably going to put the stats for those in the Monster Manual, likely with player options because some monsters like Drow or Kobolds are pretty popular as PCs.

Akal Saris
2013-05-04, 02:59 PM
What do fighters and rogues look like when they make deals with powerful beings?

Bodyguards?

:smalltongue:

Eldan
2013-05-04, 03:05 PM
Hm. If it was my choice, Truenamer, Beguiler, Swordsage and Binder for classes. Changeling as a race. Other planetouched would be nice but not really essential. I know Aasimar are supposed to be generic upper-planar, but the name makes me think Aasimon-touched, so I'd quite like those touched by the upper planes themselves instead of the divine. Warforged and Shifters are quite cool, too. I like goblins, as well. Nathri are a personal favourite, though no one seems to think of them. Oh, and either Rogue Modrons or Modron Exiles.

tbok1992
2013-05-04, 04:07 PM
So, does anybody like my idea of "Fleshwarper-as-Class"?

DrBurr
2013-05-05, 12:20 PM
I'm pretty sure the discussion of Next is, Why don't these numbers work like [insert edition] I haven't heard anyone cry foul that their are no AEDU's

Assuming PHB1 has Barbarian, Bard, Cleric, Druid, Fighter, Monk, Paladin, Ranger, Rogue, Sorcerer, Wizard, Warlock and whatever their mystery class is. With Warden being a Nature Paladin, Warlord being a Leader Fighter and Assassin being a Shadow Rogue.

Hoping the PHB2 contains the following classes Swordmage, Shaman, Psion, Artificer and Runepriest.

Angel Bob
2013-05-05, 01:08 PM
I disagree with the statement that Next has 4E fans wailing in a corner while 3E fans laugh mercilessly at them. From what I've seen, no one seems particularly pleased with it. 4E fans think it's too much like 3E, 3E fans think it's too much like 4E, and fans of older editions... haven't said much. :smalltongue: As a member of the 4E camp, I personally think it's more than a little unbalanced... but all of that is really not the point of this topic, I realize.

Ergo, I assume you mean: what classes/races do I want to see in Next's next (hahaha) PHB? Well, sorcerers were easily my favorite class in 4E; I'd like to see how they function in Next (and yes, I know they were briefly present, but apparently they're undergoing a massive revision). I'm also curious about warlocks. As for classes we haven't yet seen, I'd like to see shamans make a return in Next, if only so that a group doesn't absolutely have to have a cleric in order to function.

As for races... as a DM, I dislike having to deal with too many over-the-top fantastic races (shardminds and minotaurs always made me grit my teeth in 4E). Less ridiculous races such as the goliath or kenku, however, float my boat. Of course, old favorites like gnomes and half-orcs are also essential. I wouldn't mind seeing deva or dragonborn make a return, although I have to wonder what sorts of stats they'd get. I'm not sure if all of these races really lend themselves to subraces, either.

Still -- I'll just watch as it all unfolds. For now, I think it's more imperative that Next fix its glaring balance issues and figure out what it's trying to do with itself than introduce even more broken options.

137beth
2013-05-05, 09:25 PM
I should start by saying that I haven't actually spent much time looking at the D&DN playtesting packets...


Anyways, I want minotaurs (although those will probably be in the monster manual...) and ninja. But not an awful ninja like 3.5's, a good one!