What "dark" class / character options do you find lacking?

[Ivellius]

I was recently inspired by a Facebook discussion of "necrobotany" to work on homebrewing some material to cover some themes that might seem more typical of villainous characters. While the DMG provides examples of dark Cleric and Paladin paths, I was wondering if anyone had any ideas / suggestions about themes or abilities you'd like to see along these lines? My focus has initially been on expanding options for classes that were a bit neglected by the PHB.

My current list of class options I've either completed or plan to work on, with a brief overview:
Barbarian: Path of Ancestors, summoning familial spirits for guidance and protection, Path of the Collector, who gains power from the bones of his enemies, and the Path of the Damned, summoning fiendish powers for martial prowess.
Bard: College of Lamentation, an order that administers funerary rites and preserves the memories of the deceased.
Druid: Circle of Decay, with necrotic abilities, and Circle of Plagues, focused on disease and vermin.
Sorcerer: Cancer Mage, who gains powers from a magical cyst.
Warlock: Archlich Patron and (possibly) Pact of Flesh.
Wizard: Possibly Arachnomancy, Fiendbinder, and Noctumancy, but they have a lot of class options already.

I also made a Necrobotanist feat, focused on combining the undead and plant creatures but for a more wizardly focus. What else do you think would be good to see?

[Torched Forever]

Any links to your work? Just wondering.

5e could use some darker backgrounds besides criminal. What if you worked as a servant of some evil empire or gathered bodies for a necromancer?

[Ziegander]

5e could use some darker backgrounds besides criminal. What if you worked as a servant of some evil empire?

You mean, like, as a Criminal? Or a Soldier? Or an Urchin?


Or gathered bodies for a necromancer?

OOOH, you mean, like, as a Criminal? Or an Outlander? Or even a Sage?

I mean, what backgrounds are you actually looking for here? There's killers, liars, pirates, spies, and thieves. You could have been an acolyte to an evil god, a demon, or eldritch abomination. Perhaps you're the well-to-do scion of a horrible family and you're not the black sheep trying to right the wrongs of your dark past. You could be a discredited academic because you're really into dissecting living, sentient creatures as well as necromancy. Maybe you served as a Soldier under a Thayan Knight in service to a Lich Red Wizard.

Actually... I'm trying to come up with other "evil" or "dark" backgrounds that the existing ones can't accommodate and I'm failing.

[SharkForce]

generally speaking, i feel little need for specifically "dark" options.

most of the time, you can be as dark as you need to be with standard options. you don't need to be a derive power from it to collect bones. you don't need a wizard specializing in spider magic to have someone that uses spider-themed spells. etc.

i can make a noble warrior who helps the weak, and i can make a cruel warrior who preys on them, without needing any special abilities to reflect either.

[Ivellius]

Yeah, Backgrounds specifically are pretty flexible. I homebrewed a setting-specific one for someone involved with a necromantic order, but Acolyte or Sage covered much of the same territory.

I'll probably put up a link in the Homebrew Forum once I get a bit more done. I wanted to solicit feedback first to see if that would give me any ideas for things I might want to cover--I'd prefer starting the thread with it more thought out so I have a more definite end in mind.

If you want what I've already put out publicly you can find it in the D&D 5e group on Facebook, though.


generally speaking, i feel little need for specifically "dark" options.

most of the time, you can be as dark as you need to be with standard options. you don't need to be a derive power from it to collect bones. you don't need a wizard specializing in spider magic to have someone that uses spider-themed spells. etc.

i can make a noble warrior who helps the weak, and i can make a cruel warrior who preys on them, without needing any special abilities to reflect either.

That's great. This thread isn't for you, then. Some people might like having those special abilities, and there currently isn't a druid ability that says "You can turn into an undead creature."

[KorvinStarmast]

Yeah, Backgrounds specifically are pretty flexible. I homebrewed a setting-specific one for someone involved with a necromantic order, but Acolyte or Sage covered much of the same territory.

I'll probably put up a link in the Homebrew Forum once I get a bit more done. I wanted to solicit feedback first to see if that would give me any ideas for things I might want to cover--I'd prefer starting the thread with it more thought out so I have a more definite end in mind.

If you want what I've already put out publicly you can find it in the D&D 5e group on Facebook, though.



That's great. This thread isn't for you, then. Some people might like having those special abilities, and there currently isn't a druid ability that says "You can turn into an undead creature."
Given that PHB specifically mentions how druids are opposed to undeath ... in the class description ... and that druids are all about that which is natural ... maybe druid isn't the class for being a liche.

then again, with MC options, the other class element might be a perfect fit, be it warlock, wizard, cleric ...

[Ivellius]

Given that PHB specifically mentions how druids are opposed to undeath ... in the class description ... and that druids are all about that which is natural ... maybe druid isn't the class for being a liche.

then again, with MC options, the other class element might be a perfect fit, be it warlock, wizard, cleric ...

Sure, generally speaking. But if druids are about nature, it's entirely feasible that some would decide that having all of these undead around is actually kind of natural (just to spawn another "Undead aren't inherently evil!" discussion). Death and decay are a huge part of nature, and it would make sense for some druids to find a kinship with the decomposing forces of the world. They might not be common or terribly orthodox, but it's a reasonable concept to discuss. Paladins are universally "united by their oaths to stand against the forces of evil," but one of the first official class options we get is an evil paladin. There's plenty of room for exceptions to exist.

It's also true that the Wild Shape chassis is a mechanically effective way to represent someone who can transform into creatures.

[djreynolds]

In the old "Deities and Demigods" book there was a picture of guy, the master of the pack or something. So like an evil ranger, like the paladin oath of ancients combine with vengeance. A druid whose grotto was destroyed and is out for "balance".

[D.U.P.A.]

Wizards already have necromancy school which looks the most evil, Warlocks have fiend patron, who is usually evil. Nature classes like Druid and Ranger looks more towards good yes. Other classes are more neutral and alignment versatile or already have the evil variant.

[Slipperychicken]

Maybe we could have something like that runescarred berserker option from 3.5, which allowed barbarians to cast some spells using tattoos or ritual scarification. Basically just Eldritch Knight for barbarians. They could even use something similar to warlock invocations, getting some at-will or always-on powers.

In general though, each class can be made as dark as desired. Just throw on some edgy backstory and a fitting background, and you're done.

[ronlugge]

With the exception of the Paladin, and the arguable exception of the Druid, I don't think you need 'evil' archetypes.

[JNAProductions]

Vengeance-Good people killed my master, so all good people must die.

Ancient-People are opposed to nature. All people who are not at one with nature must die.

Really, only Devotion is hard to make evil.

[Gurka]

Honestly, I'm not a fan of having very many classes or even class archetypes that are inherently good or evil. I very much prefer for each character, however built mechanically, to have the option to be good, evil, or somewhere in the middle.

That said, I'm also a big fan of having more options presented, so while I don't really want to see more "evil" archetypes, I do want to see MORE archetypes. As more are made, some will certainly dovetail well with conventionally evil, or at least non-good backgrounds. I think that the large majority of character concepts can be shoehorned into one of the existing archetypes, but the more options are out there, the easier it is to accomplish without trying to push a square peg through a round hole.

Rather than seeing tons more specific archetypes however, I'd like to see a book devoted to offering a plethora of examples of appropriate abilities at each "tier" for archetypes, thus making it easier for players and DM's to put together their own unique class archetypes. It's perfectly doable now, but in my experience there's always some degree of resistance since it's not codified in a book.

[Naanomi]

While I don't think there needs to be specifically 'evil' archetypes but...

A decay/bug Druid would be nice;

An undead aligned warlock patron and more pact boons as well, some of which could align evil easily... Tiki mask based on fear/intimidation, voodoo doll to enhance hex and curses;

More cleric domains (darkness, destruction, domination, disease, madness) might also lead themselves to darker archetypes

[ronlugge]

Vengeance-Good people killed my master, so all good people must die.

Ancient-People are opposed to nature. All people who are not at one with nature must die.

Really, only Devotion is hard to make evil.

That actually doesn't work. It doesn't match their required tenants. That's easily obvious with oath of ancients. Oath of the Ancients paladins are required to 'kindle the light', 'shelter the light', 'preserve [their] own light', and 'be the light'. They're required to be kind and mercifiul, to protect good, beauty, love, and laughter, to enjoy life, and the encourage others to do the same.

Oath of Vengeance is a bit more difficult, but the flavor text makes it clear that they fight evil, not good. Fight the Greater Evil, No Mercy for the Wicked, By Any Means Necessary... but then you have Restitution. You could argue this one back and forth quite a bit, but the text makes it clear they're expected to do this to fight evil.

[JNAProductions]

Fair enough. As a DM, though, I'd be perfectly willing to let you play an evil Paladin, of any kind.

[ronlugge]

Fair enough. As a DM, though, I'd be perfectly willing to let you play an evil Paladin, of any kind.

Oh I'd definitely be willing to house rule those away, but the RAW still stands.

[Zevox]

Oh I'd definitely be willing to house rule those away, but the RAW still stands.
Well, by the rules as written, there are no alignment restrictions on Paladins anymore. The only problem with being an evil Paladin is that evil behavior is very likely to lead to violations of any of the oaths. Nonetheless, I could see an evil Oath of Vengeance Paladin existing, in the form of someone who takes the "by any means necessary" element of that oath too far but doesn't violate the part about helping the victims of his sworn enemies. It might be a fine line to walk, however.

Oath of Devotion or Ancients though, yeah, evil behavior will violate those very fast.

[Estrillian]

With the exception of the Paladin, and the arguable exception of the Druid, I don't think you need 'evil' archetypes.

We need an evil Druid archetype so that I can play a Drune from the Slaine comics. Slough Throt was my favourite. A Druid who follows the great worm, Crom Cruach, for example, would be entirely into death and decay.

[Cazero]

What the hell, guys. Nature is not even remotely good.
Nature advocates preying on the old and the sick just because they're easier targets. Nature consider murder a perfectly valid option as soon as the benefits outweight the cost. Nature advocates toying with your still living prey because it's fighting practice.

You don't need an evil druid archetype. The typical druid doesn't care about strangers. He is against civilization (maybe even weapons and tools) because it weakens species. He might see as his holy duty to remind people that the reign of nature is absolute, and that no law, no walls, no city, no society is above nature. He would burn down Waterdeep just to make a point : big crowded cities are too vulnerable to disasters to be a fit method of survival.

[SharkForce]

or, rather, an evil druid might do those things.

a good or neutral druid is quite unlikely to do those things.

but yeah, no need for a special "evil druid" archetype. you just make a druid, that is evil. druids already get spells that can be used to harm people. that makes them perfectly capable of being evil.

i don't see a druid focused on decay as being an appropriate archetype. druids are all about balance. on the other hand, a druid focused on the life cycle as a whole, with a view of death being a natural and necessary part of that life cycle, sounds perfectly fine. an evil druid of the archetype might seek out situations where there is too much life disrupting what they consider the natural order of things and seek to "cull the herd". a good druid of the archetype might focus more on the birth/rebirth aspect, and help in areas where there is not enough life, and particularly will have a great hatred for the undead (the evil druid should also hate undead, mind you; they're perverting the natural order. note that they will hate undead, whether they are good or evil, and probably also hate unnaturally immortal creatures). a neutral druid of the archetype will likely be some mixture of the two, but is unlikely to actively seek to kill off large populations directly.

[ronlugge]

Well, by the rules as written, there are no alignment restrictions on Paladins anymore. The only problem with being an evil Paladin is that evil behavior is very likely to lead to violations of any of the oaths. Nonetheless, I could see an evil Oath of Vengeance Paladin existing, in the form of someone who takes the "by any means necessary" element of that oath too far but doesn't violate the part about helping the victims of his sworn enemies. It might be a fine line to walk, however.

There's a slight difference between being a villian and just plain crossing the line. That said...

The kingpin character seems a perfect fit for that description, but by RAW, the line is just a little to fine to tread. I don't think a character could manage to walk it without lots of extra character knowledge.

[Ivellius]

Wow, this thread went nowhere. There was never any idea of a "need" for these things, but surely you can agree that having new options is nice. There's absolutely no need for the evil cleric and paladin in the DMG, but isn't it great to have additional options? Same for the evil druid who actually likes undead and sees them as part of the natural order. You can't say a druid absolutely won't take that view, although you're free to houserule that for your own campaigns.

Slipperychicken, the Barbarian options I put together don't really cover that, although mechanically you might like some of what I had. Naanomi, it may please you to know I've got the Circle of Decay and the Warlock patron Archlich completed. I'll be putting up a homebrew thread soon, I think.

The rest of you, thanks for the "help."

[ronlugge]

Wow, this thread went nowhere. There was never any idea of a "need" for these things, but surely you can agree that having new options is nice.

New options are nice. New options that explicitly tie to being evil not so nice. New options that tie specifically into evil for the sake of tieing into evil, very not nice.

[Slipperychicken]

New options are nice. New options that explicitly tie to being evil not so nice. New options that tie specifically into evil for the sake of tieing into evil, very not nice.

"Evil" options can be appropriate for that kind of campaign, although it takes some restraint to keep them from creeping into "good" games.

[Gurka]

"Evil" options can be appropriate for that kind of campaign, although it takes some restraint to keep them from creeping into "good" games.

I'm not even sure they need to be kept separate. It's a pretty common trope in fantasy stories to have antiheroes that are certainly not good, and quite often down right evil, as the protagonists. It's also quite a common, and often very interesting story device to have good and evil (or at least not-good) characters forced to team up to deal with a greater evil/event.

One of the best fantasy campaigns I ever played had a mix of good, evil, and in between, and the culmination (after the big bad was dealt with) ended up being a huge confrontation between the good and evil players that lasted half as long as the campaign proper. It was pretty epic.

Evil won... because good was dumb.

[Naanomi]

Druid doesn't need an evil option, sure... moon and land can both be evil just fine... but I would like a Decay/Insect druid *anyways* (that could also be a good character) and it is an archetype that lends itself towards evil interpretations somewhat naturally, like a death-cleric does

[Slipperychicken]

I'm not even sure they need to be kept separate. It's a pretty common trope in fantasy stories to have antiheroes that are certainly not good, and quite often down right evil, as the protagonists. It's also quite a common, and often very interesting story device to have good and evil (or at least not-good) characters forced to team up to deal with a greater evil/event.

My experience and most of what I've seen online show that carelessly mixing evil and good PCs tends to end poorly. It takes appropriate OOC context and mature players to make it work, which makes me feel like it's best to keep them separate unless that's the case.

Of course, in the right group, with the right context, it can be appropriate to mix them.

[ronlugge]

Actually, let me expand my previous comment.

I don't want new 'evil' options because it drives me absolutely nuts that some of the current evil options aren't available to players. I would love to do a death-domain cleric, even if the raise undead bonuses were useless to a cleric of Kelemvor, but I'm not allowed to do so in AL. Ticks me off.

[Mjolnirbear]

Background: Exile
Whether due to crimes you committed or whether everything is a complete misunderstanding, returning to your home has become a lifelong prison sentence or even a sentence of death. You are bereft of your loved ones or any bonds you had in your old life. You should work out the details of your crimes (whether real or imagined) and the penalty for return with the DM.
Skills: Stealth; Persuasion
Tools: disguise kit
Background feature: Underground movement. Through deals, old favours and connections necessitated by a life on the run, you are able to contact the underground element of any city where you have travelled and obtain hidden passage through it, or into any location within the city. This passage may be through guild, deception, or hidden access tunnels. The DM may allow you to make new deals or new favours for a new city that you have not had a chance to visit previously.



Background: Mad
Perhaps you were born that way; perhaps something drove you to madness. People who learn of this may be uneasy, or think you harmless, depending on how your madness manifests. Work with your DM to determine the form of your madness and what circumstances might trigger it. You should take care to make your madness subtle and that it does not overly disrupt the campaign.
Skills: Deception, Insight
Language: any two
Background Feature: Madness can be genius. During any social interaction, your DM may elect to roll a d20 if the situation has a chance to trigger your madness. On an even roll, your madness reveals some insight into your current situation.
For example, your madness manifests as voices whenever you see a woman with brown hair and pigtails; she reminds you of the daughter you lost which triggered your madness. While you're attempting to persuade a female guard to let you into the jail to speak with a prisoner, the DM rolls a d20 and gets a 14; you hear a voice that sounds like the guard, saying "Oh, Roland, I'm so tired of working here... I wish that priest would charge less for your treatments." As it turns out the guard's husband was grievously wounded while cutting wood, and she took this job so they could afford the priest's fees for treatment. This information, if used correctly, might provide an advantage in your negotiation.
On an odd roll, your madness confuses the situation. For example, you occasionally see visions that appear to be past events. While negotiating with a lord for a quest, the DM rolls an odd number. You see a vision of a shadowy puppetmaster controlling the lord with invisible strings. Your attempt to ascertain the truth of this confuses the negotiation, and the lord might withdraw the quest or lower the reward for completing it.
Needless to say, this background can only be taken with DM approval. Furthermore the player that takes this background should be content with the thought that the DM controls nearly every aspect of this background.



Background: Shadowy deal
In your past, in desperate need or in power, you made a deal. This deal may have allowed a loved one to survive, provided with training you needed to gain employment, or given you some advantage in the past. Your side of the deal worked; however you have yet to work off your debt; indeed you may never do so. The power with whom you dealt occasionally requests some service or quest from you, for no reward or pay. Work out with the DM what your favour was for and with whom you dealt. Depending on your benefactor, the payment he requires may be benign, or may be malicious.
Skills: Intimidation, Investigation
Tools: Poisoner's tools; thieves' tools.
Feature: Debt payment. During one of your current quests, your benefactor contacts you and asks you to provide a service related to your current quest. He may provide information to help your quest, so that you may also complete your service. Your benefactor may wish someone's death, information on an artifact you discover, stealing and delivering a particular item of power, or any number of other things. You also have the means to initiate communication in case you find something you think may be of interest to your benefactor.