Classes/Prestige Classes from older editions that you want to see on 5e?

[DragonSorcererX]

What are some classes/prestige classes that the denizens of the forum want to see back?

I want to see the Psion Shaper back so that I can make my Stand and scream: ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ...

[j_spencer93]

Hellfire Warlock- could actually be improved, making it more then just blasting.
Osteomancer
Hexblade
Shadowcaster
Binder
Dragonfire Adept- this actually seems remarkably easy to do.
Samurai- personal fave, would just love an official one
Spellthief
Sohei- monk focused on polearms and slight magic.

Soulknife

[Specter]

The only ones that I couldn't really build with archetypes and that I miss are Bloodhound, Anointed Knight and Kensai.

[DracoKnight]

The Dragonfire Adept (could be done as a warlock patron, but when I tweeted Mearles he said the Draconic Sorcerer was 5e's DFA), the Soul Knife, and the Sword Mage.

[Nishant]

Granted it has a racial lock, and shifters are only UA, but the pre-errata weretouched master was awesome. Greygaurd and shadowbane inquisitor are covered in spirit by vengeance paladin, I would say, and I remember several barbarian unarmed prestiges that were solid. I think there was an antimagic one, too.

[Talionis]

Master Thrower
Combat Trapsmith
Master Alchemist
Incarnate
Binder
Spellthief

My biggest advice would be never to put a racial or alignment restriction on any class. I think it's okay to say what race started a class but they should always leave open the possibility of other races taking a class or prestige class without DM fiat.

[Aembrosia]

3.5 Animist

[Belac93]

Psion, soulknife, binder, and shadowcaster for me. Great classes.

[Professor Gnoll]

Bone Knight, Blackguard and Entropomancer are all cool things that deserve to still exist.

[Nishant]

Bone Knight, Blackguard and Entropomancer are all cool things that deserve to still exist.

Isn't blackguard set by oathbreaker? Or am I confused

[Professor Gnoll]

Isn't blackguard set by oathbreaker? Or am I confused
Oathbreaker is good, but Blackguard had elements like sneak attacking, using poisons, etc. 4th edition had them as not necessarily being evil, with Lawful and Chaotic subtypes. Different archetypes of the 'evil Paladin' ideal, which Oathbreaker doesn't necessarily cover.

[JellyPooga]

I'd like to see the return of the Fochlucan Lyrist. I realise that it's very doable just with Bard or through multiclassing, but the Lyrist was the spiritual inheritor of the original Bard Class; the first Prestige Class. I also like the notion of a Prestige Class being more than something that a slew of builds can enter; Fochlucan Lyrist, like the original Bard, required very specific multiclassing to enter and for me that's what a Prestige Class is about. Not just "have feat X" or "be level Y", but something really earned.

[Arkhios]

Horizon Walker was one of my big favorites, as well as Sacred Fist.

[Zevox]

The Psionic classes, definitely. In a more robust way than the "Mystic" class they've been doing in UA - one class that basically tries to lump Psion and Psychic Warrior together is not a very satisfying way to go about that.

Mystic Theurge is another, though that Wizard subclass based on it from UA is a better start than the Mystic is to Psionic classes. Needs serious balance work, and preferably some unique class features rather than just cribbing all of the domain features from Clerics, but it's the right direction I think, at least.

[Socratov]

I don't really miss classes (not even my favourite combo of bard/sublime chord/virtuoso) since a lot of them have been combined into the main class or subclasses. That's also why I don't really like prestige classes all that much (though a lot of classes could do with a decent capstone instead of these now (I'm looking at you sorcerer). However, I kind of secretly hope for a truenamer that is not broken beyond playing as it was in 3.5. The fluff for the truenamer was top notch (I really loved it and still love the magic=knowing its true name trope) but it seems to be harder to actually make it a playable class then you'd think. I hope they will at some time arrive at a way to make it decent and playable. I'd also like for Wizards to implement something like Furycraft as used in de books by Jim Butcher. Oh, and while I'm at it: can I please get shamanism like in teh Shaman King manga? I thought it was a wonderful way to incorporate ghosts and spirits into powers and wielded items.

[EvilAnagram]

It seems like a lot of these classes are already represented. How are Hellfire Warlocks, Dragon Fire Adepts, and Spellthiefs not represented by Fiend Pact Warlocks, Dragon Sorcerers, and Arcane Tricksters?

[Willie the Duck]

A version of the Ur Priest concept, wrapped up in a new system where they aren't chosen exclusively for the cheese.

They could make an Eldritch Knight style variant that emulates hexblades and duskblades (and suel arcanomancers).

Of course any kind of shifter or slowly gain beastial traits build would be cool. Since it looks like we won't get any 'savage species' type thing soon, it would be nice to have another way to 'play as a lycanthrope.'

[Levistej]

Master of many forms or Warshaper would be a delicious adition to 5e but I really dont know how they would balance it out with the current mindset on wildshape. From 3.5 I would also like to see something in the mould of rage mages and binders.

From 4e, I absolutely loved the Swordmage and Warden classes so I really hope we get an arcane haf-caster tank, and a barbarian or ranger subclass based on frontline battlefield control.

[X3r4ph]

Marshal
I miss a class that is 80% none magical support. The banneret/battlemaster fighter and the devotion paladin are both close... but not close enough for me.

Spirit Shaman
I need a class that is a "primal" caster without wildshape. Yeah I said it :) to hell with Wildshape!

I agree on the following:
Spellthief (unique game mechanic)
Combat Trapsmith (unique game mechanic)
Binder (unique game mechanic)
Psion (new stuff and interesting flavor)
Shadowcaster and Necromancers (two iconic parts of DND)

__________

Edit: Anything Book of Vile Darkness related. Classes yes, but spells also. :D

[JellyPooga]

Spirit Shaman
I need a class that is a "primal" caster without wildshape. Yeah I said it :) to hell with Wildshape!

Oh gods yes.

I still think Wild Shape should have been an exclusive ability to the Circle of the Moon and the Beastmaster should have been a Druid Circle (not Ranger Archetype), leaving superior spellcasting for Circle of the Land.

The 3.5 Druid was broken because it had 3 class features that were each nearly as strong as (if not stronger than) entire Classes. Breaking those features down into three unique Circles seemed to me to be an intuitive leap that the devs of 5ed evidently did not share.

[Joe the Rat]

The Dragonfire Adept (could be done as a warlock patron, but when I tweeted Mearles he said the Draconic Sorcerer was 5e's DFA) And I have a bridge at Daggerford to sell you.

Draconic Sorcerer is a Dragon Disciple. "Warlock, only Dragony" is a very different flavor. I'd also like to see a Dragon Shaman again - though the line between these is quite blurry. (And if you ask, I bet Mearls will point to Purple Dragon Knight as its replacement, because it has Dragon in the name).

Sacred Fist, Arcane Fist-that-has-more-than-four-winds, Ur Priest (which I still think is a Warlock concept), Master Thrower, Geometer, Geomancer (only good), A Dracolexi/Truenamer (Words of Power) type caster, Drunken Master, the magic Super-specialists - by spell type, or spell-specific (conjurer, unseen hand, sevenfold veil, etc.)

[Talionis]

It seems like a lot of these classes are already represented. How are Hellfire Warlocks, Dragon Fire Adepts, and Spellthiefs not represented by Fiend Pact Warlocks, Dragon Sorcerers, and Arcane Tricksters?
Only talking about Spellthief, because it's the one I said, Spellthief basically was a one third caster. But only being able to steal a spell at 17th level is actually a point where most campaigns end. It could be a slight adjustment to the Arcane Trickster but it's not currently represented well.

[Socratov]

Only talking about Spellthief, because it's the one I said, Spellthief basically was a one third caster. But only being able to steal a spell at 17th level is actually a point where most campaigns end. It could be a slight adjustment to the Arcane Trickster but it's not currently represented well.

well, with the reduction of spellslots that is not weird. a spellslot stolen, compared to 3.5, is quite the loss.

as for one more thing I really miss a the 3.5 artificer. It sould not be a wizard, but a tinkerer.

[Prince Zahn]

Binder. goes without saying. :smallwink:

I'd also like to see if the 5e R&D team are bold enough to re-explore the Wu Jen. I don't know a thing about oriental-fantasy, but I'll bet they could do it justice!

in terms of PrC's, I think I would also like to see a Nightmare spinner executed in a clever way, and Daggerspell mages:smalltongue: and thirdly, more Fey-based (sub/)classes!

[clem]

Binder, which I could see as a warlock who has invocations that are swappable on a long rest.
Truenamer, done by someone who can do math.
Warblade
Swordsage
Artificer, not as a wizard but perhaps a rogue variant.
Archivist
Factotum

[2D8HP]

Nope!
I think 5e has too many classes already!

[Prince Zahn]

Nope!
I think 5e has too many classes already!... Are you serious? :smallconfused: it has only 1 class more than in the 3.5 PHB.


Binder, which I could see as a warlock who has invocations that are swappable on a long rest.


Putting aside for a second the blatant heresy of both these remarks, i can see why you would associate a binder with the Warlock (for one thing they would both have pact magic!) , however, I don't believe any ToM binder design be modeled after a warlock can keep the "swappable" benefits that everybody loved in 3.5 without making a bloody mess of the warlock class. It has some carefully planned design rules to maintain!

[odigity]

You know what I don't miss about 3.5?

Having to memorize 30 sourcebooks just to feel like I left no stone unturned while optimizing a build.

[SillyPopeNachos]

The tattoo monk would be nice, considering their melee abilities currently fall behind the fighter, barbarian, and paladin.

[BigONotation]

I'm working on a homebrew Dervish modelling itself on the SCAG Bladesinger which frankly might be a little too powerful IMHO (the Bladesinger).

[JAL_1138]

I wouldn't mind an optional ruleset for using monsters as PCs or a compendium of nonstandard races, a'la Complete Book of Humanoids, as long as it was über-clear that it was purely DM-optional and not something players could count on having access to. I miss my bariaur ranger from Planescape back in 2e.

But at the same time, I understand the concerns of not wanting to comb through dozens of races/classes to get a build made, and in some respects think maybe it's fine where it is and that maybe new material should be largely fluff (setting books, etc.) rather than new crunch.

[2D8HP]

Nope!
I think 5e has too many classes already!

... Are you serious? :smallconfused: it has only 1 class more than in the 3.5 PHB.Yes I am absolutely serious. While the free basic rules (http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/basicrules) are great, the PHB is just adds too much, which makes it a chore to DM. All those extra sub-classes or "archetypes", give me options fatigue.

You know what I don't miss about 3.5?

Having to memorize 30 sourcebooks just to feel like I left no stone unturned while optimizing a build.As for the false 3.5? Except that it seems to be what most people actually play, I would prefer to ignore the false 3.5 entirely. I'd also like to ignore AD&D as well.
For me the editions are:

1e: Little Wars by H.G. Well in 1913
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0d/Littlewars.jpg

2e: Chainmail by Gygax & Perren in 1971
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a1/Chainmail-1st-thumb.jpg

3e: Dungeons & Dragons by Arneson & Gygax in 1974
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/8/8e/D%26d_Box1st.jpg/175px-D%26d_Box1st.jpg

3.5: The Greyhawk supplement by Gygax & Kuntz in 1975
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e4/Greyhawk_Supplement_1975.jpg

4e: The English translation of D&D (AKA "Basic") by Holmes in 1977
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/0/09/D%26d_original.jpg/200px-D%26d_original.jpg
And then 5e in 2014

All other (false) editions imperil your soul. Heed my warning!


in some respects think maybe it's fine where it is and that maybe new material should be largely fluff (setting books, etc.) rather than new crunch.No new "crunch" at all please! Too many rules already!
End the rules deluge!
Stand athwart the editions and yell "Stop"!

[JAL_1138]

Yes I am absolutely serious. While the free basic rules (http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/basicrules) are great, the PHB is just adds too much, which makes it a chore to DM. All those extra sub-classes or "archetypes", give me options fatigue.
As for the false 3.5? Except that it seems to be what most people actually play, I would prefer to ignore the false 3.5 entirely. I'd also like to ignore AD&D as well.
For me the editions are:

1e: Little Wars by H.G. Well in 1913
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0d/Littlewars.jpg

2e: Chainmail by Gygax & Perren in 1971
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a1/Chainmail-1st-thumb.jpg

3e: Dungeons & Dragons by Arneson & Gygax in 1974
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/8/8e/D%26d_Box1st.jpg/175px-D%26d_Box1st.jpg

3.5: The Greyhawk supplement by Gygax & Kuntz in 1975
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e4/Greyhawk_Supplement_1975.jpg

4e: The English translation of D&D (AKA "Basic") by Holmes in 1977
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/0/09/D%26d_original.jpg/200px-D%26d_original.jpg
And then 5e in 2014

All other (false) editions imperil your soul. Heed my warning!

No new "crunch" at all please! Too many rules already!
End the rules deluge!
Stand athwart the editions and yell "Stop"!

I'm a 2e guy. It had supplements (usually setting box-sets...man, I miss setting box-sets) out the wazoo. Admittedly, most of the Complete [Whatever]'s Handbooks and virtually all the content in the Player's Option books were crap. But I think to an extent the fundamental assumption was more "Nothing outside the PHB (and for that matter some of the PHB) is allowed unless the DM clears it first; these are additional options which may or may not be used" rather than "Everything is assumed to be allowed unless the DM institutes restrictions." I could be wrong--I gamed in a very small community back then and wasn't active on forums (not that there were a heck of a lot of boards, even in the late 90s, and in the early '00s 3e was the new hotness)--but that was the general impression I had.

In some ways it was a bit like UA stuff in 5e is now--there was sort of an asterisk (for a footnote of "this may not be allowed, don't count on it") next to the supplement material in discussions.

[Vogonjeltz]

What are some classes/prestige classes that the denizens of the forum want to see back?

I want to see the Psion Shaper back so that I can make my Stand and scream: ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ORA! ...

I would rather avoid splat book bloat than see the Hexblade show up again.

[DragonSorcererX]

I'm in favor of customization to the maximum possible, that is why I rebuke so much rolling ANYTHING during character creation, level uo and similar situations, it erases your customization to the void. The more classes, races, feats, backgrounds, items, etc... there are, the bigger is the customization! (This problem will be solved when we get D&D 5e BESM)

[Mongobear]

I would like an ACTUAL Anti-Paladin/Blackguard class with its own subclass/archetype options.

Not some half-arsed "Oathbreaker" who has gone against his class's fluff reason for existing, but only loses 3-4 class features instead of having their entire class change. Thats one of my pet peeves with Oathbreaker, you have violated your code so badly and embraced this dark evil power, but you still have every Paladin feature, and swap out Oath stuff for Oathbreaker stuff. You can still call forth Radiant blasts of energy to Smite foes, you can still Lay on Hands to heal people, you still have the exact same spell list, sans Oath spells.

/endrant

Also, Samurai/Sohei/Ninja as has been mention before would be nice. I am a sucker for Oriental Adventure type stuff.

Kensai from 3.5 Complete Warrior was always a favorite of mine, and there isnt a whole lot of ways to really make that unique class work in 5e. Maybe a Monk or Fighter hybrid archetype?

Oh! That would be cool, Archetypes that can be chosen by multiple different classes. Gaining the same/similar benefits whether they were selected on a Rogue, a Bard, or a Fighter. obviously the mechanics would need to be slightly different based on which class you selected, but it would be cool.

[2D8HP]

OK if the clearly false rumors of a "3.5" Edition being published earlier in the 21st Century were true (hypothetically), and a book called "The Complete Adventurer" had a class that combined features of the Ranger and the Rogue in a Class called the "Scout",
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f3/Compadventurercover.jpg
that might maybe be completely awesome.
:confused:

Otherwise, combine and eliminate all but three classes:
1) Arcane Spell-casters (call them "Magic Users"),
2) Divine Miracle Workers (call them "Clerics"),
3) Non Spell-casters (since without Magic it will be a struggle to survive, call them "Fighters").
I think that would work!
:biggrin:

[Professor Gnoll]

OK if the clearly false rumors of a "3.5" Edition being published earlier in the 21st Century were true (hypothetically), and a book called "The Complete Adventurer" had a class that combined features of the Ranger and the Rogue in a Class called the "Scout",
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f3/Compadventurercover.jpg
that might maybe be completely awesome.
:confused:

Otherwise, combine and eliminate all but three classes:
1) Arcane Spell-casters (call them "Magic Users"),
2) Divine Miracle Workers (call them "Clerics"),
3) Non Spell-casters (since without Magic it will be a struggle to survive, call them "Fighters").
I think that would work!
:biggrin:
Eh. I like having lots of options. I like having the freedom to choose from a wide variety of possibilities to build a wide array of characters. 5e is already pretty streamlined. If you want to reduce it that much, you might as well make a simple fantasy heartbreaker and be done with it.

[Nishant]

I'm in favor of customization to the maximum possible, that is why I rebuke so much rolling ANYTHING during character creation, level uo and similar situations, it erases your customization to the void. The more classes, races, feats, backgrounds, items, etc... there are, the bigger is the customization! (This problem will be solved when we get D&D 5e BESM)

While I love rolling stats, i agree wholeheartedly with this. I just love the idea of being able to play as whatever race I want, even more than new classes.

edit: also, I'd love to see scout return. it would be able to fit well with the rogue kit, it just needs a little fine tuning.

[RickAllison]

Silver hair Knights. Love the concept and would be intrigued to see how it fares in a system with less emphasis on alignment.

[JakOfAllTirades]

OK if the clearly false rumors of a "3.5" Edition being published earlier in the 21st Century were true (hypothetically), and a book called "The Complete Adventurer" had a class that combined features of the Ranger and the Rogue in a Class called the "Scout",
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f3/Compadventurercover.jpg
that might maybe be completely awesome.
:confused:

Otherwise, combine and eliminate all but three classes:
1) Arcane Spell-casters (call them "Magic Users"),
2) Divine Miracle Workers (call them "Clerics"),
3) Non Spell-casters (since without Magic it will be a struggle to survive, call them "Fighters").
I think that would work!
:biggrin:

Posts like this make me wonder why you bother with this forum. It's obvious you're not interested in 5E as written.

[Quintessence]

Planar Shepard :^)

[Herobizkit]

Chameleon (be whatever class today)
Master of Masks (add class/race powers; very Majora)
Eldritch Theurge (Warlock/Cleric that let you burn "turn undead" to change your EB to a healbeam; other cool stuff)
Master of Many Forms (let's change into, say, aberrations, shall we?)

Soulknife was knifty, if a little bland
Psychic Warrior was pretty rad (especially when paired with Monk)

There was a 'pet' wizard PrC that let you make clockwork/golem companions that was kinda okay.

Oozemaster. My god, Oozemaster. This begs to be a Druid circle. The plant one they had on the DM Guild was close.

[Asmotherion]

None! Prestige Classes do not belong in 5e. I hope the idea stays in UA, and is never mentioned again.

If I however had to chose, I would say Ultimate Magus, Eldrich Theurge, and in general staff that can make Class A and Class B progress at the same time... That said it can be perfectly managable by creating custom specialisations.

-Hellfire Warlock can be covered in an Invocation chain that is specific to the Fiend-Pact warlock. Or as an alternative Pact Gift "Hellfire", which is meh at first, but if you take a couple of it's invocations becomes interesting... That said, the Warlock is powerfull enough as it is, and doing so would be breaking game balance.

-Ultimate Magus can be worked as a Wizard tradition that gives a limited amout of metamagic (Maybe half level in spell points/only 2 metamagic options)... Still, the wizard is already too powerfull as he is, and access to quicken/twin spell would take away the only awesome thing the Sorcerer gets in reguards to the Wizard. I would say it could also work as a Sorcerous origin, but it can't... Pitty.

-Eldrich Theurge: Remember those, so-called Sorlocks, Bardlocks, maybe even Wizlocks (I am refearing to the 2-3 Warlock dip people take, which, to be honest, I find awesome)? Now you have a fancy name for them all.

In any case, if what you want is the lore of an old Prestige Class, I am sure that, with a good DM, you can work it as a custom backround option. If on the other hand you want synergising and stuff, I am sure you can pull this without a prestige class in 5e. Now, on the rare cases you can't, it's either too game-braking for you to have access to it, or you'll need to work a custom class specialisation with your DM.

For example, the Master Transmogrifist prestige from 3.5 can either be a Sorcerous Origin from a shapeshifter bloodline or a Re-touched Wizard tradition (Transmutation).

[Socratov]

None! Prestige Classes do not belong in 5e. I hope the idea stays in UA, and is never mentioned again.


I simultaneously agree and disagree with you. Yes I don't think prestige classes have any place in 5e, but I also consider the subclasses to have the same role as PrC's in 3.5: they provide different options wihtin a class and different ways to manifest your class. This does mean that theurging won't have a plce in 5e and that is fine with me: a small sacrifice for things I love about 5e (like vicious Mockery). However I think some classes are missing or some cool 3.5 inventions could still have their place in 5e as subclasses or classes on their own

[JAL_1138]

I would say Thief-Acrobat (1e UA. Because old. Get off my lawn. Dagnabbed whippersnappers) but Thief-subclass covers it fine.

[RickAllison]

I simultaneously agree and disagree with you. Yes I don't think prestige classes have any place in 5e, but I also consider the subclasses to have the same role as PrC's in 3.5: they provide different options wihtin a class and different ways to manifest your class. This does mean that theurging won't have a plce in 5e and that is fine with me: a small sacrifice for things I love about 5e (like vicious Mockery). However I think some classes are missing or some cool 3.5 inventions could still have their place in 5e as subclasses or classes on their own

Agreed. I kind of like the the example set with the Totem Barbarian, where the new totems just used the normal base and so it was easy and modular.

Like the Silverhaired Knight could just be a Paladin of Devotion that trades out certain abilities for others. Heck, I've already toyed with making a Gadgeteer and Alchemist who were just the Arcane Trickster and Eldritch Knight with spells known substituted for gadgets/potions a la the UA Artificer. Quick and Easy!

[2D8HP]

Eh. I like having lots of options. I like having the freedom to choose from a wide variety of possibilities to build a wide array of characters. 5e is already pretty streamlined. If you want to reduce it that much, you might as well make a simple fantasy heartbreaker and be done with it.
Posts like this make me wonder why you bother with this forum. It's obvious you're not interested in 5E as written.I like playing 5e a lot. I've had super-fun as a player with my level five and below (Champion) Fighter's and Rogues. It's as a DM that I find it too complex.
While with just the Starter set, and the free basic rules (http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/basicrules) DM'ing is still OK, when you add the PHB it's just too much of a chore to DM. Especially at higher levels all those extra different super-powers, while fun for players, just increase the burden on DM's.
I gave the 3.5 "Scout" as an example of a Class I'd like to as a player (the purpose of the thread), but I wanted to give the dissenting view that for DM's they're already too many classes.
While less so than 3.5 compared to oD&D, 5e is very much a players game, and that's the problem. They're too many players and too few DM's.
I'd like there to be more tables playing D&D, and I think that by having a little less complex game more people would be willing to "wear the DM hat".
Player options are fun, but actually playing the game is even more fun!

[Occasional Sage]

I would say Thief-Acrobat (1e UA. Because old. Get off my lawn. Dagnabbed whippersnappers) but Thief-subclass covers it fine.

As long as there isn't a Bard that requires three different classes to be taken prior, sure.

[Socratov]

I like playing 5e a lot. I've had super-fun as a player with my level five and below (Champion) Fighter's and Rogues. It's as a DM that I find it too complex.
While with just the Starter set, and the free basic rules (http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/basicrules) DM'ing is still OK, when you add the PHB it's just too much of a chore to DM. Especially at higher levels all those extra different super-powers, while fun for players, just increase the burden on DM's.
I gave the 3.5 "Scout" as an example of a Class I'd like to as a player (the purpose of the thread), but I wanted to give the dissenting view that for DM's they're already too many classes.
While less so than 3.5 compared to oD&D, 5e is very much a players game, and that's the problem. They're too many players and too few DM's.
I'd like there to be more tables playing D&D, and I think that by having a little less complex game more people would be willing to "wear the DM hat".
Player options are fun, but actually playing the game is even more fun!

I disagree mostly, since the days of 3.5 and 4e the DM has goitten a lotof agency back. Before, the player was guaranteed to have interpertations in the book, this was most commonly explained by the DC's set for skills in terms of guidelines or crystal clear set DC's for a certain task. This has disappeared completely in 5e since it says, that you can make a skillcheck and the DM sets a DC (no more DC X gives you Y success at [task]). And that's not the only example: the rules (both PHB and DMG give the player the warning that everything goes by the grace of the DM. it seems almost everywehre the designers could they said 'ask you DM' and went for a minimum effort on crystal clear rules.

That said I agree that the DM has a lot to do when preparing (one of the reasons that when I decided to start DMing to pick a different system) because he has the added burden of being ajudicator, on top of referee, opposition, and basically the world creator. Fortunately the DM can make use of the DMG and MM, however, as mentioned in another thread, they weren't as dilligent in creating the MM as they could have been. ( I believe the words 'lazy devs' were used at some point). The fact that the DM has to account for a myraid of options, yet at the same time narrow them down for the options the players have chosen (think about all those spelleffects) to create a diverse and challenging, but overcomable set of problems. I agree that it's a daunting task and the choice fatigue can readily creep in. However, the myria dof options does give the DM a way to create an ever diverse set of obstacles. Be they traps, mosnters, enemies (with classlevels) and so on. I think that in this case more options can definitely enrich a game like 5e.

[JellyPooga]

As long as there isn't a Bard that requires three different classes to be taken prior, sure.It's funny you should say that...

I'd like to see the return of the Fochlucan Lyrist. I realise that it's very doable just with Bard or through multiclassing, but the Lyrist was the spiritual inheritor of the original Bard Class; the first Prestige Class.

[Professor Beard]

I like Initiate of the 7-fold Veil from 3.5. Massive focus on magical defense. Super fun for the PCs, and, as the DM, I had a ball with it.

I really liked 3.5's half-dragon and other become-a-monster prestige classes. Cool development for PCs.

Rainbow Servant from 3.5 was also fantastic. At least I think it was, getting cleric spells as a sorcerer was fantastic. Maybe I am just remembering the picture fondly, too, but the class was fun and had lots of RP potential.

[Zevox]

I simultaneously agree and disagree with you. Yes I don't think prestige classes have any place in 5e, but I also consider the subclasses to have the same role as PrC's in 3.5: they provide different options wihtin a class and different ways to manifest your class. This does mean that theurging won't have a plce in 5e and that is fine with me: a small sacrifice for things I love about 5e (like vicious Mockery). However I think some classes are missing or some cool 3.5 inventions could still have their place in 5e as subclasses or classes on their own
Also agreed. I don't want Prestige Classes in their 3.5 form, as extra classes you could only multiclass into at higher levels, back - but seeing them represented as subclasses of regular classes, the way the Eldritch Knight and Arcane Trickster were from the outset, would be great.

That's the type of thing I want to see with Psionics, incidentally. Not one Psionic class whose subclasses amount to Psion and Psychic Warrior, but a Psion class with things like Psionic Uncarnate or Thrallherd as subclasses; and a Psychic Warrior class with subclasses like War Mind, Soul Knife, and Pyrokineticist; and Psionic Fist as a Monk subclass.

[EvilAnagram]

I like playing 5e a lot. I've had super-fun as a player with my level five and below (Champion) Fighter's and Rogues. It's as a DM that I find it too complex.
While with just the Starter set, and the free basic rules (http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/basicrules) DM'ing is still OK, when you add the PHB it's just too much of a chore to DM. Especially at higher levels all those extra different super-powers, while fun for players, just increase the burden on DM's.
I gave the 3.5 "Scout" as an example of a Class I'd like to as a player (the purpose of the thread), but I wanted to give the dissenting view that for DM's they're already too many classes.
While less so than 3.5 compared to oD&D, 5e is very much a players game, and that's the problem. They're too many players and too few DM's.
I'd like there to be more tables playing D&D, and I think that by having a little less complex game more people would be willing to "wear the DM hat".
Player options are fun, but actually playing the game is even more fun!

As a DM, I have not had any problems at all. Sometimes, maybe once or twice a session, I take ninety seconds to look up a rule, and that's the extent of my trouble with the rules.

[DivisibleByZero]

I think the UA PrC that they released being received so poorly, in combination with the general format of subclasses being 5e's version of prestige, means that subclasses will continue and PrCs will remain unavailable for quite some time.

And as I've said before (maybe I this thread, maybe prior), if you want a certain PrCs from 3.5, then all you have to do is choose a few of the previous PrC's abilities and use those to make a subclass for an appropriate base class.
That's really all you need.

Less is more. Especially in 5e.

[NecroDancer]

Horizon walker, I think it would be a perfect ranger archetype.

Anima Mage, this is a warlock archtype as well.

[JellyPooga]

Horizon walker, I think it would be a perfect ranger archetype.

There's definitely room for a series of "Planeswalker" Archetypes, I think; Horizon Walker for the Ranger, Planar Shepard for the Druid, Gate Crasher for the Rogue, etc.

[NecroDancer]

There's definitely room for a series of "Planeswalker" Archetypes, I think; Horizon Walker for the Ranger, Planar Shepard for the Druid, Gate Crasher for the Rogue, etc.

Maybe it will be released in a planescape book, one can only hope

[DragonSorcererX]

None! Prestige Classes do not belong in 5e. I hope the idea stays in UA, and is never mentioned again.

They are called Archetypes, for now... (Since the Prestige Classes will only come back when WotC starts releasing a new book each month to raise money to move to D&D 6e...)

[2D8HP]

As a DM, I have not had any problems at all. Sometimes, maybe once or twice a session, I take ninety seconds to look up a rule, and that's the extent of my trouble with the rules.I suspect that you "rolled" a much higher "Intelligence stat', than I did than.

[EvilAnagram]

I suspect that you "rolled" a much higher "Intelligence stat', than I did than.

This isn't highschool. We don't have to pretend the ability to memorize information is the same as intelligence.

[2D8HP]

This isn't highschool. We don't have to pretend the ability to memorize information is the same as intelligence.I was being sincere. I have a much harder time remembering most rules I last read 35 minutes ago than I do remembering rules I read 35 years ago, which is why I'm a failure at DM'ing 5e, to the regret of the others at the table who drafted me on the basis of my "experience"
While I can still improvise adventures, and "worldbuild", I'm terrible at adjudicating current RAW, and given the unmet need for DM's that's a pronlem.
Is there a way to have more willing and competant DM's?

[Arkhios]

They are called Archetypes, for now... (Since the Prestige Classes will only come back when WotC starts releasing a new book each month to raise money to move to D&D 6e...)

That's an awfully negative and pessimistic point of view. Please, go form a D&D 6e forum elsewhere, such talk does not belong here :(

[JAL_1138]

I was being sincere. I have a much harder time remembering most rules I last read 35 minutes ago than I do remembering rules I read 35 years ago, which is why I'm a failure at DM'ing 5e, to the regret of the others at the table who drafted me on the basis of my "experience"
While I can still improvise adventures, and "worldbuild", I'm terrible at adjudicating current RAW, and given the unmet need for DM's that's a pronlem.
Is there a way to have more willing and competant DM's?

You could tab and label the chapters in your book or get a searchable .pdf of it so you can ctrl+f for certain bits of text, and accept that there may be slight delays for reading rules. I have a terrible memory myself (lack of available hard disk space, metaphorically speaking, after all the stuff I have to keep memorized for work and now even more schooling, with additional memory problems from depression--it wreaks havoc on short-term memory, and did I mention depression causes memory problems? I forget) and so I flip through the book pretty often, but having it thoroughly tabbed means I can usually find what I need quick enough it doesn't completely shoot the game's pacing in the foot. Grazes it, maybe, giving it a limp but not totally hobbling it. That metaphor got weird. Anyway...having a .pdf of the rules may be an even better option than tabbing, depending on your feelings about using laptops or tablets--if you need to look up, say, overland travel pace, you can ctrl+f "travel pace" or some such and find the rule for it in a couple seconds.

The 5e DM screen isn't bad, but isn't perfect either. You could make your own with some of the rules you forget reference the text of most frequently summarized on it.

You can also appoint the most rules-knowledgeable player as a human Google to look stuff up for you and present the relevant text. Since I look stuff up just for my own understanding plenty, I get this job sometimes as a player.

Typically for 5e, in my experience thus far, a player's class-build should only be a concern as DM if it starts really messing with the game balance-wise or if something they're doing sets off a red flag of "wait, I thought it worked differently." In which case, it's the player's job to point you to the rules text they're exploiting referencing, not your job to know it all backwards and forwards. E.g., "How do you have that ability?" "It's from this feat, right here *points to page* See?" "*reads text* Ok, got it."

[DragonSorcererX]

That's an awfully negative and pessimistic point of view.

I ALWAYS expect the worst from humanity, and WotC is part of it. If they were Metallic Dragonborn Paladins of Bahamut I would have faith in them... but they're humans...

[TripleD]

It warms my heart to see several other people remember the "Combat Trapsmith"/"Trapsmith". I hope it returns as a Ranger subclass. Model it off of the Battlemaster; every few levels you pick new kinds of traps you can lay.

[Nishant]

Also agreed. I don't want Prestige Classes in their 3.5 form, as extra classes you could only multiclass into at higher levels, back - but seeing them represented as subclasses of regular classes, the way the Eldritch Knight and Arcane Trickster were from the outset, would be great.

That's the type of thing I want to see with Psionics, incidentally. Not one Psionic class whose subclasses amount to Psion and Psychic Warrior, but a Psion class with things like Psionic Uncarnate or Thrallherd as subclasses; and a Psychic Warrior class with subclasses like War Mind, Soul Knife, and Pyrokineticist; and Psionic Fist as a Monk subclass.

Elocater from 3.5 was a neat idea too, I think. They could probably even set 'pyrokineticist' to have multiple element options and choose from one of them. Either way, I'd love to see them

[Xetheral]

I'd like to see the return of the Fochlucan Lyrist. I realise that it's very doable just with Bard or through multiclassing, but the Lyrist was the spiritual inheritor of the original Bard Class; the first Prestige Class. I also like the notion of a Prestige Class being more than something that a slew of builds can enter; Fochlucan Lyrist, like the original Bard, required very specific multiclassing to enter and for me that's what a Prestige Class is about. Not just "have feat X" or "be level Y", but something really earned.

I too want to see the Fochlucan Lyrists return, although at least a little flexibility on entry requirements would be nice. (Still make them super-strict, but with more than one way to meet them.)


-Ultimate Magus can be worked as a Wizard tradition that gives a limited amout of metamagic (Maybe half level in spell points/only 2 metamagic options)... Still, the wizard is already too powerfull as he is, and access to quicken/twin spell would take away the only awesome thing the Sorcerer gets in reguards to the Wizard. I would say it could also work as a Sorcerous origin, but it can't... Pitty.

Actually, I think UM would be easy as a sorcerous origin. Give them int-mod (capped by level) memorizations from a spellbook from the wizard list on top of their spells known. Maybe twice that number for the last origin feature. It would be competitive with Favored Soul power wise (extra spell-choice flexibility compensated for by MADness and lack of extra attack) and I think that's a good thing.

[CursedRhubarb]

I'd like to see the Oozemaster from 3.5 be updated. It looked like a lot of fun and would be hilarious and mesh oddly well with a Great Old One Warlock, and give some interesting melee and ranged non-spell options to casters.

Plus...you get to become an ooze.

[NecroDancer]

I just read ToM, an anima Mage would be awsome (if not overpowered)

[Breltar]

I'd love to see scout return. it would be able to fit well with the rogue kit, it just needs a little fine tuning.

They made an Unearthed Arcana piece about scout and a few other older versions of classes from AD&D in the "Kits of Old" article.

http://media.wizards.com/2015/downloads/dnd/04_UA_Classics_Revisited.pdf

I'm currently playing as that version of the scout in our Curse of Stradh Ravenloft Campaign and find it's a really neat mix of fighter/ranger/rogue.

[2D8HP]

While the books are expensive (but so pretty), besides the free basic 5e rules (http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/basicrules) which are great, I haven't gone a year without seeing really cheap used year 2000 printings of the "3e" PHB for sale (that I paid full price for my so soon "obsolete" copy is a reason that I boycotted 3.5 & 4e), and my local Library has alll the core books and "Princes of the Apocalypse" available for checkout!
Now that's availability (if only I could better remember all those new rules)!
:smile:

[Breltar]

While the books are expensive (but so pretty), besides the free basic 5e rules (http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/basicrules) which are great, I haven't gone a year without seeing really cheap used year 2000 printings of the "3e" PHB for sale (that I paid full price for my so soon "obsolete" copy is a reason that I boycotted 3.5 & 4e), and my local Library has alll the core books and "Princes of the Apocalypse" available for checkout!
Now that's availability (if only I could better remember all those new rules)!
:smile:

I often suggest that folks only use the basic rules for their first games, it makes it a lot less for really new players to rpgs to have to remember. The SRD for 5E is pretty good too, once you have the rules down.

There are so many monsters and extras free through the D&D site it's almost criminal. Some are via the basic rules and others through the players guides and supplements like Horde of the Dragon Queen.

[NecroDancer]

While the books are expensive (but so pretty), besides the free basic 5e rules (http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/basicrules) which are great, I haven't gone a year without seeing really cheap used year 2000 printings of the "3e" PHB for sale (that I paid full price for my so soon "obsolete" copy is a reason that I boycotted 3.5 & 4e), and my local Library has alll the core books and "Princes of the Apocalypse" available for checkout!
Now that's availability (if only I could better remember all those new rules)!
:smile:

Your library has D&D books!?

[DracoKnight]

Your library has D&D books!?

Mine too! It has everything from AD&D on :smallbiggrin:

[DragonSorcererX]

Mine too! It has everything from AD&D on :smallbiggrin:

From AD&D? How many buildings does your library has?

[DracoKnight]

From AD&D? How many buildings does your library has?

Two, actually.

[2D8HP]

Mine too! It has everything from AD&D on :smallbiggrin:That sounds awesome!
Mine used to have "The Dragon", and the 1e DMG, but no more. The only pre-5e stuff they still have is 3.5 era.
:frown:
The library in nearby Oakland has 4e stuff I've been curious to check out.

[DracoKnight]

The library in nearby Oakland has 4e stuff I've been curious to check out.

I'd say it's worth it - 4e's not nearly as bad as people say it is.

[JAL_1138]

Two, actually.

Of course. Stands to reason. One building for the "Dungeons & Dragons" line (Holmes, B/X, BECMI, RC) and one for the "Advanced Dungeons & Dragons" line (1e, 2e, etc.). :smalltongue:

[Axorfett12]

I'm a little late for this party, but having read through all the responses, I just have to contribute my personal favorite source for all my 5e needs.

I present...

The Middle Finger of Vecna (http://www.middlefingerofvecna.com/p/homebrew.html?m=1)

The vast majority of the options mentioned in this thread can be found as various archetypes. Even the ooze master makes an appearance. Take a look. It's worth it.

[Professor Gnoll]

I'd say it's worth it - 4e's not nearly as bad as people say it is.
4E's a good system, and is especially good as a tactical battle game, but is also very un-D&D in a lot of ways. This is the crux of people's dislike- not that it's bad as such, but that it doesn't feel like D&D.

Still very much worth trying out.

[Socratov]

4E's a good system, and is especially good as a tactical battle game, but is also very un-D&D in a lot of ways. This is the crux of people's dislike- not that it's bad as such, but that it doesn't feel like D&D.

Still very much worth trying out.

Exactly: it felt more like playing a video game instead of DnD. What they did right was balance, but at the same tie they lost sight of what makes the classes real actual classes. This is where 5e went right, sure they lost a bit balance, but they reintroduced the feel of distinct flavours between classes.

[PapaQuackers]

Chameleon (be whatever class today)
Master of Masks (add class/race powers; very Majora)
Eldritch Theurge (Warlock/Cleric that let you burn "turn undead" to change your EB to a healbeam; other cool stuff)
Master of Many Forms (let's change into, say, aberrations, shall we?)

Soulknife was knifty, if a little bland
Psychic Warrior was pretty rad (especially when paired with Monk)

There was a 'pet' wizard PrC that let you make clockwork/golem companions that was kinda okay.

Oozemaster. My god, Oozemaster. This begs to be a Druid circle. The plant one they had on the DM Guild was close.

I made a class called Mime that is at the very least an homage to Chameleon. If you just google 5E Mime its the first thing that pops up.


I would like to a class that really dedicates itself to using big big swords. LikeI want Monkey Grip and what not.

[JellyPooga]

I'd like to see the Oozemaster from 3.5 be updated. It looked like a lot of fun and would be hilarious and mesh oddly well with a Great Old One Warlock, and give some interesting melee and ranged non-spell options to casters.

Plus...you get to become an ooze.

Yeah, another Oozemaster would be cool and might make a good Warlock Patron; particularly apt for pacts with the likes of Jubilex.

[Arkhios]

I'm a little late for this party, but having read through all the responses, I just have to contribute my personal favorite source for all my 5e needs.

I present...

The Middle Finger of Vecna (http://www.middlefingerofvecna.com/p/homebrew.html?m=1)

The vast majority of the options mentioned in this thread can be found as various archetypes. Even the ooze master makes an appearance. Take a look. It's worth it.

These look awesome!

Although, on the matter of Oozemaster fandom. What's wrong with you guys? Yearning for a conversion for this class begs for checking one's head! :smallbiggrin:

[Scarey Nerd]

Classes/subclasses:
Archivist - Its own class
Spirit Shaman - Its own class
Dread Necromancer - Sorcerous Origin maybe?
Spellthief - Roguish Archetype

PRCs:
Tattooed Monk
Hellfire Warlock
Menacing Brute
Runesmith (expanded on, obv)

[furby076]

Sacred exorcist of the silver flame

[Sigreid]

I wouldn't mind seeing a true summoner. One that can call on a wide variety of supernatural creatures, but whose power is almost exclusively in the summoning and banishing of spirits, demons, devils, fey, elementals, etc.

[Kane0]

Arcane Archer
Hexblade
Dragon Shaman/Dragonfire Adept/Dragon Disciple
Tome of Battle classes
Binder
Magic of Incarnum classes
Shaman/Warden
Dwarven Defender

Luckily there are some excellent 'brews out there that cover most of these

[Steampunkette]

Psionicist.
Psychic Warrior.
Soulknife I could take or leave. Maybe make it a rogue-like subclass of Psychic Warrior?

Spirit Shaman would be cool? I'd also love to see a nature caster that isn't all about animal-summoning and transformation.

Flashy charisma-based fighter type gladiator/swashbuckler/something. Not a Paladin, a light fighter who uses charisma rather than spellcasting.

Chronomancer. Seriously. Come on. Give me time magic! I want to push people around in the timestream!

Necromancer. Not just as a subkit of wizard, but an all out complete necromancer class. It will probably never work, due to action economy, in the classic "Here are my dozens of minions" sense. But being able to move around a series of "Difficult Terrain" tokens that threaten the area around them could be neat. Then develop some spells and abilities that allow you to attack from one of your zombie tokens. Muahahaha! The higher level you are, the more you get, but they only ever have a few HP each and... I'm gonna have to go homebrew this idea, aren't I?

I also think that Prestige Classes are a Very Bad Idea. I would much rather see more of the Subclasses used to represent Prestige Classes and Prestige Feats. (Crossposting)
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?425261-Homebrew-Feats-(including-Prc-replacement-feats)

Seriously, Sindeloke is a freaking genius.

[T.G. Oskar]

Of the classes/PrCs presented here, I figure there's some close approximations of pretty good ones:

The Spellthief exists in a way within the Arcane Trickster, with the Spell Thief class feature. It's somewhat limited (it's mostly the Spellthief's Absorb Spell class feature, but essentially 1/day). The spell list of the Arcane Trickster is pretty close to the Spellthief one, drawing mostly from enchantment and illusion, so making it a full class is pointless. Replacing Mage Hand Legerdemain with an actual Steal Spell class feature would make it the actual spellthief in all but name).
The Swordmage was pretty much cannibalized by the Eldritch Knight, particularly its At-Will spells, which became cantrips. Some of the more unique spells, such as...say, the Aegis feature, could be turned into spells the Eldritch Knight (and only the Eldritch Knight) can cast, making it a better defender of sorts.
Dragon Disciple and Wild Mage are Sorcerous class origins. Enough said.
Tattooed Monk exists in a way on the Way of the Four Elements; if you notice the fluff, they make reference to said monks having tattooes, which echoes the feel. Maybe with a revision you could have a proper Tattooed Monk, or have the Way of the Four Elements work as a basis for the Way of the Tattoed Monk/Way of Ise Zumi, and make it self-buffs, would be much nicer.
Warden....that's a tough one, because it blurs the line between Druid and Ranger. A Warden archetype/Warden Conclave would be pretty decent. The other half is covered by the Oath of the Ancients, in a way.
The way it's working, the Mystic's Path of the Immortal will be essentially the Psychic Warrior, so don't expect that, or Battlemind.
The Way of Shadows is pretty much a Ninja, so that's somewhat out of the question.

That said, I'd love to see these worked on.

The Artificer. Full Stop. The Wizard school just doesn't make it justice - it's clunky, and doesn't fit the mechanics of the Artificer of tinkering, rather than being a magician that knows how to craft. Plus, there's a good set of subclasses - the Renegade Mastermaker, the Alchemist Savant, the Wand Adept, the Effigy Master...those are pretty interesting, distinct Artificer specializations.
The Soulknife, at least as an Archetype. As a Fighter archetype, it'd be pretty awesome - have your own weapon, maybe get access to one or two disciplines, and couple it with the Fighter's tried and true fighting capabilities. The Soulknife was visualized as a sort of agile warrior, but it fits best with the ideology of the current Fighter.
The Marshal or Warlord. This one is a tough call. As a class, it doesn't have enough distinctive concepts to translate into subclasses. As a Fighter subclass, it wouldn't do much justice - you could rework the Battlemaster into one. It's kinda split into Battlemaster and Purple Dragon Knight in what it offers, but it's still wider.
The Hexblade, as a Martial Archetype based on the Eldritch Knight, but using Pact Magic instead. Essentially, condense the Pact of the Blade, some of the Warlock's invocations (limited progress, one or two less slots), and work the Hexblade's curse and that's a wrap. The Hexblade exists in a way as part of the Pact of the Blade, but the class itself is pretty distinct, as it inclines more to the FIghter side than to the Warlock side. It was a concept that couldn't be worked as intended at the moment it was released, but after the Warlock? Would have been awesome. Never figured why not make an ACF that replaced Hexblade spells with Warlock invocations...
The Avenger. Maybe as a Roguish Archetype. Sure, the Oath of Vengeance works in a way like the Avenger did, but the Avenger IMO was closer to a "divine Rogue" in terms of being used to stealth and subterfuge.
The Geometer, as a school of Wizardry. Figure out how to work the spellglyphs, and how to empower the glyph-based spells. Would make for a nice magic trap master. Didn't realize the Geometer was a translation of the AD&D 2e Player's Option additional Wizard specializations (alongside Song Magic...now that's one I can't seem to wrap my head up)
The Horizon Walker as a Ranger Archetype/Conclave. The Totem Warrior has a way to handle the different terrains/planes, the Circle of the Moon has another way to handle them. Maybe the first one grants access to a favored terrain, the third feature grants a favored planar terrain, and features 2 and 4 just enhance both altogether.
As someone mentioned, the Trapsmith, as either a Ranger or Rogue archetype (though I'd incline toward Rogue). Make some quick and easy traps, and make it a master trap disarmer. Traps would work to an extent as Fighter maneuvers, except triggered by external sources. Maybe add a few more things, and combine their effects (Poison damage + Poison effect, Bludgeoning damage + Knock Prone, Fire/Radiant damage + Blind effect, and so on).
The Kensai, as a Martial Archetype. Same concept as the Soulknife, except with a bonded weapon, and maybe add maneuvers... Could wrap Samurai as a class into a simple, easy archetype. The Battlemaster works quite well like it, but it lacks a few of the things earlier kensai had (maybe Power Surge, Instill?)
A curve - d20 Future's Dreadnaught. Maybe as a Barbarian Path. The Dreadnaught was pretty simple - wear the heaviest armor, get into an Adrenaline Surge much like a Barbarian, become completely immune to fear, knock people prone just by hitting a damage threshold, wield weapons one size category larger, and knock prone while moving around. Mostly, it'd involve having the Barbarian gain heavy armor proficiency, the Knockdown effect first as part of a Dash move and then as part of your Attacks (maybe as a bonus action after a successful attack?), amongst other things. It'd be a barbarian that focuses into wielding the biggest armor and weapons around, and be just generally unstoppable.

[JellyPooga]

Although, on the matter of Oozemaster fandom. What's wrong with you guys? Yearning for a conversion for this class begs for checking one's head! :smallbiggrin:

So speaketh one unititiated in the joys of ooze. You clearly didn't eat enough jelly* or blancmange as a kid! Still, the PrC had quite a lot going for it, despite it's somewhat...unusual theme. Unique features like being able to squeeze through small gaps and produce gobs of acidic goo at-will were fun to play with. Being the guy whose opening move in big combats is to declare "Go forth my oozy minions and devour!" was always good for drawing a few incredulous looks. Also, speaking in-character by gargling whatever you were drinking at the table was always good for a laugh (and tended to give your character sheet an authentic, sticky, goo-stained texture), not to mention being allowed to throw jelly-sweets at the GM whenever you made an attack. It might have been weird and sub-par (IIRC it only gave half-spellcasting progression with requisites more suited for a full-spellcasting build *shudder*), but Oozemaster was a hoot to play. I never did manage to set up that underground Ooze-Racing circuit though...

*That's "jello" to all those in the States :smallwink:

[Satsujinki]

i'd love a kensai and a samurai. I KNOW i can reskin a fighter but i'd like something more unique to it....

[Arkhios]

i'd love a kensai and a samurai. I KNOW i can reskin a fighter but i'd like something more unique to it....

I know you said you'd like something unique, but isn't the battlemaster essentially an universal chassis to fit a samurai at least?

I mean, weren't samurai upper class citizens and expected to be cultural. Student of War fits well for that concept.
Make him a noble or knight, depending on rank, and you're set.

[RickAllison]

I know you said you'd like something unique, but isn't the battlemaster essentially an universal chassis to fit a samurai at least?

I mean, weren't samurai upper class citizens and expected to be cultural. Student of War fits well for that concept.
Make him a noble or knight, depending on rank, and you're set.

I really like Barbarian for a quiet samurai, substituting Rage for Trance or similar where the samurai enters a quiet, cold, killer phase. Rogue is good for the image of a sword strike being so fast that it isn't noticed until after the rogue has passed by, or to represent numerous slashes faster than the eye can track.

[DivisibleByZero]

I know you said you'd like something unique, but isn't the battlemaster essentially an universal chassis to fit a samurai at least?

I mean, weren't samurai upper class citizens and expected to be cultural. Student of War fits well for that concept.
Make him a noble or knight, depending on rank, and you're set.

Battlemaster is 5e's default Samurai, yes. That's literally the first thing I thought when I originally read Student of War.

[Grey Watcher]

Oh gods yes.

I still think Wild Shape should have been an exclusive ability to the Circle of the Moon and the Beastmaster should have been a Druid Circle (not Ranger Archetype), leaving superior spellcasting for Circle of the Land.

The 3.5 Druid was broken because it had 3 class features that were each nearly as strong as (if not stronger than) entire Classes. Breaking those features down into three unique Circles seemed to me to be an intuitive leap that the devs of 5ed evidently did not share.

I dunno, part of me agrees with you, but part of me says, if you want a casting-only Nature caster, the 5e way to do it would be to use a Cleric Domain, Wizard School, Sorcerer Bloodline, or similar (though, of those three, I think the Cleric's Nature Domain is the only one you can really do without homebrew, unless you're *very* specifically focused on, say, air/storm themed magic, which gives you the Storm Sorcerer).

It's just that, without the sub-class specific stuff, Wizards have better ritual casting and arcane recovery (OK, they're a lackluster example), Sorcerers have metamagic and sorcery points, Clerics have the basic Channel Divinity, and Bards have inspiration. If you take away the Druid's Wildshape, she literally has nothing left but very basic, unmodified spellcasting (which, don't get me wrong, is nothing to sneeze at). Wildshape is, mechanically speaking, the defining trait of being a Druid.

I guess, if you're Circle of the Not-Moon, you can justify it as "you always have a weak Polymorph spell prepared that lets you assume some basic animal forms". :smallconfused:

On the main topic, as cheesy as it is, a Factotum might actually be nice. I realize that, ultimately, D&D isn't built for one character to have that level of versatility, but it's still fun to have that gal who always has some other trick up her sleeve.

Most of the rest, I feel like could be handled with new Domains/Paths/Circles/Whatevers. Ur-Priest could be mechanically represented as a specific Cleric domain, for example, and, thanks to the DM's Guild, I think WotC is basically crowdsourcing that work.



The Avenger. Maybe as a Roguish Archetype. Sure, the Oath of Vengeance works in a way like the Avenger did, but the Avenger IMO was closer to a "divine Rogue" in terms of being used to stealth and subterfuge.

I've never really understood why a Dex-based Vengeance Paladin with proficiency in either Stealth and Perception (if you're going for physically sneaky) or Bluff and Insight (if you intend to be socially sneaky) didn't get you everything you needed to emulate 4e's Avenger. Unless you're very specifically sold on the Light Armor with Big Honkin' Greatsword image, I suppose. Maybe try to pick up Acrobatics and Athletics for chase scenes: I think there are backgrounds that can get you those. If you can afford it, maybe burn a feat on Skilled to make sure you've got everything you want.

[Witty Username]

Psionicist.
Psychic Warrior.
Soulknife I could take or leave. Maybe make it a rogue-like subclass of Psychic Warrior?

Spirit Shaman would be cool? I'd also love to see a nature caster that isn't all about animal-summoning and transformation.

Flashy charisma-based fighter type gladiator/swashbuckler/something. Not a Paladin, a light fighter who uses charisma rather than spellcasting.

Chronomancer. Seriously. Come on. Give me time magic! I want to push people around in the timestream!

Necromancer. Not just as a subkit of wizard, but an all out complete necromancer class. It will probably never work, due to action economy, in the classic "Here are my dozens of minions" sense. But being able to move around a series of "Difficult Terrain" tokens that threaten the area around them could be neat. Then develop some spells and abilities that allow you to attack from one of your zombie tokens. Muahahaha! The higher level you are, the more you get, but they only ever have a few HP each and... I'm gonna have to go homebrew this idea, aren't I?

I also think that Prestige Classes are a Very Bad Idea. I would much rather see more of the Subclasses used to represent Prestige Classes and Prestige Feats. (Crossposting)
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?425261-Homebrew-Feats-(including-Prc-replacement-feats)

Seriously, Sindeloke is a freaking genius.
have not done much with 5E yet but, I think that the soul knife and psychic warrior would be nice to see if they were connected in some fashion like if soul knife was a variant or something.

[Arkhios]

have not done much with 5E yet but, I think that the soul knife and psychic warrior would be nice to see if they were connected in some fashion like if soul knife was a variant or something.

Both are warrior type psionic classes, they could definitely be archetypes for a generic psionic warrior class.

[NerdwithaPencil]

The Fleshwarper, if only to resurrect a failed BBEG I thought had a lot of potential.

[Coffee_Dragon]

Don't forget the psychic rogue (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/psm/20040723b), y'all psionics lovers. The extent to which you could customize these things with powers, feats, psionics feats, rogue abilities and psionic rogue abilities was through the roof.

[T.G. Oskar]

I've never really understood why a Dex-based Vengeance Paladin with proficiency in either Stealth and Perception (if you're going for physically sneaky) or Bluff and Insight (if you intend to be socially sneaky) didn't get you everything you needed to emulate 4e's Avenger. Unless you're very specifically sold on the Light Armor with Big Honkin' Greatsword image, I suppose. Maybe try to pick up Acrobatics and Athletics for chase scenes: I think there are backgrounds that can get you those. If you can afford it, maybe burn a feat on Skilled to make sure you've got everything you want.

Well - the Oath of Vengeance doesn't get you key abilities that the Avenger would most likely have; an Oath of Vengeance Paladin alone doesn't make for a "divine Rogue". Then again, my 4e knowledge isn't entirely 100% accurate, but the idea was that the Avenger was a Striker - and Strikers didn't necessarily had to be skillmonkeys, but they could often do.

Dipping into a few Rogue levels can do a bit of what a "divine Rogue" can pull off: Vow of Enmity pretty much enables Sneak Attack and fits the idea of the 4e Avenger's actual censures, Expertise fits the idea of a current "Striker/Skillmonkey", you get actual extra skills to pad up the character's needs, Cunning Action gives you additional uses for your bonus action "slot"...but then, it feels like quite a bit of work, and some of the stuff might not work (Light Armor begs for Dex, Greatsword begs for Str, so you're either good with both or not, and Greatsword negates Sneak Attack). Plus - if you have to rely on a feat to get all that...it means it can't be done on the (arguably few) tables that don't use them.

Maybe it's also that I'm lumping PF's Inquisitor with 4e's Avenger. Both are of a Divine origin, the Inquisitor does act like a Striker as well (its Judgments are analogues to an extent of the Avenger's Censures), both are suited to the skillmonkey role except Avenger also gets some Cleric stuff (in 5e parlance, same # of skills as Rogue, skill access as Rogue + Religion and Medicine tucked in for free), and they combine attacks with spells (much like the 4e Paladin does).

In the end, it's somewhat the same problem as the Marshal/Warlord. To explain: it has a set of things that require a lot of effort to duplicate with the current stuff (and that includes SCAG AND Unearthed Arcana), but the fluff doesn't give you enough to expand into a full-fledged 5e class. The Marshal/Warlord can't do much just with Battlemaster maneuvers (of which no more have been introduced), but it's difficult to create subclasses for it, so making it a full class seems difficult. The Avenger/Inquisitor fulfills the idea, class-wise, of a "divine trickster + assassin" but it's very difficult to deviate from that unless you really, REALLY stretch it out (as with the Paladin). I'd still like to see a translation, but as it stands, it's...somewhat difficult to bring all of the Avenger's toys and unique quirks into the mix. It's not entirely impossible (Vow of Enmity + Hunter's Mark, with a Greatsword, Light Armor and insane amounts of Dex and Str gets the basic gist; the added spells further reinforce that), but it misses on some stuff that makes you feel you got...something improvised, rather than the real thing.

But, again - they managed to pull it off with the Paladin, which IMO has the most inflexible fluff ever, and even managed to push up another Oath in SCAG (a proper Tanking one, as well - and one that doesn't rely on a god or even theocracy, even!), so it's...possible.