what races/subclasses/feats do you think we WILL get officially in 5e?

[Rfkannen]

Just wondering, what do you think IS coming in 5e. Now what you want to come in 5e, but what you think will.

For example, while I would LOVE for their to be an official 5e pixie race, I have always wanted to play a pixie paladin, HOWEVER, with 5e's stance on sizes for pcs, pixie will be almost certainly never be in an official product.

On the other hand, I have no real desire to play a bladeling, but imo they are probably going to publish an official 5e bladeling at some point. I mean it is a race that helps fill out an outer planes book, it would be pretty easy to stat, fills a definitive niche. I would be surprised if by the time 6e comes out there was not a bladeling race in 5e.


Another thing I am pretty sure will come out at some point is a dragon pact warlock. With how much dragon stuff dnd likes to do, and the entirty of 3.5, it just feels like a niche that will be filled at some point.


What things are you pretty sure are eventually going to come out in 5e?

[CheddarChampion]

Are you talking about things you want to see or things you think we'll see?

I can't recall which three settings the design team has suggested will be coming in the future, but if we get Darksun I expect an Elemental paladin subclass.

If we get Spelljammer I expect a Pilot subclass for the Wizard: what book is complete until the design team adds a wizard subclass?

[Naanomi]

More Psionics to support Darksun (Oath of the Templar... or possibly Pact of the Templar... in the setting book as well?); probably as subclasses (especially for sorcerers) and sorcerer/psionic exclusive spells

More cleric domains geared towards evil deities

More monster PC races (bullywug?) that probably don’t need their own book but can be thrown in other stuff

Feats have a ton of room for stuff, and I’ll be glad to have more options, but nothing I’m really clambering for

More monster manuals; a ton of classic monsters we haven’t seen yet

[Rfkannen]

Are you talking about things you want to see or things you think we'll see?

I can't recall which three settings the design team has suggested will be coming in the future, but if we get Darksun I expect an Elemental paladin subclass.

If we get Spelljammer I expect a Pilot subclass for the Wizard: what book is complete until the design team adds a wizard subclass?

Things we think we will see.

[P. G. Macer]

Another thing I am pretty sure will come out at some point is a dragon pact warlock. With how much dragon stuff dnd likes to do, and the entirety of 3.5, it just feels like a niche that will be filled at some point.


Interesting that you say that, because I’m nearly convinced that we won’t see a Dragon Patron Warlock, because Wizards of the Coast seems determined to have next to no overlap between Sorcerous Origins and Otherworldly Patrons*, and not only do we already have a Dragon Sorcerer, the description for it says it can be a result of a bargain or lowercase-p pact with a dragon.

This also makes me think we won’t be getting Fey or Fiendish Sorcerous Origins.

*There are exceptions to this rule, most notably the Great Old One Patron and the Aberrant Mind Origin, and also possibly the Shadow Sorcerer and the Hexblade. Celestial Patron and Divine Soul don’t count because the latter can be associated with any of the Outer Planes, while the former only with the Upper Planes.

As for what we will see, I agree that we haven’t seen the last of psionics with the two Tasha’s subclasses, as WotC seems eager to do Dark Sun, to the point that the Psionics UA articles mentioned Athas in all or almost all of the subclasses.

If WotC ever becomes willing to make subclasses that rely on spells from Xanathar’s guide (and that’s a big if) via reprinting the spells, we will probably see a Sea/Ocean Domain Cleric, because aside from getting control water as a Domain Spell, the current title-holder of the Tempest Domain doesn’t fit well.

I wouldn’t be too surprised if we see some of the wackier, late-4e races like Wilden or Shardminds appear, as knee-jerk antipathy** towards that edition wanes.

**not to be confused with reasoned and justified criticisms, of which there are many.

[jaappleton]

Draconian Dragonborn.

The only part of the PHB that got a little gray subtext box off to the side and hasn't come to fruition yet.

[Sception]

What I think will come? I guess that depends on the actual products we see. I expect we'll see at least one more MtG based setting book before 5e rolls over into 5.5, and you'd expect a couple playable races and a couple subclasses from any such book, though to guess at particular possibilities you'd have to know what the next MtG block is, which I don't.

We also might see another setting book like the recent Eberron title, and any such book would likely have a few races & subclasses. Again, though, which particular races or subclasses would depend on the settings in particular. Dark Sun, for instance, would see Muls, maybe some darksun specific subraces, maybe a full psionic class, maybe a blighted arcanist wizard subclass, more psionic subclasses.

On the other hand, a planescape book might have bariaurs as a new race, and maybe new subraces of aasimar, tiefling, genasi, or gith. Or maybe reprints of existing versions, with or without minor updates. You'd also expect to see a few extraplanar themed subclasses, maybe reprints of a couple of those that we've already seen.

Personally, I still think an updated & expanded Forgotten Realms setting book remains a possibility, including reprints with updates to the remaining SCAG content plus maybe a new bit here or there. Maybe a red wizard subclass.

I'm hoping for Feywild & Shadowfell books, or maybe one book covering both. This may seem like wishful thinking, especially with the fey ranger getting printed in tasha's already, but there's been other UA stuff, including that undead patron warlock, which indicate such books might still be coming.

[Naanomi]

What I think will come? I guess that depends on the actual products we see. I expect we'll see at least one more MtG based setting book before 5e rolls over into 5.5, and you'd expect a couple playable races and a couple subclasses from any such book, though to guess at particular possibilities you'd have to know what the next MtG block is, which I don't.
Magic doesn't officially do 'blocks' anymore. The sets coming out soon are... a Viking Setting, a 'Harry Potter Wizard's School' setting, a return to Innistrad (the gothic horror with a touch of Lovecraft setting), and then an official visit to the Forgotten Realms

[Rule-Of-Three]

Honestly I really wish they would just flesh the societies for the races that already exist, ala Races of the Wild, Stone, Eberron, etc... Put some meat on it with more feats, spells, items, you know the rest.

Yes we are in a boom for D&D under 5e, but it feels so thin compared to even 3rd ed, let alone the phenomenal world-building of 2nd ed. campaign settings. There's not much to reference in 5e for a neophyte who is looking for RP clues and character development arcs. I suspect this is by design but I don't believe it's a good choice for the hobby. I go by FLGS in my travels (before COVID) and observe gameplay, and get the general sense that D&D is being played like Mythic Dungeon runs in WoW, even outside of Adventurer's League. I even suspect this is what many players want, but I'm more concerned about the players that look at the books and think that's all there is.

[Willie the Duck]

Dragon-themed stuff and psionics seemed like the last great big open space. Between TCOE and the recent dragon subtype UA, they look to be moving forward. Obviously whatever campaign settings they release will include some specific races and subclasses (ex. spelljammer would necessitate those anthro hippopotamuses or whatever they were, Darksun would need thri kreen).

Other than that, I don't think there is a set in stone kind of thing, just stuff they might do. Playable undead? I'd give it <50%, but wouldn't rule it out. Play as actual dragons? They've done it before, I can see it happening again. I think this next year (again with the new-old settings) will be vey informative as to where WotC is going with this second half-decade of 5e.

[KorvinStarmast]

More Psionics to support Darksun
Please yes.

More cleric domains geared towards evil deities
Please no.

More monster PC races (bullywug?) that probably don’t need their own book but can be thrown in other stuff While I can live without them, I can see this happening.

Feats have a ton of room for stuff, and I’ll be glad to have more options, but nothing I’m really clambering for No racial feats please. All feats need to be elibigle for all PCs. (That's my opinion)

More monster manuals; a ton of classic monsters we haven’t seen yet Meh. But I think we'll see some of that if an Athas setting arrives. I prefer to see the new monsters be associated with a published adventure.

This also makes me think we won’t be getting Fey or Fiendish Sorcerous Origins. Aaaw. :smalleek:


If WotC ever becomes willing to make subclasses that rely on spells from Xanathar’s guide (and that’s a big if) via reprinting the spells, we will probably see a Sea/Ocean Domain Cleric, because aside from getting control water as a Domain Spell, the current title-holder of the Tempest Domain doesn’t fit well. We have a homebrew water/ocean domain in one of my games, I'd like to sea that.

I wouldn’t be too surprised if we see some of the wackier, late-4e races like Wilden or Shardminds appear, as knee-jerk antipathy** towards that edition wanes.
Please, no. That edition gave us advantage; let's not over do it. Quit while we are ahead. :smallbiggrin:

I expect we'll see at least one more MtG based setting book before 5e rolls over into 5.5, and you'd expect a couple playable races and a couple subclasses from any such book, though to guess at particular possibilities you'd have to know what the next MtG block is, which I don't. Like Theros, I guess.

Dark Sun, for instance, would see Muls, maybe some darksun specific subraces, maybe a full psionic class, maybe a blighted arcanist wizard subclass, more psionic subclasses.
That would be cool. (Well, hot, it's Athas).

Planescape: looks likely.

Maybe a red wizard subclass.
Wizard has enough toys as is.

I'm hoping for Feywild & Shadowfell books, or maybe one book covering both. Yes, please.

Playable undead? I'd give it <50%, but wouldn't rule it out. Please, no.

[Amdy_vill]

To be honest I don't think we are going to be able to predict feats and races. feats because of how few we have gotten and the oddities we have seen in 5e take on them, races because 5e has been odd. 5e has gone after obscure races that are not setting specific and aren't plain touched for the most part or setting specific interpretation of classic fantasy creatures. I don't think predicting them is real posable outside of having more info. if we were told the next book would be Dragonlance then I can see predictions but outside of hints from WotC, I don't see any real predictions being made.

with Subs, it's a lot easier. mostly because we have some ua but also because of subs just seeming to be easier to perdict. we will defiantly see a bunch of dragon-themed subs. I can also see a bunch of artificer subs coming as that class just has no support yet.

[Naanomi]

Please no.
Worldbuilding is just challenging when all the 'evil' you have to work with is Death, War, and Trickery (and calling 'twilight' 'Darkness')... a proper Destruction Domain, and Disease... maybe Strength... Perhaps Greed/Wealth, Decay, Fear/Madness, Pain. We wouldn't need *all* of these, it wouldn't take a ton, but just a handful to diversify the Evil part of pantheons.

I'd like a real 'luck' domain for worldbuilding as well, Trickery isn't a good substitute

[Wraith]

I expect we'll see at least one more MtG based setting book before 5e rolls over into 5.5, and you'd expect a couple playable races and a couple subclasses from any such book, though to guess at particular possibilities you'd have to know what the next MtG block is, which I don't.

I agree with this, though I don't necessarily think that the next 'block' will be concurrent with existing ones. Ravnica wasn't particularl recent, and the Planeshift pdfs - Zendikar, Ixalan, Dominara, etc are all out of order from when they appeared in the card game. Likely, they'll pick out something particularly popular and use that.

I'd like to think it would be Lorwyn or Kamigawa since they both have their own unique flavour, and have some interesting options for playable races - Faeries, Nezumi, Soratami, Kitsune, various types of Genasi-esque Elementals. Could be good fun.

[Sception]

Wizard has enough toys as is.

This isn't a want/don't want thread, but a thread of what we think might actually happen, and I think it's unreasonable to think that any class in the game is done getting content, like there just won't be anything more for it ever. Especially wizard.

Even Artificer could still see content, even if it meant reprinting the core class /yet again/. For example, if Innistrad gets the full book treatment, then I could absolutely see Necro-Alchemists as a new Artificer subclass. Though possibly renamed something else to avoid overlap with Regular-Alchemists.



to fey/shadowfell content: Yes, please.
to playable undead: Please, no.

If we see a book dedicated in whole or even in part to the Shadowfell, a playable undead race of some kind is highly likely, whether anyone wants it (and a great many players would want it) or not. Playable undead are also likely options in several potential MtG crossover setting books.

I would honestly be surprised if 5e rolls over into 6e /without/ a playable undead race of some kind, especially after Theros's fey Satyr race.

[KorvinStarmast]

Playable undead are also likely options in several potential MtG crossover setting books.

I would honestly be surprised if 5e rolls over into 6e /without/ a playable undead race of some kind, especially after Theros's fey Satyr race. I can see your point, and I'll drop a notional 50 cents on you being right, but at my tables they will not be a PC option.

When the cleric, good or evil, turns undead I don't want to have to have one of the PCs make their wisdom save ... :smalltongue:

For Naanomi:


Worldbuilding is just challenging when all the 'evil' you have to work with is Death, War, and Trickery (and calling 'twilight' 'Darkness')... a proper Destruction Domain, and Disease... maybe Strength... Perhaps Greed/Wealth, Decay, Fear/Madness, Pain. We wouldn't need *all* of these, it wouldn't take a ton, but just a handful to diversify the Evil part of pantheons. I'd like a real 'luck' domain for worldbuilding as well, Trickery isn't a good substitute I have a real issue/distaste/contempt for WoTC's FR "alignment and domain are locked together" methodology.

Quite frankly, I detest it. The "this deity can only have this domain clerics" or "if you have this domain, you can only pick one of these deities" is hot garbage.
I fully realize that we are dealing in matters of taste here.

The key thing is for the player to pick a domain, and a deity, for their character and then play it. I would hope that during the PC's career they will run into frictions or difficulties with their deity and even conflicts. Any deity in a pantheon can have servants who are good or evil. This isn't 3.5.

Yes, some deities attract more evil followers than others, sure. I just don't like for how tightly that seems to be proscribed. Gets in the way of running a campaign and world building.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions: PCs serving a good or neutral deity could be evil as hell, right? :smallwink: (and vice versa)

[Sception]

When the cleric, good or evil, turns undead I don't want to have to have one of the PCs make their wisdom save ... :smalltongue:

That will be awkward, but it's already an issue with playable fey and 'Turn the Faithless', and that didn't stop Satyrs from going to print, which is why I brought them up.

[KorvinStarmast]

That will be awkward, but it's already an issue with playable fey and 'Turn the Faithless', and that didn't stop Satyrs from going to print, which is why I brought them up. While I don't care for that either, your reasoning is sound. :smallcool:

[Kireban]

A feat like SS/GWM but for spells with attack rolls. The lack of it is really weird.

[Naanomi]

I have a real issue/distaste/contempt for WoTC's FR "alignment and domain are locked together" methodology
Even if you ignore the mechanical and big A ‘Alignment’ aspects, there are just big holes in the domain list... particularly for darker gods. Say I have a god of pain and suffering, a god of disease, a god of necromancy, a god of assassins (FR lore has all those)... every one gets the Death domain to best represent them because of lack of other options on that spectrum of divinity. My homebrew pantheon has Seven (or eight) evil Gods it... and I’d like some diversity in how to explore the concepts they represent without homebrew or extensive reflavoring

Just one or two more ‘dark’ concepts represented would help... but instead we get Grave (death but good), Twilight (‘darkness’ but with positive flavor), Peace (not even ‘community’ or something, but an explicitly good concept)

Like I said, I’d like Luck domain to fill that ‘theological concept gap’ in similar function

[KorvinStarmast]

Like I said, I’d like Luck domain to fill that ‘theological concept gap’ in similar function Not a bad idea. :smallcool:

[Necromas]

A feat like SS/GWM but for spells with attack rolls. The lack of it is really weird.

They probably held off on something like that because of warlocks. Since they can already stack a lot of per-hit damage bonuses and things like quicken spell if they multiclass, adding another non-concentration bonus they could work in is unlikely.


Not a bad idea. :smallcool:

If they put it in a lighthearted book you don't have to consider canon, like acquisitions incorporated, I'd like to see a domain of doubt for the agnostic clerics out there. "I will admit I must get my power from somewhere, but that doesn't prove *insert deity* is the one that gave it to me!"

[KorvinStarmast]

If they put it in a lighthearted book you don't have to consider canon, like acquisitions incorporated, I'd like to see a domain of doubt for the agnostic clerics out there. "I will admit I must get my power from somewhere, but that doesn't prove *insert deity* is the one that gave it to me!" A great way to convince me to not get a D&D book is to relate it to Acq Inc. :smallyuk: (Heck, I only bought Theros due to a lifelong love of Greek Mythology/Legends/etc).

[Witty Username]

I feel like new races are less likely because of the Tasha's rules, we are a step or so away from "just do it yourself" at this point.
A couple new sub classes may happen, like two per settings book like has been done.
And we are never seeing a psionic class.

Expect fighter subclasses that continue to borrow from battlemaster mechanics while being weaker than the battlemaster. And more MTG content.

[Azuresun]

There's still room for a Spellfire subclass for sorcerer (or patron for warlock, which might be a better fit) from FR, along with maybe a Shadow Weave Adept subclass for wizards.

Thri-keen and muls would be expected of a Dark Sun book and maybe (after EGW introduced two new dragonborn types) dray as their own thing. Not sure about half-giants, since there's already a lot of "big strong guy" races out there.

[Naanomi]

Thri-keen and muls would be expected of a Dark Sun book and maybe (after EGW introduced two new dragonborn types) dray as their own thing. Not sure about half-giants, since there's already a lot of "big strong guy" races out there.
Goliath have been used as stand in for half-giants before, so maybe just a reprint. I wouldn’t be shocked for some Subraces as well... halfling, maybe elf, dwarf with an explicit stubborn mechanic, etc