What would a scholarly, non-caster class look like?

[Greywander]

Unfortunately, I feel like the answer is that D&D just isn't built for anything not completely combat oriented, and an academic that isn't also a mage isn't combat oriented. A more boring answer might be "rogue with INT skills", which isn't satisfying, either.

I do think something could be worked out, though. A couple thoughts I have are to draw on things like the ranger's Favored Enemy, where the scholar gets a bonus against specific types of monsters thanks to knowing obscure lore that points out their weaknesses, and adds more creature types as they level up. Another one is the artificer's ability to use any magic item. A scholar might not be able to cast spells or create magic items, but they'd probably know a lot about them, being able to identify and make use of them easier. Bardic Inspiration could also be another mechanic that could we could use for inspiration, no pun intended. Another possibility is using INT for attack and damage rolls with a crossbow (or firearm).

Really, I don't know that you need a lot of combat-specific abilities to make a class viable. You generally have damage bumps at 5th and 11th level for every class, which we can reason out a justification for. Add in a few other combat abilities, such as granting advantage to allies or imposing vulnerability on an enemy, and it should be sufficient. I'd expect a scholar to lean much more heavily on out-of-combat utility type stuff, not unlike a rogue, really.

What do you think? What sorts of features would put on a scholar class? What core mechanic would you build them around? What subclasses would you have? Maybe I should take a stab at writing something up...

[JNAProductions]

I think Grod The Giant made some classes along this vein. Can't find them at the moment, but check his stuff-if I recall correctly, he's already taken a stab at this.

[ProsecutorGodot]

I don't see why you'd need anything other than Battlemaster/Samurai Fighter with a small dip into Mastermind Rogue, take the Cloistered Scholar background.

Now you have in and out of combat uses for your book smarts.

I know this is exactly the boring answer you expected but I just don't see how you'd make a 1-20 class focused purely on scholarly things

[KorvinStarmast]

What would a scholarly, non-caster class look like?
Thief. Rogue. Sage Background. Proficiencies in History and Arcana, and expertise in one of those (history), with expertise in arcana added at sixth level. Your other two expertise will be Stealth at level 1, Thieve's Tools at level 6.

Make sure to bump Int a bit to keep it consistent, maybe up to 14.

There you go. Enjoy.

[Abracadangit]

Unfortunately, I feel like the answer is that D&D just isn't built for anything not completely combat oriented, and an academic that isn't also a mage isn't combat oriented.

Yep. In D&D, every class is given a combat role from the get-go, and that's the chassis that exploration/social items are tacked onto. Wizards are the de facto scholar class of the D&D world, because if you had a scholar that DIDN'T use magic, it would just feel like a wizard with pieces taken out. Even the rogue, which you're using as an example of utility over combat, has a class ability list that's mostly combat stuff. You're right - with things like Expertise and Reliable Talent, they stand head and shoulder over the other classes in terms of out-of-combat utility, but that's only because the bar isn't set very high. Sneak Attack, Cunning Action, Uncanny Dodge, Evasion, Slippery Mind, Elusive - combat, combat, combat.

"Non-magical scholar" feels a bit like an NPC class, or like one of those TCE sidekick classes. Granted, they'd probably have very good bonuses to all the knowledge skills, some academic tool proficiencies, and some nifty utility abilities for the purposes of translating languages or knowing flavor info on everything you encounter, but that might be the size of it. Plus there are a lot of different ways that you could use background in conjunction with certain classes that already exist to make a scholarly type.

If someone told me I had to make a legit character class that was a non-magical scholar or else I wouldn't get the million dollars, I'd start with the core fantasy of why a player would want to be a non-magical scholar, and work from there. The nice thing about wizards (and really, spellcasters in general) is that their knowledge is their power. Knowing things isn't just an occupation for them - with magic, their knowledge is a tangible, measurable force capable of imposing their will on the world. So if I had great knowledge but DIDN'T have magic, I'd be working off of the idea that I'm not so much a mover-and-shaker, as I am a support character. I lend my expertise to my allies, to help inform their decisions, guide their courses of action, and generally be an all-around repository of useful data. But unlike the bard, who can use a touch of magic to support anything and everything (i.e. even Stealth or Sleight of Hand), my focus would be more on a) combat things (or else what's the scholar's point of being around) and b) direct knowledge things, such as Arcana, Medicine, and so on.

So I suppose the best I could come up with would be something like Scholar's Lore, where the scholar uses their tactical know-how and/or knowledge of the enemy's weak points to do a ranged version of the Help action. Which is pretty much like that one ability the Mastermind subclass already has, except maybe you'd expand this. Like at higher levels, you could use it as a reaction to give a friend advantage on a saving throw? Or something? And then subclasses could refine the field of knowledge and things you could use Scholar's Lore on, like the Tactician, the Naturalist, and so on.

But see, even then, Tactician sounds like a fighter sub, Naturalist sounds like a watered-down druid, and so on. This is a tough puzzle, and I think the solution might be non-magical scholars are better as NPCs than as PCs. Unless you're playing one of those campaigns where everyone's playing an NPC class.

[Keravath]

Is your scholar an adventurer? If they spend their time on scholarly pursuits then where do they learn the survival and combat skills suitable to an adventurer?

A world, even D&D, is full of far more people, backgrounds, careers, pursuits, hobbies than the adventurers that make up the bulk of those willing (and trained) to risk life and limb for the rewards of knowledge, treasure, magic items or whatever takes their fancy.

There are possibly many researchers and scholars, you just don't usually find them traipsing around dungeons and when they do, they hire adventurers to protect them. A scholar who WANTS to be self sufficient learns the combat and survival skills needed to adventure along with their academic skills. Such a character could be represented by a fighter or rogue depending on training with the sage or researcher background and with the prodigy and skilled feats combined with a reasonable intelligence.

Does it make sense that there would be a group of scholars with special training in identifying weaknesses in monsters? In pointing these out to other adventurers so as to affect their attacks? Or some other mechanism to try to give a character who has spent their career studying and who suddenly finds themselves in a dangerous situation - something to do that might contribute to combat? To me, not really. The scholar spends their time learning things, not trying to point out weaknesses to other characters in combat. Weaknesses that once identified really don't need to be pointed out every time, thus more or less invalidating the concept as a class ability.

Anyway, in my opinion, "scholarly" either describes a skilled character without combat skills or an adventuring character whose background and feat choices create a character that can effectively role play a scholarly background.

Knowledge cleric is one of the best choices for a scholar adventurer. If someone wanted to homebrew a scholar adventurer class - starting with knowledge cleric and removing the spellcasting feature and replace it with something more knowledge and skills related might work. However, the problem remains that "scholar" is primarily based on skills so adventurer archetypes with a skills focus tend to be good choices for a "scholar" adventurer.

[GeoffWatson]

D&D classes are heavily focused on combat, so a non-combat character wouldn't fit.

You could do something like a Lazy Warlord build from 4e, where they give their allies large combat bonuses (extra attacks, reroll saves, temporary hp) through advice and encouragement.
Some of the Bard abilities are like that.

[Kane0]

I do think something could be worked out, though. A couple thoughts I have are to draw on things like the ranger's Favored Enemy, where the scholar gets a bonus against specific types of monsters thanks to knowing obscure lore that points out their weaknesses, and adds more creature types as they level up. Another one is the artificer's ability to use any magic item. A scholar might not be able to cast spells or create magic items, but they'd probably know a lot about them, being able to identify and make use of them easier. Bardic Inspiration could also be another mechanic that could we could use for inspiration, no pun intended. Another possibility is using INT for attack and damage rolls with a crossbow (or firearm).

Really, I don't know that you need a lot of combat-specific abilities to make a class viable. You generally have damage bumps at 5th and 11th level for every class, which we can reason out a justification for. Add in a few other combat abilities, such as granting advantage to allies or imposing vulnerability on an enemy, and it should be sufficient. I'd expect a scholar to lean much more heavily on out-of-combat utility type stuff, not unlike a rogue, really.

What do you think? What sorts of features would put on a scholar class? What core mechanic would you build them around? What subclasses would you have? Maybe I should take a stab at writing something up...

I think there have been a few tries already, but some features that I think of:

- Expertise/Reliable in INT skills
- Bonus action Help, Search, Bardic Inspiration-style buff
- Successful INT or Insight check against a creature grants you extra attack/damage/AC
- Using a reaction when an ally makes an attack to add attack/damage
- Being able to ID spells without using your reaction (If you use the Xan's rule)
- Being able to foil magic with a successful Arcana check, like a mundane counterspell/dispel
- Being able to 'read' items (identification, who used it last, where it was made, etc)
- Being able to use any sort of scroll and a fair number of other wondrous items even if they normally need a caster to use/attune.
- An assortment of languages including nonverbal means of communication
- Something like Evasion or Danger Sense, but for Int/Wis/Cha attacks
- Being able to use INT or WIS for ranged weapon attacks
- Research/Information gathering downtime at faster rate, at reduced cost, at advantage, etc. Perhaps also apply to buying/selling magic items.

[Brawnspear]

Thief. Rogue. Sage Background. Proficiencies in History and Arcana, and expertise in one of those (history), with expertise in arcana added at sixth level. Your other two expertise will be Stealth at level 1, Thieve's Tools at level 6.

Make sure to bump Int a bit to keep it consistent, maybe up to 14.

There you go. Enjoy.

Thief rogue seems like a great starting point, we can pull from a couple other ones too.

Level 3
Replace Fast hands with something like Inquisitives insightful fighting, only tied to making an appropriate knowledge check about the creature (History: Orcs tend to over extend on their swings due to the heavy nature of their weapons, Nature: Owlbears can't look up, Arcana: Every Gibbering Mouther has one mouth that closes slower than the others, Religion: Devas are less likely to swing to the left since they are champions of the right, etc.)

Instead of Second Story work gain the ability to add your Int to your thief tools checks and be unable to roll below 8 on investigation due to your analytical mind.

Level 9
Instead of Supreme sneak, you gain advantage on knowledge checks to recall information if you have access to your notes and some time to think. In addition you gain the benefits of an active Detect Magic spell when investigating magical objects or features

Level 13
Keep Use Magic Device just as it is

Level 17
Instead of Thief's reflexes, creatures affected by your Knowledgeable Fighting are Vulnerable to the first attack you make against them that combat.

Still combat focused but more flavored towards an Int-y rogue without building out a full on new class.

Alternatively could mix it into a knowledge monk and replace all the Wis based features with int. (or replace Dex with Int for a full non physical scholar type, may want to change fast movement and step of the wind up though)

[Reach Weapon]

I think I'd like to see this most as a first round selection on a new class chassis built around high survivability, low DPR.

This chassis should also support a pure grappler, and probably some sort of hapless damage sponge archetype, as well.

I see the non-caster scholar as covering characters like Indiana Jones, where cleverness and relentlessness fuel success.


[...] some features that I think of:
Yeah. Like that.

[Frogreaver]

Unfortunately, I feel like the answer is that D&D just isn't built for anything not completely combat oriented, and an academic that isn't also a mage isn't combat oriented. A more boring answer might be "rogue with INT skills", which isn't satisfying, either.

I do think something could be worked out, though. A couple thoughts I have are to draw on things like the ranger's Favored Enemy, where the scholar gets a bonus against specific types of monsters thanks to knowing obscure lore that points out their weaknesses, and adds more creature types as they level up. Another one is the artificer's ability to use any magic item. A scholar might not be able to cast spells or create magic items, but they'd probably know a lot about them, being able to identify and make use of them easier. Bardic Inspiration could also be another mechanic that could we could use for inspiration, no pun intended. Another possibility is using INT for attack and damage rolls with a crossbow (or firearm).

Really, I don't know that you need a lot of combat-specific abilities to make a class viable. You generally have damage bumps at 5th and 11th level for every class, which we can reason out a justification for. Add in a few other combat abilities, such as granting advantage to allies or imposing vulnerability on an enemy, and it should be sufficient. I'd expect a scholar to lean much more heavily on out-of-combat utility type stuff, not unlike a rogue, really.

What do you think? What sorts of features would put on a scholar class? What core mechanic would you build them around? What subclasses would you have? Maybe I should take a stab at writing something up...

I think you are trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. Any character or any class in 5e can be a scholar. Much like any can be a soldier, etc. Being a Scholar is tied more to background and character disposition than class and creating a scholar class necessarily implies that Fighters, Wizards, Artificers, etc. are not and cannot be scholars and that seems just a little odd to me.

If you wanted a Scholar Class I think he'd have to function on being able to establish fiction about monsters etc. Which is generally viewed as a no-no by D&D players. I don't see the class ever working for D&D. Could work as a subclass though.


I see the non-caster scholar as covering characters like Indiana Jones, where cleverness and relentlessness fuel success.

Scholar is fairly low on my list of things that come first to mind when thinking about Indiana Jones. Yes he was a scholar literally. In D&D terms he had that background and the DM built the story around his background. But he was more of a rogue archetype if i had to pick from current D&D classes - cunning, lucky, not necessarily a trained fighter. 5e rogues have a bit too much baggage though with sneak attack and thieves cant and the like.

5e could probably use a generic adventurer class, which would fit great for Indiana Jones - modeled somewhat after the rogue but with extra attack instead of sneak attack. A focus on skills - with subclasses like scholar focusing on particular skills.

[OldTrees1]

Since D&D has a combat pillar, this Sage class is probably going to have significant subclasses that answer "How do we apply knowledge to overcome combats" in different ways. The subclasses might be big enough to be worth splitting the class into multiples.


1) I know you and thus you will lose
The Sage pulls on their vast knowledge and quick insight (yes Int and Wis) to learn about the enemies. The Sage has multiple features that represent this knowledge by making allies better at effecting this/these enemies and make this/these enemies less effective at effecting the party. Advantage and Disadvantage would be handed out like popcorn. Other features might include the Sage spending Action/Bonus Action/Reaction to grant an ally a Reaction to do XYZ.

2) Ranger done right
A Nature Lore Sage that specializes in a type of nature lore and has features for applying that knowledge. The packmaster has trained companions that will tear you asunder. The wanderer knows how to take advantage of terrain to its fullest as you suddenly find yourself being guided into potholes ravines and other hazards while their allies dance across the grass. The Hunter has studied the vulnerably of all prey, you are no exception. Not content with quantitative improvement, they get qualitative bonuses against each type of enemy.

3) I know my minions/team, this is time for formation gamma.
A marshal/warlord adapted to the current edition.

Of course, since the Sage is about knowledge and understanding, they will have plenty of out of combat features to expand on the same or other knowledge bases. I expect something like Reliable Talent and Expertise combined with details about how high DC skill checks have level appropriate out of combat effects for high level.


So the main class is focused on level appropriate skilled based out of combat utility. The subclasses will start at 1st and provide a combat application of specific knowledge. This means at minimum there would be subclass features at 1st, 5th, 11th, and 17th, however I expect 6 levels of subclass features might be reasonable. Oh and because warlock had a good idea, let the Sage have a smaller 2nd type of subclass that elaborates on a type of out of combat utility.

[Lunali]

Unfortunately, I feel like the answer is that D&D just isn't built for anything not completely combat oriented, and an academic that isn't also a mage isn't combat oriented. A more boring answer might be "rogue with INT skills", which isn't satisfying, either.

An academic that isn't a mage can be combat oriented, but if you aren't satisfied by X with int skills, I don't know what you actually want. In general, anyone smart enough to be directly using int for combat is also going to be smart enough to figure out some magic unless you have some pressing reason why they wouldn't be able to do so.

As for D&D not being built for anything not combat oriented, that's completely true. D&D is a tactical battle game with other elements tacked onto it. If combat isn't high on your (or your group's) priority list, a different game would probably suit you better. That's not to say that you can't use D&D for non-combat stuff, it just isn't built for it.

[5eNeedsDarksun]

I'm thinking back to older editions where Int got you more proficiency slots that could be used effectively for a fighter. It's a shame there isn't some benefit like that in 5e, so Int is just a dump stat. I know one of my players (running a 20 Int Wizard) often said, 'Why the heck would I be hanging around with these guys?' referring to the rest of the group where every other character was 8 Int. I don't think he was all wrong.

[JackPhoenix]

You all know there's only one proper answer:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZHoHaAYHq8

[strangebloke]

What about a utility fighter? Healer, inspiring leader, ritual caster. He can fight well enough he supposes, but it's just a hobby.

[Frogreaver]

I'm thinking back to older editions where Int got you more proficiency slots that could be used effectively for a fighter. It's a shame there isn't some benefit like that in 5e, so Int is just a dump stat. I know one of my players (running a 20 Int Wizard) often said, 'Why the heck would I be hanging around with these guys?' referring to the rest of the group where every other character was 8 Int. I don't think he was all wrong.

I despise any rule whose outcome is buffing wizards.

[Kane0]

What about a utility fighter? Healer, inspiring leader, ritual caster. He can fight well enough he supposes, but it's just a hobby.

You could patchwork together Fighter and Rogue into something, plus a bit of bard and ranger even, but at the end of the day 'Sage' is a Background and thus secondary to Class which I think is what Greywander is getting at.

[Waazraath]

Late 3.5 had a class like this, the Factotum - while it got some divine and arcane spells at later levels (by being smart and picking stuff up along the way), essentially it was a non-casting explorer class, based on int.

[Morty]

I don't think this is anywhere near as difficult as people claim. Of course any D&D class needs combat abilities, but a "scholar" class can have features based on studying enemies and supporting their allies well enough. Plus, you know, just using a weapon, even if it won't be as effective as a fighter. The game just seems stuck in thinking that rogues need to be the be-all, end-all of characters who aren't warriors but also don't cast magic.

[Salmon343]

There's a class in 3.5 called the Archivist which is about 50% of the way there. They get a feature called "Dark Knowledge", which lets them provide buffs to the party and debuffs to the enemy a few times per day, based on their Knowledge check result. (They also get casting from every Divine list (with shenanigans), which is the meat of the class)

Using that as inspiration, you could increase the number of times they could do it (perhaps make some at will, some per encounter, etc.) and the range of things that they can do. To make it non-caster, you could make its direct combat capabilities martial.

[Dienekes]

Hmm, if I was building one?

Alright the Scholar. Skill monkey, like the Rogue. Maybe use that as a basis. But I'd have their main combat function being more around support abilities than Sneak Attack.

Perhaps various abilities about pointing out weak points in the enemy, providing others damage bonuses. Or using persuasion and deception like features to control them. Honestly, I'd probably raid Star Wars Saga Edition for their abilities that were given to the Scoundrel and Noble classes and the Officer, Corporate Agent, Medic, Saboteur, Improviser, and Charlatan prestige classes.

Subclasses would be something like:

Commander: Focuses more on providing actions and boosts to allies in combat
Medic: Non-magical healing
Orator: Really hone in on providing area wide debuffs and confusing the enemy
Conservationist: More like a scout/wild life focused subclass with a lot of monster knowledge

Followed by your more generic:
Warrior-Poet: Which acts as just giving them a bit more of a martial feel.
Sage: Which gives them 1/3 casting.

[Man_Over_Game]

Unfortunately, I feel like the answer is that D&D just isn't built for anything not completely combat oriented, and an academic that isn't also a mage isn't combat oriented. A more boring answer might be "rogue with INT skills", which isn't satisfying, either.

I do think something could be worked out, though. A couple thoughts I have are to draw on things like the ranger's Favored Enemy, where the scholar gets a bonus against specific types of monsters thanks to knowing obscure lore that points out their weaknesses, and adds more creature types as they level up. Another one is the artificer's ability to use any magic item. A scholar might not be able to cast spells or create magic items, but they'd probably know a lot about them, being able to identify and make use of them easier. Bardic Inspiration could also be another mechanic that could we could use for inspiration, no pun intended. Another possibility is using INT for attack and damage rolls with a crossbow (or firearm).

Really, I don't know that you need a lot of combat-specific abilities to make a class viable. You generally have damage bumps at 5th and 11th level for every class, which we can reason out a justification for. Add in a few other combat abilities, such as granting advantage to allies or imposing vulnerability on an enemy, and it should be sufficient. I'd expect a scholar to lean much more heavily on out-of-combat utility type stuff, not unlike a rogue, really.

What do you think? What sorts of features would put on a scholar class? What core mechanic would you build them around? What subclasses would you have? Maybe I should take a stab at writing something up...

3 levels into Battlemaster, 3 levels into Mastermind, grab the 3 new Tasha's maneuvers that improve skill checks and the fighting style that grants you more even maneuvers/dice, get +1d8 per skill check 4 times per Short Rest + Expertise and call it a day.

[RogueJK]

A homebrew Scholar class could easily be made using the Expert sidekick class from Tasha's as a starting point.

[Kuulvheysoon]

Honestly, you could do it with Rogue. Make a new subclass that has a mechanic like the Ambush feats of old - giving up SA damage for a variety of debuffs on the opponent, but add some abilities that buff you/your allies. Give a free Int skill or two, maybe allow attacks with Intelligence instead of Dexterity (to keep with the theme of attack-replacing abilities having some limit on them).

Maybe an ability called Hampering Strike or something that made you give up 2d6 SA until the start of your next turn (so no RXN SA), but every creature has advantage on attacks against the selected oppponent.

[5eNeedsDarksun]

I despise any rule whose outcome is buffing wizards.

That's probably the single reason why we haven't made a house rule to give some benefit to getting at least an average int. Would it be enough to actually encourage players to do it, or would it just buff Wizards? At best we figured such a rule might provide ATs and EKs a bit more incentive to invest.

[Theodoxus]

Late 3.5 had a class like this, the Factotum - while it got some divine and arcane spells at later levels (by being smart and picking stuff up along the way), essentially it was a non-casting explorer class, based on int.

That's what I was thinking of too when I read the title. Now I want to see if I can port Factotum to 5E... shouldn't be too hard, outside of the fact I haven't looked at the class in probably 15 years.


That's probably the single reason why we haven't made a house rule to give some benefit to getting at least an average int. Would it be enough to actually encourage players to do it, or would it just buff Wizards? At best we figured such a rule might provide ATs and EKs a bit more incentive to invest.

I'm seriously thinking of dropping class skills and granting 1 skill associated with the attribute per attribute mod point. Of course, this would require an expansion of the skills set. I'm currently looking at the following:



Acrobatics
Dexterity
As per 5E


Animal Handling
Wisdom
As per 5E


Arcane Lore
Intelligence
As per 5E


Axes
Strength
Weapon Group


Bargaining
Charisma
Obtaining a better deal


Black Powder
Dexterity
Weapon Group


Bludgeons
Strength
Weapon Group


Bows
Dexterity
Weapon Group


Brawling
Strength
Weapon Group


Calligraphy
Dexterity
(Tool) pens


Cartography
Intelligence
(Tool) maps, sextant


Climbing
Strength
As per 5E Athletics


Courage
Wisdom
Bolsters saves vs fear


Crafting
Dexterity
(Tool) basic crafting


Cryptography
Intelligence
Creating and solving cyphers


Cultural Lore
Intelligence
Knowing about cultures


Deception
Charisma
As per 5E


Disguise
Charisma
(Tool) disguise kit


Driving
Strength
(Tool) Cart, wagon


Dueling
Dexterity
Weapon Group


Empathy
Wisdom
Replaces Insight


Engineering
Intelligence
Practical construction


Etiquette
Charisma
Social niceties


Evaluation
Intelligence
Appraisal


Faith
Wisdom
Bolsters saves vs religious adversity


Forgery
Dexterity
(Tool) Forgery kit


Gambling
Dexterity
Making money through games of chance


Hearing
Wisdom
Noticing sounds


Heavy Blades
Strength
Weapon Group


Heraldry
Intelligence
Knowing about royalty


Historical Lore
Intelligence
Knowing the history of places


Initiative
Dexterity
Acting quickly in tense situations


Intimidation
Strength
As per 5E


Investigation
Charisma
As per 5E


Jumping
Strength
As per 5E Athletics


Lances
Strength
Weapon Group


Leadership
Charisma
Guiding and directing others


Light Blades
Dexterity
Weapon Group


Medicine
Wisdom
As per 5E


Might
Strength
Feats of strength


Military Lore
Intelligence
Knowing about military tactics and personnel


Natural Lore
Intelligence
Knowing about the natural world


Navigation
Wisdom
(Tool) maps, sextant


Performance
Charisma
As per 5E


Persuasion
Charisma
As per 5E


Polearms
Strength
Weapon Group


Propelling
Constitution
(Tool) Self-powered propulsion: bicycle or rowboat


Religious Lore
Intelligence
Knowing the various religions, their offshoots and their gods


Research
Intelligence
Finding answers by using objects/books


Riding
Dexterity
Basic ability to ride an animal


Running
Constitution
Moving quickly


Sabotage
Dexterity
(Tool) Sappers equipment


Sailing
Dexterity
Knowing how to use the wind to propel a watercraft


Searching
Wisdom
Finding hidden or obscured objects


Seduction
Charisma
Making winning moves in the game of love


Seeing
Wisdom
Noticing sights


Self-Discipline
Wisdom
Focusing your mental energy or controlling your motives


Sleight of Hand
Dexterity
As per 5E


Smelling
Wisdom
Noticing smells


Smithing
Strength
(Tool) Blacksmithing, Armor crafting, Weapon smithing


Spears
Strength
Weapon Group


Stamina
Constitution
Enduring fatigue / resisting exhaustion


Staves
Strength
Weapon Group


Stealth
Dexterity
As per 5E


Survival
Wisdom
As per 5E


Swimming
Constitution
As per 5E Athletics


Tolerance
Constitution
Drinking, Drugs, Poison


Tracking
Wisdom
How to follow a critter



This would decouple skills from Intelligence specifically that boosts Artificers and Wizards, while granting skills, weapons and tools to the classes who would get the most out of them.

[Lord Raziere]

I don't think this is anywhere near as difficult as people claim. Of course any D&D class needs combat abilities, but a "scholar" class can have features based on studying enemies and supporting their allies well enough. Plus, you know, just using a weapon, even if it won't be as effective as a fighter. The game just seems stuck in thinking that rogues need to be the be-all, end-all of characters who aren't warriors but also don't cast magic.

Exactly I've seen a bunch of Scholar class homebrew pull it off. just because you read a lot of books and know stuff doesn't you can't also know how to stab that monster- and if you read the right books, you know exactly where to stab so that it goes down quicker. We really need to expand non-magic classes beyond rogue.

[Ashrym]

I would find an scholarly adventurer as inspiration and build from there. Indiana Jones is a typical example getting back to the rogue with a sage background.

Other scholarly backgrounds include anthropologist, archeologist, or cloistered scholar. Or make a custom back ground to cover it thematically.

If a person wants a less roguish scholar then I might go with a fighter. Fighters are practically a blank canvas for making a standard everyday adventurer with whatever them a person might want for a flavor build. Go battle master and include tactical assessment, ambush, commanding presence, and maneuvering attack.. Add other maneuvers that do not require saves and a lower STR or DEX will not be negatively impacting in using them. For example, precision attack would be suitable to the intelligent theme.

Take the skill expertise, skilled, dungeon delver, keen mind, linguist, or ritual caster for thematic feats.

Skills like history, arcana, religion, nature, and medicine are thematic.

A fighter who does not optimize for combat is built on a strong enough chassis to support playing with options like that. It also prevent such a fighter from stepping on toes because the knowledge or skill versatility added means a bit lower combat ability for a trade off in the concept.

If a person wants to make INT more prominent in the concept then that means making another subclass or class. A class would be more work and be looking at multiple subclasses. Expertise, bonus skill proficiencies, tool expertise, and flash of genius are similarly applicable abilities that might be used. The Next playtest bardic knowledge would work as well. It was like reliable talent but only worked for lore checks.

[JNAProductions]

Scholar (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?636578-Scholar-WIP&p=25200807#post25200807), WIP.

[Mitchellnotes]

A homebrew Scholar class could easily be made using the Expert sidekick class from Tasha's as a starting point.

This was exactly my thought. A non-wizard/rogue scholar that helps others in combat may be the way to go.

[Tanarii]

IMO scholar (or Sage) is a background, not an adventuring class. It's what you did before you started adventuring, not the thing that enables adventuring. That's not to say it can't have impact on adventuring.

Just like I wouldn't expect a Noble class or a Hermit class or a Soldier class.

If you want a non-caster former scholar now adventuring, take one of the very few non-caster class/subclass combinations and ad an appropriate background of choice. Sage, Acolyte and Hermit are the traditional ones from the PHB.

[Greywander]

I see the non-caster scholar as covering characters like Indiana Jones, where cleverness and relentlessness fuel success.
As I was scrolling through the thread, I started thinking about characters in fiction who could be described as both scholars and adventurers, and Indiana Jones popped into my head not long before I scrolled down to your post. Coincidence?


The game just seems stuck in thinking that rogues need to be the be-all, end-all of characters who aren't warriors but also don't cast magic.
Truth. Fighter is great as a blank slate, but rogue has too much of its flavor baked in to its features, with things like Sneak Attack, Thieves' Cant, and thieves' tools. I remember once trying to build a doctor character, and Sneak Attack kind of made sense based on his knowledge of anatomy, but the rest did not. It would certainly be nice to have a few other options for non-magical skill monkeys.


Scholar (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?636578-Scholar-WIP&p=25200807#post25200807), WIP.
Interesting, you took this in quite a different direction than my WIP. It will be interesting to compare once we've fleshed out our concepts more.

I started a WIP of my own, and it's starting to come together.

I gave it a d6 hit die, reasoning that they're probably not any tougher than a wizard. But they get medium armor (they are a warrior scholar, after all), so they'll at least have decent AC. I'm also giving them Uncanny Dodge or something like it, so they can still be somewhat resilient, but the lack of a shield and lower HP will encourage them to stick to the back line.

I'm a bit worried I might have them getting too much at 1st level. Currently, they get four features: Monster Lore (basically Favored Foe, but it extends to all INT and WIS checks related to that creature type), Bonus Languages (four of them, in addition to the one from Monster Lore), Expertise, and Ballistics. I feel like the bonus languages would be the first on the chopping block, since they already get extra languages from Monster Lore, but I feel like there isn't really a class that specializes in languages and this one should be the one that does.

Ballistics allows you to use INT with your ranged weapons. It also allows you to use a bonus action to calculate projectile trajectory so you can shoot in an arc. This doubles your range and allows you to ignore cover, including full cover (so long as there is a path for the projectile to arc through). Keep in mind that you have disadvantage on the attack if you can't see the target (e.g. if they are behind full cover). The way this is worded, the bonus action effects apply to any ranged attack, including thrown weapons or spells (I might have been thinking about my previous Eldritch Sniper concept). This makes it an interesting ability to dip for, but not a ridiculous one.

Typically a class gets a damage bump at 5th and 11th level, but I decided to go a different path for this. The scholar is supposed to be a support class, not a DPR class. So at 5th level you get Distracting Ramble. Once on your turn, when you attack a creature you can impose disadvantage on their next attack. Note that you don't have to hit; this combos nicely with Ballistics letting you reach behind full cover. You can also use this ability to try and distract a crowd by making an INT check with proficiency against their passive Insight. If you succeed, that creature will listen to you ramble for 1 minute, imposing disadvantage on their Perception checks and giving advantage on attacks against them.

Then, at 11th level, your rambling can lower a target's guard. When an affected target makes a save, they subtract 1d6 from their save, once per round. This is in addition to imposing disadvantage on their next attack, and it also works with the crowd version (e.g. for a Mass Suggestion).

At this point, I have everything up until 14th level filled out, so I don't think I have any more room for lower level features. Which is a shame, because I still have some ideas for some. One of them was adding your INT mod to Persuasion checks thanks to your ability to reason out an argument with logic. Being a class that gets lots of languages, it made sense to give them more social features, but not too many since scholars aren't exactly known for people skills (Persuasion is a class skill though for exactly this reason, and because logical arguments). TBH, making a logical argument should probably be an INT (Persuasion) check anyway.

Not sure about a capstone or high level features. I have some ideas for subclasses, though.

Arcanist. Boring version is that it's a half or third caster subclass. Less boring version is that they're not a caster at all, but do study magic. They record spells in a book, not a spellbook but a normal book with normal ink, and they're not restricted by class lists. They can do ritual casting, and can scribe scrolls, but don't get spell slots. I'm playing with the idea of having them create makeshift scrolls at the end of a long rest, but I suppose that's just spell slots by another name. Another idea is counterspelling a spell by brandishing a matching spell focus (which will require you to know what kind of spellcaster the enemy is), and possibly only when the spell is targeting you (so maybe something more akin to the lightning redirect from Avatar: The Last Airbender).

Monster Hunter. You know those big game hunters that go to Africa to hunt lions or elephants or whatever with the safari hats and blunderbusses? Yeah, that. A more combat oriented subclass, they would probably get additional combat-related benefits from their monster lore, but also just be more competent in combat in general. Monster lore would be a nice extra, not the crux of the subclass. Not sure why this came to mind as a scholar subclass, but I think it oddly fits.

Monster Tamer. The subclass for those who want to be the very best, like no one ever was. To catch them is their real test, to train them is their cause. So maybe a Beastmaster who doesn't suck? Implementation could be a problem. If you're meant to tame a variety of monsters as you meet them, where do you keep them when you're not using them? TBH, if we're not using a pokeball analogue, then this concept might work better by having a companion that can copy or possess a monster, so instead of actually taming the monster you're having an already friendly ally become the monster. In any case, an important aspect of this concept is collection; you're not just going to tame a monster at 3rd level and keep it until the end of the campaign, you'll want to tame new monsters as you encounter them, and maybe switch between them. Possibly a modified version of Find Familiar could be used for this.

Beyond that, perhaps a tactician, poet, or archaeologist subclass could also be good options. I'll need to get the base chassis down before I start working on subclasses, but I've got a few ideas so far.

[Gignere]

I'm thinking back to older editions where Int got you more proficiency slots that could be used effectively for a fighter. It's a shame there isn't some benefit like that in 5e, so Int is just a dump stat. I know one of my players (running a 20 Int Wizard) often said, 'Why the heck would I be hanging around with these guys?' referring to the rest of the group where every other character was 8 Int. I don't think he was all wrong.

They are his slaves/peons, that’s why he’s hanging out with them.

When I play wizard that’s how I role played my attitude towards the rest of the party.

[Grod_The_Giant]

I think Grod The Giant made some classes along this vein. Can't find them at the moment, but check his stuff-if I recall correctly, he's already taken a stab at this.
I went through a bunch of iterations, but I don't think I ever managed a great scholar-type class. The closest I got (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?543633-New-base-Clase-The-Scholar) was a muddled mess that offloaded its main schtick onto wildly different subclasses. I eventually wound up breaking it up into a couple different classes:
The Alchemist from my Guide, which is a straight up spellcaster with some quirky rules about how their spells work to make them feel more like potions and poisons.
The Magewight from my Guide, who's my version of the Artificer. Think the published class, but replace all the spellcasting and unique infusions with extra Replicate Magic Items you get to shift around during long rests.
"Mundane healer" subclasses for the Fighter and Rogue, also in my Guide.
The Archivist from my Grimoire, who's sort of a full spellcaster, but with a very limited set of combat magics (Voodoo curses and blessings) and a massively expanded set of ritual magic.
The Warlord from my Grimoire, who's a purely-mundane-support class with auras and party-aiding reactions. Not very scholarly, but it wouldn't be hard to swap Charisma for Intelligence and do a bit of refluffing.
Your take looks like it'll wind up being a much more direct and faithful take on the concept, though.

It might also be worth looking for non-casting Bard homebrew; there's a lot of overlap between "charismatic leader" and "all-knowing support." I don't know how many exist for 5e, though; I did one for 3.5e but it's not even remotely import-able.

[Havlock]

I'd think you could get reasonably close without having to homebrew a new class. Just go with the appropriate background and a high int & wis Inquisitive Rogue with a 1 lvl Ranger dip... or even 2 lvls ranger if you don't mind reflavouring some of the spells as less magic-y.

[BoutsofInsanity]

As I was scrolling through the thread, I started thinking about characters in fiction who could be described as both scholars and adventurers, and Indiana Jones popped into my head not long before I scrolled down to your post. Coincidence?


Truth. Fighter is great as a blank slate, but rogue has too much of its flavor baked in to its features, with things like Sneak Attack, Thieves' Cant, and thieves' tools. I remember once trying to build a doctor character, and Sneak Attack kind of made sense based on his knowledge of anatomy, but the rest did not. It would certainly be nice to have a few other options for non-magical skill monkeys.


Interesting, you took this in quite a different direction than my WIP. It will be interesting to compare once we've fleshed out our concepts more.

I started a WIP of my own, and it's starting to come together.

I gave it a d6 hit die, reasoning that they're probably not any tougher than a wizard. But they get medium armor (they are a warrior scholar, after all), so they'll at least have decent AC. I'm also giving them Uncanny Dodge or something like it, so they can still be somewhat resilient, but the lack of a shield and lower HP will encourage them to stick to the back line.

I'm a bit worried I might have them getting too much at 1st level. Currently, they get four features: Monster Lore (basically Favored Foe, but it extends to all INT and WIS checks related to that creature type), Bonus Languages (four of them, in addition to the one from Monster Lore), Expertise, and Ballistics. I feel like the bonus languages would be the first on the chopping block, since they already get extra languages from Monster Lore, but I feel like there isn't really a class that specializes in languages and this one should be the one that does.

Ballistics allows you to use INT with your ranged weapons. It also allows you to use a bonus action to calculate projectile trajectory so you can shoot in an arc. This doubles your range and allows you to ignore cover, including full cover (so long as there is a path for the projectile to arc through). Keep in mind that you have disadvantage on the attack if you can't see the target (e.g. if they are behind full cover). The way this is worded, the bonus action effects apply to any ranged attack, including thrown weapons or spells (I might have been thinking about my previous Eldritch Sniper concept). This makes it an interesting ability to dip for, but not a ridiculous one.

Typically a class gets a damage bump at 5th and 11th level, but I decided to go a different path for this. The scholar is supposed to be a support class, not a DPR class. So at 5th level you get Distracting Ramble. Once on your turn, when you attack a creature you can impose disadvantage on their next attack. Note that you don't have to hit; this combos nicely with Ballistics letting you reach behind full cover. You can also use this ability to try and distract a crowd by making an INT check with proficiency against their passive Insight. If you succeed, that creature will listen to you ramble for 1 minute, imposing disadvantage on their Perception checks and giving advantage on attacks against them.

Then, at 11th level, your rambling can lower a target's guard. When an affected target makes a save, they subtract 1d6 from their save, once per round. This is in addition to imposing disadvantage on their next attack, and it also works with the crowd version (e.g. for a Mass Suggestion).

At this point, I have everything up until 14th level filled out, so I don't think I have any more room for lower level features. Which is a shame, because I still have some ideas for some. One of them was adding your INT mod to Persuasion checks thanks to your ability to reason out an argument with logic. Being a class that gets lots of languages, it made sense to give them more social features, but not too many since scholars aren't exactly known for people skills (Persuasion is a class skill though for exactly this reason, and because logical arguments). TBH, making a logical argument should probably be an INT (Persuasion) check anyway.

Not sure about a capstone or high level features. I have some ideas for subclasses, though.

Arcanist. Boring version is that it's a half or third caster subclass. Less boring version is that they're not a caster at all, but do study magic. They record spells in a book, not a spellbook but a normal book with normal ink, and they're not restricted by class lists. They can do ritual casting, and can scribe scrolls, but don't get spell slots. I'm playing with the idea of having them create makeshift scrolls at the end of a long rest, but I suppose that's just spell slots by another name. Another idea is counterspelling a spell by brandishing a matching spell focus (which will require you to know what kind of spellcaster the enemy is), and possibly only when the spell is targeting you (so maybe something more akin to the lightning redirect from Avatar: The Last Airbender).

Monster Hunter. You know those big game hunters that go to Africa to hunt lions or elephants or whatever with the safari hats and blunderbusses? Yeah, that. A more combat oriented subclass, they would probably get additional combat-related benefits from their monster lore, but also just be more competent in combat in general. Monster lore would be a nice extra, not the crux of the subclass. Not sure why this came to mind as a scholar subclass, but I think it oddly fits.

Monster Tamer. The subclass for those who want to be the very best, like no one ever was. To catch them is their real test, to train them is their cause. So maybe a Beastmaster who doesn't suck? Implementation could be a problem. If you're meant to tame a variety of monsters as you meet them, where do you keep them when you're not using them? TBH, if we're not using a pokeball analogue, then this concept might work better by having a companion that can copy or possess a monster, so instead of actually taming the monster you're having an already friendly ally become the monster. In any case, an important aspect of this concept is collection; you're not just going to tame a monster at 3rd level and keep it until the end of the campaign, you'll want to tame new monsters as you encounter them, and maybe switch between them. Possibly a modified version of Find Familiar could be used for this.

Beyond that, perhaps a tactician, poet, or archaeologist subclass could also be good options. I'll need to get the base chassis down before I start working on subclasses, but I've got a few ideas so far.




It seems to me you really just want to homebrew a class that fits your desires, rather than use the current class system available to build a character within the framework of the established game. I completely understand that desire and encourage it.

As others have already stated, there are numerous ways to get to a scholar like character within the bounds of the system without having to homebrew an entire class. Feel free to use or not use those.

I think however, there is a better solution than homebrewing an entire class, which is to change how intelligence skills work. Currently, the stupidest thing that occurred within the 5e development was the discarding of the 4th edition monster manuals. They were fantastic. (I think 3rd had some of these features as well.) Each monster manual entry had a DC associated with a knowledge check, letting characters who made them learn the various history and tactics the monsters used. Further, a homebrew rule my table used was dividing your result by 5 and giving you that many questions to ask about specific monster defenses.

AC
Weakest Save
Strongest save
Best attack
Worst attack
Special abilities
Weaknesses
Resistances
Special Senses


This allowed players to then make informed decisions in character about how to fight the said monster. I think working with your DM to bring back some of the reward for knowledge checks would really develop the abilities of intelligence characters to do cool helpful stuff without directly fighting. I think developing the skill system a little more would enable that feeling. From there, if that still doesn't scratch the itch, I would instead think making a rogue subclass that interacts with the Knowledge Skills might feel better than creating an entire new class. Example below.

Rogue Subclass - The Travelling Scholar

3rd Level Part 1 - Gain 2 Intelligence skills and give expertise into one of them. Further, as a bonus action you may now make intelligence checks as a bonus action and you treat any die roll of a 7 or less as an 8 in regards to knowledge checks. When you make a successful knowledge check on a monster (use the difficulty DC chart as a guide to set the DC based on the lore of the game world) You learn a piece of knowledge based on my list above.

3rd Level part 2 - Helpful Strike - If the Scholar deals sneak attack to an enemy, they can choose not deal damage and hold those dice in reserve until the beginning of their next turn. Representing the Scholar distracting the enemy, or giving helpful advice they may give those dice to characters as they make attacks at the same creature. Letting them roll those dice for either to-hit rolls or damage. Similarly to bardic inspiration.

Something like that.