OneDND Subclass Predictions

[ZRN]

Somewhere in the new UA playtest materials, they mentioned that the revised PHB will have 48 subclasses across the 12 base classes (vs. 44 in the 2014 PHB). What are your hopes/predictions on what'll be added and removed, and how it might change?

Here are mine (original PHB options in parentheses):

Barbarian (Berserker, Totem): I'd be shocked if they didn't keep both of these and add at least one or two more options. Ancestral spirit is my personal favorite.

Bard (Lore, Valor): Lore confirmed in UA. Valor keeps the name but absorbs some or all of Swords. Maybe Whispers added?

Cleric (Knowledge, Life, Light, Nature, Tempest, Trickery, War): I say cut light, nature, rework trickery, maybe replace knowledge with arcana? You need a bunch of options here, but I'm not a huge fan of the 2014 PHB selection as an introduction to the cleric class.

Druid (Land, Moon): No removals; I hope they add at least one (stars?) to show the range this class can have.

Fighter (Champion, BM, EK): No removals here; I could see cavalier or rune knight as a good candidate to be added. I don't expect a warlord subclass, but a man can dream.

Monk (Open Hand, Shadow, Four Elements): OH and Shadow stay. I expect a decent rework of Four Elements or else a full replacement.

Paladin (Devotion, Ancients, Vengeance): I expect/hope they keep all of these and add at least one more. Conquest?

Ranger (Hunter, BM): Hunter confirmed, and they're certainly keeping BM as well. I'd love to see a reworked bounty hunter/Monster Hunter. Fey Wanderer was great too.

Rogue (Thief, Assassin, AT): Thief confirmed. AT I expect to remain. Maybe assassin needs to retire? Swashbuckler seems a great PHB addition, along with maybe a reworked Mastermind and/or Inquisitive.

Sorcerer (Draconic, Wild): Big rewrite of both existing subclasses more in line with Tasha's (e.g. bonus spells). At least two more added - maybe a fey bloodline? I'd love an Elemental bloodline inspired by 4e sorcerer flavor.

Warlock (Fey, Fiend, GOO): These three aren't going anywhere, and I expect a reworked Hexblade as well.

Wizard (8 schools): IMHO toss them all and come up with 3-4 good, thematic concepts (which can cannibalize mechanics from the old subclasses as appropriate). Maybe something like Warmage (evocation and abjuration stuff), Beguiler (enchantment/illusion), Summoner (conjuration), Arcanist (generalist)? Whatever they do, they need to find a way to make your subclass define the spells you pick, rather than just sit on top of them like frosting on a cake.

[Oramac]

Pure speculation at this point, but let's do it!


Barbarian (Berserker, Totem): Most likely both stay. Hopefully Berserker gets a rework with the proposed new Exhaustion mechanic. Personally I'd love to see Ancestral Guardian and/or Zealot.

Bard (Lore, Valor): Lore confirmed in UA. Valor keeps the name but absorbs some or all of Swords. <---- Agreed. I'd like to see Eloquence, personally, though I don't expect it.

Cleric (Knowledge, Life, Light, Nature, Tempest, Trickery, War): This one is tough. I feel like they're going to lean in to the stereotypical cleric. So Life will stay for sure. Other than that, IDK. Perhaps Knowledge, Nature, or even Death? (Death would be cool)

Druid (Land, Moon): Circle of Stars is by far my favorite, so I hope to see that. Maybe also Dreams? (though I'm personally not a fan, it is thematic)

Fighter (Champion, BM, EK): Cavalier seems the most likely candidate, though not my favorite. I'd love to see the Psi-Knight, but I think that's a pipe dream at this point.

Monk (Open Hand, Shadow, Four Elements): OH and Shadow stay. <--- Agreed. IDK about Four Elements. It fits thematically but would need a HUGE rework. Otherwise, I think Kensei is likely, though I'd much rather see the Astral monk.

Paladin (Devotion, Ancients, Vengeance): Conquest would be nice, but I think Crown or Redemption are more likely. Especially since apparently paladins are "priests" now. (BOO)

Ranger (Hunter, BM): Hunter confirmed, and they're certainly keeping BM as well. <-- Yup. I'm a big fan of the Drake Warden. Also, not a subclass, but I want to see more support for a melee ranger. (more specifically, a Strength Ranger)

Rogue (Thief, Assassin, AT): Thief confirmed. AT I expect to remain. <-- Yup. Swashbuckler seems the most likely. Personally I'd love to see the Mastermind and Soulknife, but I won't hold my breath.

Sorcerer (Draconic, Wild): I think Divine Soul has a solid chance to get in the PHB. Other than that, I really don't know. EDIT: how the hell did I forget Storm? Add Storm Sorc!!

Warlock (Fey, Fiend, GOO): These three aren't going anywhere, and I expect a reworked Hexblade as well. <--- For sure.

Wizard (8 schools): Maybe something like Warmage (evocation and abjuration stuff), Beguiler (enchantment/illusion), Summoner (conjuration), Arcanist (generalist)? <-- I'm down for this. It would be really cool to see Chronomancy or Graviturgy make it, but I think that's even less likely than Psi-Knight is for Fighters. EDIT: Summoner should include necromancy as well.

[nickl_2000]

Please, please, please don't have 500 wizard subclasses and ignore the rest of them. Maybe, just maybe in one addition we could focus initially on literally any other class other than wizards for the most time spent on it.

Predictions, this posting will be completely ignore and Wizards will get twice as many subclasses as everyone else, like always.

(I'm sure you can all tell, I am in no way bitter at all)

[deadman1204]

We can effectively say its only 40 subclasses. There WILL be 1 for each wizard school. As well, there will probably be another 10 cleric domains minimum.
So when picking what stays and goes, its probably better to say its 25-28 across 10 classes. Which means many classes will only have 2 subclasses.

Explain to me again why 6th ed will be better and not more samey boringness?

[ZRN]

As a side note, I also kind of expect that their "no more editions" spiel will end up meaning that most or all of their published 5e stuff gets updated to OneDND for digital publication, if not paper editions. So for example, if you bought/buy Tasha's for DnD Beyond, when the new edition comes out you'll get updated OneDND versions of Soulknife, Rune Knight, etc. This would both reward current customers and entice new customers because the new edition has shiny new versions of lots of stuff right out the gate. (And judging from the expert UA, it wouldn't be THAT tough to update most of their published subclasses - shuffle the levels a bit, fix broken or obsolete rules interactions like the soulknife weapon, etc.)

If I'm right on that, they probably wouldn't include most of the post-PHB subclasses in the new PHB unless they felt it added something essential to the core class. That "must-have" list is pretty short, IMO: swashbuckler, hexblade, maayyybe cavalier and monster hunter.

[KorvinStarmast]

Cleric (Knowledge, Life, Light, Tempest, Trickery): That suffices. Add Grave, maybe.
Fighter (Cavalier, BM, EK, Rune Knight): Would work for me.

Monk (Open Hand, Shadow, Four Elements): Agree with a tweak of Four Elements, and keep Kensei.

Paladin (Devotion, Ancients, Vengeance): I expect/hope they keep all of these and add at least one more.
These are enough. Watcher isn't bad, thematically.

Ranger (Hunter, BM): Hunter confirmed, and they're certainly keeping BM as well. Add Gloom Stalker, and back fill the sub class spells to Hunter and BM and this one's done.
Rogue (Thief, Swashbuckler, AT): Add one or two of the assassin features to the base class and maybe add mastermind but it could use a tweak, I think.

Sorcerer (Draconic, Wild): Drop wild. Add Shadow and Divine. Dump clockwork and that other mess from Tasha's. Either upgrade Storm or drop it.
Warlock (Fey, Fiend, GOO): These three aren't going anywhere
Drop Hexblade, add Celestial and either Fathomless or Undying. (As much as I love Genie, I can live without it).

Wizard (8 schools): IMHO toss them all and come up with 3-4 good, thematic concepts Sadly, to be back compatible they probably need to keep the 8 school thing.

[Oramac]

Either upgrade Storm or drop it.

I'm going to edit my post to include Storm. Can't believe I forgot it. It's easily my favorite Sorc subclass.

But why does it need an upgrade?

[animorte]

Please, please, please don't have 500 wizard subclasses and ignore the rest of them. Maybe, just maybe in one addition we could focus initially on literally any other class other than wizards for the most time spent on it.

Predictions, this posting will be completely ignore and Wizards will get twice as many subclasses as everyone else, like always.

(I'm sure you can all tell, I am in no way bitter at all)
…of the coast

I literally just wrote down all my favorite vs expected subclasses just yesterday while thinking about this. I’ll drop in my mediocre thoughts when I get more time later.

[nickl_2000]

…of the coast

I literally just wrote down all my favorite vs expected subclasses just yesterday while thinking about this. I’ll drop in my mediocre thoughts when I get more time later.

I know... I know... it's literally in their name. That doesn't mean I won't keep hope that one day they will realize there are other casters out there that need more love than wizards.

[ZRN]

I'm going to edit my post to include Storm. Can't believe I forgot it. It's easily my favorite Sorc subclass.

But why does it need an upgrade?

At a minimum it should get some extra spells. I'd say the free movement thing also shouldn't take a bonus action.

[Oramac]

At a minimum it should get some extra spells. I'd say the free movement thing also shouldn't take a bonus action.

That's fair. More spells would be welcome. Though IMO the game just needs more storm-based spells in general. After about 3rd level or so, there are precious few of them.

Having played it quite a bit, I think the BA movement is ok. I certainly wouldn't complain if it was free, but I don't think it's that big a hindrance either.

[ZRN]

That's fair. More spells would be welcome. Though IMO the game just needs more storm-based spells in general. After about 3rd level or so, there are precious few of them.


Tasha's has a new Transmuted Spell metamagic so you can turn your fireball into a lightning ball. Honestly I think storm sorcs should be able to use that for free when turning spells into lightning spells.

[animorte]

I know... I know... it's literally in their name. That doesn't mean I won't keep hope that one day they will realize there are other casters out there that need more love than wizards.

For the record, I absolutely agree. I’ve mentioned it on this site probably 30 times that I just don’t like Wizards, have never played one and likely never will.

[Nidgit]

If things were totally fair based on the number of published subclasses, Druid and Sorcerer would each get three subclasses, Wizard and Cleric would get five, and everyone else would get four. That's unlikely to happen, but I'll pretend anyway:

Barbarian:
Ancestral Guardian
Berserker
Totem
Zealot

Two classics plus the two most popular new subclasses.


Bard:
Creation
Lore
Valor/Swords
Whispers

Valor takes on the more offensive capabilities of Swords Bard. Creation is the one I'm certainly least confident on, but the Fantasia vibes are too good to ignore. We can already see Lore Bard leaning more towards Eloquence.


Cleric:
Grave
Knowledge
Life
Nature
Tempest

The trickiest one to cut down, since combining too many domains causes problems for future expansion. Life takes on some aspects from Light, Knowledge contains aspects of Arcana and Trickery, and Tempest has shades of War.


Druid:
Land
Moon
Stars

Land and Moon are obvious. Stars narrowly beats out Wildfire and Shepherd. We get a land/beast/sky thing going.


Fighter:
Champion/Battlemaster
Eldritch Knight
Rune Knight
Samurai

This is assuming that Maneuvers get more incorporated into the standard Fighter chassis, which I believe WotC have already expressed some openness to. Samurai is included to offer a more social Fighter and another that doesn't rely on magic.


Monk:
Drunken Master
Four Elements
Open Hand
Shadows

The PHB three are all quite good thematically. Drunken Master beats out Kensei (thematics too weak), Sun Soul (a bit too anime), and Astral Self (definitely too anime), but all come back in the future.


Paladin:
Ancients
Crown
Devotion
Vengeance

Again, hard to argue with the starting three. Crown beats out Redemption and Conquest because it overlaps less with the other existing subclasses.


Ranger:
Beastmaster
Gloomstalker
Hunter/Monster Slayer
Swarmkeeper

The most popular subclasses. Hunter takes on a few insight aspects of Monster Slayer to better distinguish it from Gloomstalker.


Rogue:
Arcane Trickster
Assassin
Swashbuckler
Thief

Swashbuckler beats out a combined Mastermind/Inquisitive subclass due to popularity.


Sorcerer:
Divine
Draconic
Wild

Divine fills a broader niche as the only healing Mage. No subclasses really jumped out to me as exceedingly popular for specific mechanical/thematic reasons (imo Aberrant/Clockwork are mainly popular because they're buffed Sorcerers, not really due to individual abilities).


Warlock:
Fey
Fiend
Genie
Great Old One

Everybody loves Genielocks. Hexblade is reworked more directly into Pact of the Blade.


Wizard:
Bladesinger
Diviner
Necromancer
Scribe
War Wizard

Down with spell school subclasses! Let the era of private sector wizardry begin!

[Zevox]

My expectation/hope is that they'll keep all of the subclasses from the existing PHB and simply add eight, with most of them likely going to the classes that had the least in the 5E PHB (Barbarian, Bard, Druid, Ranger, and Sorcerer). Personally hoping for Beast Barbarian, Stars Druid, and Storm Sorcerer. Don't have strong opinions on Bard and Ranger subclasses.

I definitely hope for a major rework for the Four Elements Monk, it's one of the biggest disappointments of 5E for me. It looks at first glance like it should be a Bender Monk, but outside of a couple of abilities, it doesn't play like one at all, it just plays like a Monk that gets a few spells. At a minimum, it needs some way to feel like it's using elemental powers all the time, something that's not resource-dependent, in order to capture that feeling, rather than just being a normal Monk that only sometimes gets to do elemental things.

[Saelethil]

If things were totally fair based on the number of published subclasses, Druid and Sorcerer would each get three subclasses, Wizard and Cleric would get five, and everyone else would get four. That's unlikely to happen, but I'll pretend anyway:

Barbarian:
Ancestral Guardian
Berserker
Totem
Zealot

Two classics plus the two most popular new subclasses.


Bard:
Creation
Lore
Valor/Swords
Whispers

Valor takes on the more offensive capabilities of Swords Bard. Creation is the one I'm certainly least confident on, but the Fantasia vibes are too good to ignore. We can already see Lore Bard leaning more towards Eloquence.


Cleric:
Grave
Knowledge
Life
Nature
Tempest

The trickiest one to cut down, since combining too many domains causes problems for future expansion. Life takes on some aspects from Light, Knowledge contains aspects of Arcana and Trickery, and Tempest has shades of War.


Druid:
Land
Moon
Stars

Land and Moon are obvious. Stars narrowly beats out Wildfire and Shepherd. We get a land/beast/sky thing going.


Fighter:
Champion/Battlemaster
Eldritch Knight
Rune Knight
Samurai

This is assuming that Maneuvers get more incorporated into the standard Fighter chassis, which I believe WotC have already expressed some openness to. Samurai is included to offer a more social Fighter and another that doesn't rely on magic.


Monk:
Drunken Master
Four Elements
Open Hand
Shadows

The PHB three are all quite good thematically. Drunken Master beats out Kensei (thematics too weak), Sun Soul (a bit too anime), and Astral Self (definitely too anime), but all come back in the future.


Paladin:
Ancients
Crown
Devotion
Vengeance

Again, hard to argue with the starting three. Crown beats out Redemption and Conquest because it overlaps less with the other existing subclasses.


Ranger:
Beastmaster
Gloomstalker
Hunter/Monster Slayer
Swarmkeeper

The most popular subclasses. Hunter takes on a few insight aspects of Monster Slayer to better distinguish it from Gloomstalker.


Rogue:
Arcane Trickster
Assassin
Swashbuckler
Thief

Swashbuckler beats out a combined Mastermind/Inquisitive subclass due to popularity.


Sorcerer:
Divine
Draconic
Wild

Divine fills a broader niche as the only healing Mage. No subclasses really jumped out to me as exceedingly popular for specific mechanical/thematic reasons (imo Aberrant/Clockwork are mainly popular because they're buffed Sorcerers, not really due to individual abilities).


Warlock:
Fey
Fiend
Genie
Great Old One

Everybody loves Genielocks. Hexblade is reworked more directly into Pact of the Blade.


Wizard:
Bladesinger
Diviner
Necromancer
Scribe
War Wizard

Down with spell school subclasses! Let the era of private sector wizardry begin!

I would be thrilled if this ended up being the case. The only places I really differ are with Bard I would prefer they added Glamour instead of Creation. And for Fighter I would prefer Cavalier over the Rune Knight.

[Jervis]

The exact same as before but wizards get 4 new subclasses, 2 based on stealing from other spell lists, one gish that outperforms fighters and one that’s based on pumping skill checks.

Jokes aside it’s gonna be the exact same but the classes with 2 subclasses before get 1 more.

[Tanarii]

Assuming they go for four per class, here's what I think they need:

Barbarian: Berserker, Beast/Totem, Storm, Thane (all need 4e Rages)

Bard: Skald, Lore-priest, Courtier, Troubadour

Cleric: Healer/Holy (no armor), Dark/Death (no armor), Tempest (elemental), Templar (classic Cleric)

Druid: Celtic Priest, Animal Friend, Shapeshifter, Shaman

Monk: Shaolin (unarmed), Sohei (weapon), Elemental Bender, Ninja

Fighter: (rework all as HA tanks) Weapon Master (damage + effects), EK (GISH + 2H), Sword Mage (4e teleports), Warden (4e forms)

Paladin: Holy, Fey, Avenger (light armor plus mobility), Diabolic

Ranger: Frontiersman, Beast Master, Archer, Dual Wielder

Rogue: Thief, AT, Assassin, Charlatan

Sorcerer: (blooded) Dragon, Chaos, Elemental, Fey

Warlock: (pacts) Diabolic, Demonic, Fey, Far Realm

Wizards: War, Book, Magictech, Forbidden Lore (largely Necromancy/Enchantment)

[KorvinStarmast]

Cleric:
Grave
Knowledge
Life
Nature
Tempest
Hard no. Nature cleric is just wrong. We have druids. Light.


Druid:
Land
Moon
Stars Works for me.


Fighter:
Battlemaster
Eldritch Knight
Rune Knight
Cavalier


Monk:
Kensei
Four Elements
Open Hand
ShadowsDrunken Master is underwhelming. I have two of them playing for me as DM in two different games, and I am glad I never chose that one. Radiant Soul is better. :smallyuk:

Paladin:
Ancients
Crown
Devotion
VengeanceWe have an accord.


Ranger:
Beastmaster
Gloomstalker
Hunter
Monster Slayer
I dislike Swarm keeper

Rogue:
Arcane Trickster
{Mastermind (with a few tweaks) }
Swashbuckler
Thief My suggestion in brackets. As I said, give a few of the Assassin features to the base class.

Sorcerer:
Divine
Draconic
Wild
No wild, Shadow. All that Wild Sorcerer represents is a walking Wand of Wonder.


Warlock:
Fey
Fiend
Genie
Great Old One
I can live with this.
Hexblade sux. :smallfurious:

Wizard:
Bladesinger
Diviner
Necromancer Transmutation
Scribe
Evoker
War WizardIllusionist Hard no on Necromancer. It is an NPC.

[Jervis]

Necromancer zombie spam is a perfectly valid playstyle

[Tanarii]

Hard no on Necromancer. It is an NPC.
Clearly only and Evil character would frequently use the Enchanter feature Alter Memories. :smallamused:

[Leon]

I'd like to see both Cleric and Wizards (they do have a couple outside of core) get actual subclasses instead of treating the school/domain as it. Still let them have a flavored List of bonus spells tied top that school or domain choice.

[Jervis]

I'd like to see both Cleric and Wizards (they do have a couple outside of core) get actual subclasses instead of treating the school/domain as it. Still let them have a flavored List of bonus spells tied top that school or domain choice.

Ideally I’d like to see cleric domains and school specializations uncoupled from subclasses altogether.

Wizards have the option to pick a school specialization where they loose access to one school of spells and get one additional spell of a different school added to their book each level and a additional spell of that school prepared of each level (no additional spells per day).

Clerics get a domain which effects their channel divinity and domain spell list.

Both get subclasses that do different things. Wizards get things like Bladesinger, war wizard, and all the other subclasses you can think of for wizards with their own class features and clerics get different subclasses to effect their role in the church/society instead of their domain. It would allow for some more customization and personalization and open up more room for subclass design that doesn’t exactly fit a wizard school or specific domain. Not gonna happen though likely.

[Psyren]

We might only get 6 new ones if they move Oathbreaker Paladin (reworked to not need to be evil) and Death Cleric to the PHB.


My expectation/hope is that they'll keep all of the subclasses from the existing PHB and simply add eight, with most of them likely going to the classes that had the least in the 5E PHB (Barbarian, Bard, Druid, Ranger, and Sorcerer).

Agreed. I definitely see all 8 wizards coming back, and all 7 clerics seem likely too.

Assuming we only get 6 new ones, I would expect to see:

A magical barbarian (either Tempest or Wild Magic)
A magical ranger (Fey Wanderer or Horizon Walker)
A more castery bard to replace Lore (Creation or Glamour) as Lore is now the skillbard
A martial druid that doesn't shapeshift (likely Spores)
A blasty sorcerer (likely Storm).

6th spot would either be another cleric to catch them up to wizards, or Arcane Archer for a ranged-focused fighter.

I'd also like to see Draconic reworked as the "gish sorcerer", closer to what Dragon Disciple was. (All the other full casters have at least one gish subclass.)

[AvvyR]

I'd actually prefer to see Battle Master dropped entirely and maneuvers to just become a core fighter feature.

[Psyren]

I'd actually prefer to see Battle Master dropped entirely and maneuvers to just become a core fighter feature.

Or better yet a Warrior Group feature (with Fighter getting the most.) Battle Master can still exist but will get the most of all.

[Jervis]

Or better yet a Warrior Group feature (with Fighter getting the most.) Battle Master can still exist but will get the most of all.

That’s good ending. Barbarian and monk getting manuvers with a list of options built around them and fighter just staying the better of the bunch would be ideal. It would also explain the nerf to GWM and SS if everyone could get the maneuver that increases accuracy. It would also explain why ranger and Paladin aren’t there. Then again i’m a fan of ToB so anything like that is a good thing.

[Psyren]

Monk getting d10 and BM maneuvers would be *chefs kiss*

Barbarian needs some kind of bonus to Wis saves.

[Zevox]

Oathbreaker Paladin (reworked to not need to be evil)
:smallconfused: How? That's kind of the whole point of that subclass.


I'd also like to see Draconic reworked as the "gish sorcerer", closer to what Dragon Disciple was. (All the other full casters have at least one gish subclass.)
I don't think Draconic would be the choice for that, since it's the classic version of the Sorcerer, draconic bloodline being the original default explanation for sorcerers having the powers they do. They'll almost certainly want to keep that as the iconic version of the class, which means all caster.

[animorte]

Barbarian - Ancestral/Totem
Bard - Lore/Spirits
Cleric - Peace/Trickery
Druid - Stars/Dreams
Fighter - Battlemaster/Echo Knight
Monk - Mercy/Shadow
Paladin - Crown/Vengeance
Ranger - Swarmkeeper/Hunter
Rogue - Swashbuckler/Scout
Sorcerer - Shadow/Divine Soul
Warlock - Genie/Celestial
Wizard - Order of Scribes/War

Those are probably my favorites (Barb/Wiz come from just being in games next to them as I don't really care to play either). Do I expect at least half of them to show up in the next PHB? Absolutely not.

The good news is they did specifically say there will be modifications (hopefully mostly improvements) to some existing subclasses and we should expect new ones entirely. I look forward to that, though I also kind of expect some of them will very likely be renamed and slightly reworked from something pre-existing to give the impression of new.

[Psyren]

:smallconfused: How? That's kind of the whole point of that subclass.

1) Alignment is optional - are Paladins in those games not able to break their oaths?
2) If an evil Conquest or Vengeance Paladin breaks their oath to become neutral or good, what would they become?

2014 Oathbreaker has fluff (and mechanical requirements) that need it to be evil - but for a new edition both are mutable.



I don't think Draconic would be the choice for that, since it's the classic version of the Sorcerer, draconic bloodline being the original default explanation for sorcerers having the powers they do. They'll almost certainly want to keep that as the iconic version of the class, which means all caster.

Sorcerer is the only caster lacking a gish subclass. They could make a new one of course, but of the ones they released, I think Draconic has the best start due to its AC and HP buffs. (The HP buff is roughly equivalent to a d6->d8 bump.) If it got claws and a breath weapon it would have a decent reason to be up near the front.

[Jervis]

1) Alignment is optional - are Paladins in those games not able to break their oaths?
2) If an evil Conquest or Vengeance Paladin breaks their oath to become neutral or good, what would they become?

2014 Oathbreaker has fluff (and mechanical requirements) that need it to be evil - but for a new edition both are mutable.



Sorcerer is the only caster lacking a gish subclass. They could make a new one of course, but of the ones they released, I think Draconic has the best start due to its AC and HP buffs. (The HP buff is roughly equivalent to a d6->d8 bump.) If it got claws and a breath weapon it would have a decent reason to be up near the front.

IIRC one of the 5e playtests, back when they still called it next, had sorcerers transforming into the thing they got their powers from slowly over the day as they cast spells. Draconic was very gishy there.

As for oathbreaker i dont mind it being really obviously evil. DnD is a game about fantasy tropes and the oathbreaker is the fallen holy warrior one. The arguments about evil paladins breaking oaths is very fridge logic to me and not something i think has to be represented in the rules. Oath of Redemption does the job fine i feel.

[ZRN]

Sadly, to be back compatible they probably need to keep the 8 school thing.

I can't imagine why that'd be the case, but if schools are supposed to be important for wizards, they could be a simple class feature like fighting styles that gives you a few benefits to all spells in that school, separate from the subclass choice.

[Oramac]

Sword Mage (4e teleports)

Bit off topic here, but specifically what teleports are you talking about? I didn't play 4e so I'm not sure, but the idea sounds interesting so I want to look it up.

[animorte]

I can't imagine why that'd be the case, but if schools are supposed to be important for wizards, they could be a simple class feature like fighting styles that gives you a few benefits to all spells in that school, separate from the subclass choice.

Similar to the Warlock’s Pact Boon. Choose a school to have a couple bonuses in, open up room for better subclasses.

[Psyren]

IIRC one of the 5e playtests, back when they still called it next, had sorcerers transforming into the thing they got their powers from slowly over the day as they cast spells. Draconic was very gishy there.

As for oathbreaker i dont mind it being really obviously evil. DnD is a game about fantasy tropes and the oathbreaker is the fallen holy warrior one. The arguments about evil paladins breaking oaths is very fridge logic to me and not something i think has to be represented in the rules. Oath of Redemption does the job fine i feel.

I don't think any 5e Paladin should be tied to alignment mechanically, including Oathbreaker and Redemption. And I say that as someone who likes alignment. This is the best Paladin has ever been - they're varied, versatile, powerful, mechanically distinct from both fighters and clerics, and there's no constant slurry of "does the paladin fall" threads. 5e figuring out how to decouple alignment from the game's bones while still leaving it intact for players like me who don't mind it was brilliant.

By far the better way to keep paladins "falling" (or "rising") intact is via the subclass retraining rules from Tasha's. Let any subclass of paladin become any other one, and include those with an affinity (not a requirement) for the most common paladin alignments in core.

[KorvinStarmast]

... if schools are supposed to be important for wizards, they could be a simple class feature like fighting styles that gives you a few benefits to all spells in that school, separate from the subclass choice. While that's not a bad idea, good luck getting this dev team to accept that approach.
They don't want to do the work. Why? Because it means that they have to balance the spell schools with each other first.

[Tanarii]

Bit off topic here, but specifically what teleports are you talking about? I didn't play 4e so I'm not sure, but the idea sounds interesting so I want to look it up.
4e Swordmage did tactical teleports all over the battle field. It was very Nightcrawler, lots of *bamf*s.
It was a built in part of the Assault & Ensnaring Swordmage's Mark (defensive maneuver), they could mark an enemy, and if that enemy attacked an ally within (fairly short) range, the swordmage would *bamf* over as a reaction.
But Assault swordmages in particular had a fair number of Encounter and Daily short-range-teleport-to-attack powers as well.

I'd forgotten, but Swordmages are the source of Booming Blade, Greenflame Blade, Lightning Lure and Sword Burst too. Although I'm sure that was a pre-4e possibly FR specific thing. They were really a GISH, but like the EK I think they'd make highly effective Fighter in 5e. I was distinguishing between the EK, which already is a very effective Fighter with evocation spells especially if scagtrips are also allowed, and a swordmage character being a tactical teleporter Fighter concept.

[Jervis]

I don't think any 5e Paladin should be tied to alignment mechanically, including Oathbreaker and Redemption. And I say that as someone who likes alignment. This is the best Paladin has ever been - they're varied, versatile, powerful, mechanically distinct from both fighters and clerics, and there's no constant slurry of "does the paladin fall" threads. 5e figuring out how to decouple alignment from the game's bones while still leaving it intact for players like me who don't mind it was brilliant.

By far the better way to keep paladins "falling" (or "rising") intact is via the subclass retraining rules from Tasha's. Let any subclass of paladin become any other one, and include those with an affinity (not a requirement) for the most common paladin alignments in core.

I wouldn't be against oathbreaker being rebranded even if it looses some of the flavor associated with it, maybe some oath of destruction or oath of ruin or something. The treachery paladin is better for player use anyway and honestly I wouldn't be against that subclass being removed since it's very overtuned even by paladin standards. I still think oathbreaker and redemption are fine being opposite sides of spectrum and the reason a lot of people want a good aligned oathbreaker is just because the subclass is really high on the totem pole powerwise.

[Zevox]

1) Alignment is optional - are Paladins in those games not able to break their oaths?
2) If an evil Conquest or Vengeance Paladin breaks their oath to become neutral or good, what would they become?

2014 Oathbreaker has fluff (and mechanical requirements) that need it to be evil - but for a new edition both are mutable.

As for oathbreaker i dont mind it being really obviously evil. DnD is a game about fantasy tropes and the oathbreaker is the fallen holy warrior one. The arguments about evil paladins breaking oaths is very fridge logic to me and not something i think has to be represented in the rules. Oath of Redemption does the job fine i feel.
I'm with Jervis on this one. Since Paladins in this edition are defined by their Oaths, there does need to be an explanation for what happens when they break them, and since most Oaths lean heavily towards good aligned actions and goals, Oathbreaker fits there, and fills the classic role of the Fallen Paladin archetype (as well as the Blackguard/general evil Paladin, though as you mention Conquest is also quite suited to that, as well as sometimes Vengeance). For the niche case of an evil Paladin who breaks their oath and becomes a better person, Redemption is a perfectly good representation.

And if you're not using alignment at all, then what does it matter what the default versions say about the alignment of the classes? Just ignore it and use them how you please.


Sorcerer is the only caster lacking a gish subclass. They could make a new one of course, but of the ones they released, I think Draconic has the best start due to its AC and HP buffs. (The HP buff is roughly equivalent to a d6->d8 bump.) If it got claws and a breath weapon it would have a decent reason to be up near the front.
Right, but again, there's a distinct reason that you wouldn't want them to be that. Draconic Sorcerer is there to be the classic version of the class, the one you'll immediately recognize if you're coming to the game from prior editions, like the Oath of Devotion Paladin. You don't turn that version into a variant of the class, you make it as standard to the original style as possible. If they decide they want a gish Sorcerer subclass, I very much think they'd make something new.

[Psyren]

I'm with Jervis on this one. Since Paladins in this edition are defined by their Oaths, there does need to be an explanation for what happens when they break them, and since most Oaths lean heavily towards good aligned actions and goals, Oathbreaker fits there, and fills the classic role of the Fallen Paladin archetype (as well as the Blackguard/general evil Paladin, though as you mention Conquest is also quite suited to that, as well as sometimes Vengeance). For the niche case of an evil Paladin who breaks their oath and becomes a better person, Redemption is a perfectly good representation.

I'm not against Oathbreaker existing; rather I just want the results of breaking Oaths to be more open. Every paladin becoming just one subclass regardless of which oath they broke is senseless, even moreso if you're going from one evil Paladin to another. "Whatever light burned in the paladin's heart has been extinguished" assumes every paladin had light in their heart to begin with, and that's just not true in this edition.


And if you're not using alignment at all, then what does it matter what the default versions say about the alignment of the classes? Just ignore it and use them how you please.

Why does only one paladin have an alignment requirement then? This isn't about establishing and then ignoring something, this is about consistency in design.


Right, but again, there's a distinct reason that you wouldn't want them to be that. Draconic Sorcerer is there to be the classic version of the class, the one you'll immediately recognize if you're coming to the game from prior editions, like the Oath of Devotion Paladin. You don't turn that version into a variant of the class, you make it as standard to the original style as possible. If they decide they want a gish Sorcerer subclass, I very much think they'd make something new.

Eh, I still don't see why a gish can't be one of the iconic versions of the class. Dragon gish sorcerers were core before, and the gish version of a caster can still be iconic (see also Moon Druid.) But sure, if they came up with a new subclass to be the gish sorcerer and justified it, I'd be on board.