I don't like Rune Knight

[JellyPooga]

Title says it all really, but here's why.

1) Theme. The theme just feels a bit tacked on, very much as if it's a class designed from the abilities it offers and upward, rather than starting with the theme and working down.
- Why is studying the runecraft of giants a Fighter thing? Inscribing runes feels more like an Artificer thing. Study feels like a Wizard or Bard thing. Creature-feature themes feel more Druidic or Sorcerous and invoking Giants and/or their power and learning, spiritually or magically feels way more Barbarian or Warlock, generally speaking, than Fighter. Skill focus, which every rune offers, is more Rogue and Bard. Just about any Class but the Cleric or Monk would be a better fit, thematically, than Fighter.
- Why/how does it study the runes of multiple giant species, from the brutish and crude Hill Giant to the sophisticated and isolationist Storm Giant? Dragonborn and Draconic Sorcerers have to pick a lane and stick to it. Why are Fighter-Giants different, except that whoever designed it didn't put that much effort or care into actually theming their subclass?
- Where do the runes go after a long rest? Just a nit-pick, really, but inscribing a rune feels like something pretty permanent. Painting a rune on, yeah, I can go with that as a temporary thing, but inscribing implies a degree of permanence. After all, how are you supposed to..."[find] the giant's work carved into a hill or cave" if they all disappear after a day? Why does the Rune Knight get to pick and choose which runes to use every day outside of "because magic" or "something something game design"?

2) Skewey Balance. It just feels...off. There's some aspects that I could easily point at as blatant power creep or niche infringement on other Classes (if there is such a thing) and then there's other aspects that I look at and wonder why it's even there. For example, offering permanent advantage on 2-4 Skill proficiencies at level 3 is very good. Probably too good. Similarly, Cloud Rune is straight up just OP for 3rd level (and I rarely make that kind of statement). The closest other ability to Cloud Runes attack redirect I can think of is the Rogue Mastermind's Misdirection at 13th level and that comes with a heap of caveats and conditions. How is it redirecting that attack? Why doesn't it have a range limitation? Can it at least have a chance of failure? Too many questions on that one for my liking. Then on the flipside, Runic Juggernaut increases your 1/turn damage (it's not even once per anyone's turn, only on your own turn) from 1d8 to 1d10. Yes, you finally get to be Huge too (which if you're interested in being so, spellcasters have been offering with Polymorph since level 7)...but a whole extra point of average damage on one attack per turn for a minute? As your 18th level subclass capstone? Steady the horses of light and dark there, we need some balance back in this subclass! :smallamused: Seriously? Even the Champion Fighter is getting something vaguely exciting at that level.

3) Niche infringement. This harkens back to the theming argument, but Skill focus is a Rogue/Bard thing, so why is it in a Fighter subclass? Rage is a Barbarian thing, so why is it in a Fighter subclass? Miscellaneous magical abilities and functions are kind of a Warlock thing, so why are they in a Fighter subclass? I often see Rune Knight heralded as a poster child for why X Class or subclass isn't good or lacks lustre, but if Rune Knight is the exception rather than the norm, isn't it also the problem?

I just can't take the subclass seriously. It's a jumble of mis-matched theme, abilities and power that really doesn't gel for me. It consistently seems to be called out as an outlier, both in terms of power balance and roleplaying, for good and ill, so much so that I can't help but wonder why anyone would want to play it. I don't see the appeal outside of bland theory-craft or high-op play and even then, I really struggle to fit it into a greater whole that makes the game more fun for everyone at the table.

Can someone who actually likes this subclass explain why?

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

Can someone who actually likes this subclass explain why?

Maybe, but I don't so I can't. I can't believe it got printed -- but I feel that way about most things in that awful book.

[KorvinStarmast]

Title says it all really, but here's why.

1) Theme. The theme just feels a bit tacked on, very much as if it's a class designed from the abilities it offers and upward, rather than starting with the theme and working down.
- Why is studying the runecraft of giants a Fighter thing? Inscribing runes feels more like an Artificer thing.
Nope. And I dislike artificers, tastes differ, but and here's where I think your comparison falls down:
artificers are tech PCs, runes are not tech. They are magic. Auld Majick.
Runes are a cultural thing; certain cultures will use runes and depending on the lore, runes can be magical.
The Rune Knight is a different way to do Eldritch Knight without using wizard spells.
I find it appealing due to the flexibility of the runes as well as the Fighter-Centric abilities. (The Rune shield is useful all game long).

As an aside: your leaning into the "stupid fighter" trope doesn't help your argument.
Giants. Yes, giants invented runes before humans began to contaminate the world. Eldritch lore and all that. Lean into it, amigo.


2) Skewey Balance. Most of Tasha's is power creep.

More powerful than champion, and I think that the cloud giant ability is a bit more powerful than need be.
The range is wonky: if an ogre whacks me or my ally my reaction can move the effects of that attack 30 feet away to someone else.
I would not mind seeing melee version of that changed to "within reach" and a ranged / thrown version to be "within 30' of original target"


3) Niche infringement.
No.

My current Rune Knight is level 12. (He has MC'd into Genie Warlock/Dao for campaign theme reasons, as we are all elementally linked in some way. I went with earth/rock/mountains since giants and mountains seem to go to together. This alleged "niche infringement" is not a factor At All in our group. Many classes have a little bit of overlap (heck, bard is a major infringer on rogue as skill monkey)

Why Hill Giant Rune is later and Cloud Giant Rune is sooner is beyond me.
I suspect that they wanted to avoid the "resistance to damage" in Tier 1 that would perhaps make the Hill Giant OP.

The Frost Giant one is wonky in terms of how its bonuses do or don't fit in the same pattern as the others. That is the only Rune I have not used, but if I were in another campaign (like the Rime of the Frost Maiden) I'd probably make it a primary.

Have you played a Rune Knight?

[Amnestic]

Nope. And I dislike artificers, tastes differ, but and here's where I think your comparison falls down:
artificers are tech PCs, runes are not tech.

Yeah man. Artificers carving runes into items to make them magical=tech, whereas Rune Knights carving runes into items to make them magical="auld magick". Killer logic you got there.

[JellyPooga]

Nope. And I dislike artificers, tastes differ, but and here's where I think your comparison falls down:
artificers are tech PCs, runes are not tech. They are magic. Auld Majick.Artificers aren't tech; they're magic. Everything they do is magic. Rogues are more tech than Artificer.

Runes are a cultural thing; certain cultures will use runes and depending on the lore, runes can be magical.
The Rune Knight is a different way to do Eldritch Knight without using wizard spells.I can dig runes being non-spell magic but that doesn't explain why Fighter should get it. I like the idea of studying a culture to unlock its secrets, but what culture is actually shared between the different types of Giants beyond "they carve runes"? What makes the Fighter the Class to do it? I don't buy it as a theme for the Fighter specifically. It's got nothing to do with "stupid Fighters", which I don't think I even implied, let alone stated, but everything to do with Class themes and tropes. The Fighter is a Class themed with martial forms, weapons and styles of combat. Where does "uncovering ancient culture" come into that? Where does "learning hidden, magical crafts" fit into it? I'm not saying it can't be a Fighter thing, but it takes a bit of finagling; more than it would other Classes.


This alleged "niche infringement" is not a factor At All in our group. Many classes have a little bit of overlap (heck, bard is a major infringer on rogue as skill monkey)Why add a Rage style feature to Fighter rather than enhance the Rage of Barbarian? Why add skill focus to Fighter instead of enhancing the skill focus of Rogue or Bard? Why add rune magic to Fighter instead of enhancing the magic of Warlock, Artificer or Wizard, who already have investment in magical styles? It just doesn't make sense stylistically or mechanically.


More powerful than champion, and I think that the cloud giant ability is a bit more powerful than need be.
The range is wonky: if an ogre whacks me or my ally my reaction can move the effects of that attack 30 feet away to someone else.
I would not mind seeing melee version of that changed to "within reach" and a ranged / thrown version to be "within 30' of original target"

Why Hill Giant Rune is later and Cloud Giant Rune is sooner is beyond me.
I suspect that they wanted to avoid the "resistance to damage" in Tier 1 that would perhaps make the Hill Giant OP.

The Frost Giant one is wonky in terms of how its bonuses do or don't fit in the same pattern as the others. That is the only Rune I have not used, but if I were in another campaign (like the Rime of the Frost Maiden) I'd probably make it a primary.Yeah, all of this. It's wonky, as you say and that's entirely my point. Why would you want to play something so janky and so obviously in need of fixing?


Have you played a Rune Knight?No and I don't want to, for all the reasons. I want to know why anyone would. All I have to do is look at it to know why I wouldn't.

[JackPhoenix]

- Why is studying the runecraft of giants a Fighter thing?
Agreed.

- Why/how does it study the runes of multiple giant species, from the brutish and crude Hill Giant to the sophisticated and isolationist Storm Giant?
Because all giants are (were) a single culture. The runes may indicate different subspecies, but come from the same civilization.

Dragonborn and Draconic Sorcerers have to pick a lane and stick to it. Why are Fighter-Giants different, except that whoever designed it didn't put that much effort or care into actually theming their subclass?
Because dragonborn and draconic sorcerers have biological connection, while Rune Knights study the runes. You can learn new stuf, but your biology won't change no matter how many books you read.

- Where do the runes go after a long rest? Just a nit-pick, really, but inscribing a rune feels like something pretty permanent. Painting a rune on, yeah, I can go with that as a temporary thing, but inscribing implies a degree of permanence. After all, how are you supposed to..."[find] the giant's work carved into a hill or cave" if they all disappear after a day? Why does the Rune Knight get to pick and choose which runes to use every day outside of "because magic" or "something something game design"?
Why can artificers only infuse so many items? Why can wizards only prepare so many spells? Why do spells have limited duration? It's magic.

2) Skewey Balance.
Kinda agreed. As KorvinStarmast said, TCoE is full of power creep.

3) Niche infringement. This harkens back to the theming argument, but Skill focus is a Rogue/Bard thing, so why is it in a Fighter subclass?
It isn't, and it isn't.

Rage is a Barbarian thing, so why is it in a Fighter subclass?
It isn't.

Miscellaneous magical abilities and functions are kind of a Warlock thing
Not really.

It's a jumble of mis-matched theme, abilities and power that really doesn't gel for me.
Now that I can agree with.


artificers are tech PCs
They very much aren't. Unless you for some unfathomable reason call magic items "tech". In which case, the wizardly magic falls into the same category.

[Amnestic]

I want to know why anyone would. All I have to do is look at it to know why I wouldn't.

I liked the passive+active rune features from a mechanics standpoint, and the opportunity to grow Big was appealing for my half-orc. Runecarving felt like a suitably 'oldstyle' magic for his tribal origins too.

I don't think having aesthetic crossover with other stuff as a subclass is an issue. Giants Barbarian and Rune Knight can both coexist. Why are they a fighter thing? 'cos it's a fighter subclass. They toyed with a rune-oriented wizard subclass (Runecrafter) but then decided not to print it.

The damage 1/turn is definitely a balance consideration rather than narrative - it was each attack during UA, but changed to 1/turn for its full release. I guess they didn't want it stacking on 4-8 attacks/turn.

I find the objection to RK on the matter of Martial Forms a little weird when Eldritch Knight exists though - magic via 'standard' spellcasting is fine for a fighter, but magic via runes isn't? Ditto for the maligned Arcane Archer (people don't have problems with its lore, they have issues with its mechanics).

[Unoriginal]

Can someone who actually likes this subclass explain why?

Sure, I can do it.



1) Theme.
- Why is studying the runecraft of giants a Fighter thing?

Because Fighters are the class that studies martial might in a systemic manner, and Giants have a lot of might to learn from.


Just about any Class but the Cleric or Monk would be a better fit, thematically, than Fighter.

Hard disagree.



- Why/how does it study the runes of multiple giant species, from the brutish and crude Hill Giant to the sophisticated and isolationist Storm Giant?

Runes are a system, a language, and one linked to all Giants, their gods and their Ordning. You study the language itself, and the past & present of the Giants.



- Where do the runes go after a long rest? Just a nit-pick, really, but inscribing a rune feels like something pretty permanent. Painting a rune on, yeah, I can go with that as a temporary thing, but inscribing implies a degree of permanence. After all, how are you supposed to..."[find] the giant's work carved into a hill or cave" if they all disappear after a day? Why does the Rune Knight get to pick and choose which runes to use every day outside of "because magic" or "something something game design"?

"To inscribe" means "to write or carve on something". The "or" part is important.

The Fighter is basically doing the equivalent of a Symbol spell.



2) Skewey Balance. It just feels...off. There's some aspects that I could easily point at as blatant power creep or niche infringement on other Classes (if there is such a thing)

In practice, the Rune Knight is probably weaker than the Battle Master.

It's not power creep, even if I admit there are wonky bits.


Cloud Rune is straight up just OP for 3rd level (and I rarely make that kind of statement).

It's powerful, but it's once per long rest. You have to use it carefully to make it "extremely strong" as opposed to "nice, not getting hit this one time".

It also doesn't work against solo enemies, unless you want your teammates to eat the attack instead of you.

All in all if they had swapped the Hill Giant Rune and the Cloud Giant Rune I think no one would have complained about the power.



The closest other ability to Cloud Runes attack redirect I can think of is the Rogue Mastermind's Misdirection at 13th level and that comes with a heap of caveats and conditions.

The Drunken Master can redirect any missed melee attack against them into an auto-hit to an adjacent enemy, at level 6. Doesn't even cost a Reaction, so long as they have ki to spend they can do it.



3) Niche infringement

There is no such thing. Fighters can be good at skills, can have miscellaneous or even powerful magical perks, resist damage, and so on and so on.

Are you against the Eldritch Knight? The Psi Warrior? The Battle Master with the Maneuvres that improve skill proficiency?



I just can't take the subclass seriously.

Maybe the fact you can't take it seriously is coloring your perception of the subclass, more than your perception of the class making you not take it seriously.

[JellyPooga]

It isn't, and it isn't.

It isn't.

Not really.

5 of the 6 Runes offer a bonus to one or more Ability Checks. Sounds like a skills focus thing to me.

Giant's Might is an ability that gives you advantage on Strength checks and bonus damage and you can use it 2-6 times per long rest, depending on you level. Sounds at least a bit like a Barbarian Rage to me.

Warlock Invocations are probably the closest analogue to the miscellany of both the short rest and permanent features offered by the Runes. I'm willing to back down on this one, seeing as lots of Classes get miscellaneous features of this kind, though I do think the Warlock has a higher concentration of them.

[Mastikator]

They very much aren't. Unless you for some unfathomable reason call magic items "tech". In which case, the wizardly magic falls into the same category.
Ehhhhhhhh, if magic items and phenomena can reliably be made in a factory or workshop then it is tech. And if it's underlying nature can be understood, hypothesized and tested, then it's also a science. (it can still also be an art, much like music is a combination of technology, science and art in real life)

As you know, in the *Eberron setting the giants were gifted the knowledge of magic from the dragons. They expressed their magical technology through runes, eldritch devices and spells. An artificer may well be using runes to infuse their items with magic and cast spells. But runes are just a form of magical technology, a magical effect put onto a surface. I'd argue any class with arcane magic capability is compatible with "put runes on things".

That said, I think that fighter is a fantastic choice, but I wouldn't have minded if they also added a rune scribe artificer subclass.

-

*if anyone is wondering why I'm bringing up Eberron, it's a) where artificers were first added, b) it's the first and only setting (AFAIK) where magic is science, and c) because of the magical giants connection to rune knights.

[Amnestic]

Ehhhhhhhh, if magic items and phenomena can reliably be made in a factory or workshop then it is tech.

If I enchant a magic item in my wizard's tower, it's magic, but if I enchant it in a 'lab' in the exact same way, it's tech?



And if it's underlying nature can be understood, hypothesized and tested, then it's also a science. (it can still also be an art, much like music is a combination of technology, science and art in real life)

Sounds like wizards spellbooks are tech then, as are all magic items.

Didn't know every D&D setting was so high tech before, but the more you know...

[KorvinStarmast]

I liked the passive+active rune features from a mechanics standpoint, and the opportunity to grow Big was appealing for my half-orc. Runecarving felt like a suitably 'oldstyle' magic for his tribal origins too. Indeed. My vHuman gets large now and again. (I think the reach increase when large ought to come sooner, but that's me quibbling).


Giants Barbarian and Rune Knight can both coexist.
Rune Knight came first, and I agree they can co exist.

They toyed with a rune-oriented wizard subclass (Runecrafter) but then decided not to print it. For which we are grateful.

The damage 1/turn is definitely a balance consideration rather than narrative - it was each attack during UA, but changed to 1/turn for its full release. I guess they didn't want it stacking on 4-8 attacks/turn. Bingo. Rage damage is per attack.

5 of the 6 Runes offer a bonus to one or more Ability Checks. Sounds like a skills focus thing to me. People have been pissing and moaning about the lack of skill proficiencies for the fighter class which "makes it boring." This solves that. :smallyuk: And it does it gradually, not in a front-loaded style. As you go up in level and can use more runes, you get another skill with advantage on rolls. I get advantage on arcana rolls as a Fighter. :smallbiggrin: Yeah, you get to be more versatile to adventuring for longer. Nice concept, eh? :smallsmile: My fire rune gives me proficiency in Smith's Tools. The only rune that doesn't add a proficiency is Hill Giant (maybe due to their low int?) but it offers poison resistance.

Giant's Might is an ability that gives you advantage on Strength checks and bonus damage and you can use it 2-6 times per long rest, depending on you level. Sounds at least a bit like a Barbarian Rage to me. Nope, it isn't rage, and the bonus damage is once per turn, not once per attack. Only Hill Giant offers damage resistance to B/P/S.

Warlock Invocations are probably the closest analogue to the miscellany of both the short rest and permanent features offered by the Runes. I'm willing to back down on this one, seeing as lots of Classes get miscellaneous features of this kind, though I do think the Warlock has a higher concentration of them. Just play one. It will be fun. :smallwink:
And yes, all of the runes recharge on a short rest. Goodness.

[JellyPooga]

Sure, I can do it.Have at it! :smallbiggrin:

Hard disagree.Please explain why.

Runes are a system, a language, and one linked to all Giants, their gods and their Ordning. You study the language itself, and the past & present of the Giants.

The Fighter is basically doing the equivalent of a Symbol spell.Ok, I'll bite/concede on these. It's intriguing/engaging enough that I'll let it go as a sticking point, at least.


It's powerful, but it's once per long short rest. You have to use it carefully to make it "extremely strong" as opposed to "nice, not getting hit this one time".Fixed it for you. There's a big difference and unlike the Drunken Monk, it works on a hit, not a miss, which is crazy better. It definitely needs toning down or level gating.


There is no such thing. Fighters can be good at skills, can have miscellaneous or even powerful magical perks, resist damage, and so on and so on.

Are you against the Eldritch Knight? The Psi Warrior? The Battle Master with the Maneuvres that improve skill proficiency?You'll note that I questioned whether niche infringement even exists myself and no, I'm not against the likes of the Eldritch Knight any more than I am the Bard, Druid or any other Class or subclass that occupies multiple roles. What I'm really questioning is why the Rune Knight spreads itself so thin, thematically and mechanically, across a spectrum of other niches when had it occupied that niche in the first place, would or could have been so much more than it is.

For example. Let's run with the Rune Knight as a Barbarian subclass instead of Fighter.
1) Barbarians are a specifically Strength themed Class with strong ties to clan culture, tradition and savagery. Slotting Giants into this trope is not difficult by any stretch of the imagination. Runes and their use, both in divination and in markings/tattoos have a solid tie to shamanistic and "barbaric" cultures. Theme is 100% on point here.
2) Then there's the Runes themselves. Does it matter that runes have to be on equipment? I mean, it's only a minor limitation given that you inscribe runes every day. Why not just make them a more generic feature, fluffed as whatever you want; woad paint, etched in your armour, tattoos, ritual scarification...you do your runes however you want; open up the theme to more than just inscribing runes on their arms&armour. Thematically still on point for Giants, given the broad range of giant cultures our PC could have learned from and it gels with Barbarian nicely.
3) If we're running with Giants as an ancient culture, let's add a little sophistication to it; we already have our "Roid Rage get Big" feature, so let's look at other giant stuff for our runic inspiration. Storm Giant Divination? Yeah, cool. Throw it in for a shaman feel. Crafting with Fire Giants? Heck yeah, no-one wants to wear heavy armour in the forge; get that naked Barbarian schtick going! Prefer chillier climes? Frost Giants baby! Only the gnarliest of Cimmerians tackle those frigid wastes. You see how the different Runes/Giant types could play upon and enhance already existing Barbarian themes?
4) Then there's mechanics. Specifically Rage. Hey, we already have a mechanic we're utilising in this class that offers bonus damage and advantage on strength checks. Great. Let's make it better by offering a size increase (maybe even more additional damage) and perhaps even some scaling by level or on-choice elemental damage from different Giant types. No need to add a mechanic and a pool of depletable resources to a Class, when we have a Class that already uses that mechanic.

edit: Ok, so I only just found out that Path of the Giant Barbarian is a thing. I still think Rune Knight fits Barbarian better thematically and mechanically.

edit2: Giant's Might is definitely akin to adding Rage to Fighter. Nitpicking details doesn't make it less true.

[KorvinStarmast]

No, Giant's might is not rage. You can still concentrate on a spell if you are Giantish. And I DO!

MC into warlock, Protection from Evil/Good, get large, and I have advantage and proficiency on CON saves to keep that spell up. So I can do toe to toe with elementals, fiends, etc and they all have disadvantage to attack me. (The ranged spell casters will still cause me some problems, though).

[Sindal]

Well

I've dmd for one or two players that picked up the option. It wasn't long running sessions but both enjoyed the experienced

I would imagine it appeals to people that want magixal like abilities and perksto add to their repertoire but don't want to fiddle around with 'actual spells' to get them. Instead they're learning a magic empowered language as a more manageable half measure to get there.

It's worth noting that fighters are not dumb. They are skilled combatants who can use any weapon or armor. They've practiced. They've studied martial prowess. And they fight, or can fight, in tactical ways to show this off.

Usually thse kinds of 'magic but not actually magic' features get thrown at say, barbarian or monk. But they already have those subclasses that make thrm "magical but not" so what good would giving it to them do?

All of these classes have a different feel to them too. So I can see how rune knight might appeal to someone who isn't just trying to be "super martial man" but Aldo isn't trying to be some spellsword

[JackPhoenix]

5 of the 6 Runes offer a bonus to one or more Ability Checks. Sounds like a skills focus thing to me.
So is Enhance Ability. Or Rage. Or a familiar using Help. Or Knowledge cleric. Or dwarven Stonecunning. Note that I'm picking specifically options from the PHB, because there would be a lot more of that if I used other books, too.

Giant's Might is an ability that gives you advantage on Strength checks and bonus damage and you can use it 2-6 times per long rest, depending on you level. Sounds at least a bit like a Barbarian Rage to me.
Sounds like Enlarge/Reduce knock-off to me. Is that a barbarian Rage too?

[stoutstien]

While the flavor is a tad off it's one of the best "play" options in the game.

It has a wide array of tools but each pool itself is small. Additionally none of them are win buttons to smash. it takes situational tactics and counterplay to utilize. Unlike a single pool, or pools that can feed each other, you need to be engaged to get the most out of it both as a class and as party of a party.

Bonus points for not using spells or spells(not spells).

[Waazraath]

Can someone who actually likes this subclass explain why?

I liike it.

Thematics is a matter of taste, so I won't go too much into it. I don't mind a 'giant' subclass for fighters, and while the rune magic stuff might be fleshed out a bit more (e.g. why is it only available for members of this subclass?) I think 'rune magic' is a tried and tested fantasy trope.

Balance is fine afaic. Pure damage wise, a Battle Master is still stronger. Also compared to the Eldritch Knight or Psi warrior it's fine. Yes, it's more powerful than the Champion or Arcane Archer, but that's more a flaw of those subclasses than that's something wrong with the RK

Niche infringement A fighter should be able to be both though and/or skillfull without that being infringement towards the Barbarian or Rogue. Furhtermore, 5e took the direction that different niches for classes are not strictly enforced. With all splatbooks available we have healing wizards and warlocks, and area blasting clerics. Though I could make an argument that (sub)classes more having their own niche has advantages, that's simply not the direction the game has been going and if casters can easiliy cross traditional class boundries, why should the fighter not?

Additionally, it's imo a fun and powerful subclass, that makes a number of different builds possible, and which compensates for the critique on fighters that they only do combat well. A lot of the options of RK improve what the character does out of combat, which is something the fighter needed. Many don't like the book, but Tasha's has delivered some good stuff here, also for instance for the BM with the new skill maneuvers.

[JellyPooga]

So is Enhance Ability. Or Rage. Or a familiar using Help. Or Knowledge cleric. Or dwarven Stonecunning. Note that I'm picking specifically options from the PHB, because there would be a lot more of that if I used other books, too.Note that Enhance Ability and Rage, to pick the first two and probably call out a majority of others you might care to mention, do not function the same way; gated either by time limit or resource. Rune Knight just has them, much as a Ranger chooses their favoured enemy or additional skill proficiency, or the Rogue their Expertise. They are quite different features, as is a familiar using help, it being an entirely separate creature; you might as well call out "having a party" is the same as having a skill focus at that point. "Being a dwarf" is closer in function, granted.


Sounds like Enlarge/Reduce knock-off to me. Is that a barbarian Rage too?It is an Englarge/Reduce knock-off. Literally. And yes, they share a very similar game space by fulfilling almost identical criteria. Giants' Might and Rage are more similar to one another than Enlarge/Reduce is to either by dint of duration, being non-magical, being self-only and occupying a unique resource pool. So yeah, whilst the spell is similar, the two abilities in question are even more similar.


No, Giant's might is not rage. You can still concentrate on a spell if you are Giantish. And I DO!

MC into warlock, Protection from Evil/Good, get large, and I have advantage and proficiency on CON saves to keep that spell up. So I can do toe to toe with elementals, fiends, etc and they all have disadvantage to attack me. (The ranged spell casters will still cause me some problems, though).That's great for you and I'm sure you have a blast being able to utilise several features that would otherwise, for another character, occupy multiple concentration slots (and folk claim there's no power creep :smallsigh:), but it doesn't address the fact that Giant's Might and Rage occupy very similar design space, nor the actual issue of why adding it to a Class that doesn't have it is preferable (from a design standpoint), to enhancing it on a Class that already does.

[JellyPooga]

I liike it.

Thematics is a matter of taste, so I won't go too much into it. I don't mind a 'giant' subclass for fighters, and while the rune magic stuff might be fleshed out a bit more (e.g. why is it only available for members of this subclass?) I think 'rune magic' is a tried and tested fantasy trope.

Balance is fine afaic. Pure damage wise, a Battle Master is still stronger. Also compared to the Eldritch Knight or Psi warrior it's fine. Yes, it's more powerful than the Champion or Arcane Archer, but that's more a flaw of those subclasses than that's something wrong with the RK

Niche infringement A fighter should be able to be both though and/or skillfull without that being infringement towards the Barbarian or Rogue. Furhtermore, 5e took the direction that different niches for classes are not strictly enforced. With all splatbooks available we have healing wizards and warlocks, and area blasting clerics. Though I could make an argument that (sub)classes more having their own niche has advantages, that's simply not the direction the game has been going and if casters can easiliy cross traditional class boundries, why should the fighter not?

Additionally, it's imo a fun and powerful subclass, that makes a number of different builds possible, and which compensates for the critique on fighters that they only do combat well. A lot of the options of RK improve what the character does out of combat, which is something the fighter needed. Many don't like the book, but Tasha's has delivered some good stuff here, also for instance for the BM with the new skill maneuvers.
I think I'm starting to realise that A) the theme just isn't my cup of tea, which is getting in the way of my objectivity and B) I'm not really seeing the highlighted "number of builds" thing. Yes, RK adds a desired versatility to the Fighter, but by the end of the Class, you're choosing the one option you're not having that day, rather than the several you are. The pool of runes is very small and for a class that on the surface is offering a choice, it feels more restrictive than it perhaps actually is. Counterpoint it against the Totem Warrior Barbarian, even just the options from the PHB; there's 27 variations within the choices on offer over the course of the Class and while you only get to pick one of those suites of abilities and it's locked in once made, it's a great deal more variety of build than RK offers. Especially given how janky RK is. Let's face it, at level 3, I'd be willing to bet that most players are going to choose Cloud and Fire Runes and never look back on them because who doesn't want extra damage and one free Hammer Time per short rest? At 7th, most will choose Hill because they wanted to be a Barbarian. 10th Storm because Lore Bards and Diviners can't have all the fun messing with other peoples dice rolls and at 15th throw in Stone as "last picked" because Frost sucks by the time you're bothering to get it. Where's the build choice? It's a pretty monochromatic subclass, which again brings me back to the point that it just doesn't feel finished, let alone polished.

[Dr.Samurai]

I think I'm starting to realise that A) the theme just isn't my cup of tea, which is getting in the way of my objectivity and B) I'm not really seeing the highlighted "number of builds" thing. Yes, RK adds a desired versatility to the Fighter, but by the end of the Class, you're choosing the one option you're not having that day, rather than the several you are. The pool of runes is very small and for a class that on the surface is offering a choice, it feels more restrictive than it perhaps actually is. Counterpoint it against the Totem Warrior Barbarian, even just the options from the PHB; there's 27 variations within the choices on offer over the course of the Class and while you only get to pick one of those suites of abilities and it's locked in once made, it's a great deal more variety of build than RK offers. Especially given how janky RK is. Let's face it, at level 3, I'd be willing to bet that most players are going to choose Cloud and Fire Runes and never look back on them because who doesn't want extra damage and one free Hammer Time per short rest? At 7th, most will choose Hill because they wanted to be a Barbarian. 10th Storm because Lore Bards and Diviners can't have all the fun messing with other peoples dice rolls and at 15th throw in Stone as "last picked" because Frost sucks by the time you're bothering to get it. Where's the build choice? It's a pretty monochromatic subclass, which again brings me back to the point that it just doesn't feel finished, let alone polished.
The theme is not my cup of tea either, and I think the subclass is really cluttered and disjointed. You have runes that activate with a bonus action, a reaction, a reaction at the end of someone's turn, a bonus action that gives you a reaction ability for 1 minute. Then Giant's Might is a bonus action, and Runic Shield is a reaction. To me, it feels all over the place and busy.

When we always differentiate the barbarian and the fighter as brute warrior and skilled warrior respectively, tacking on Adv to Str checks/saves, bonus damage, and resistance to BPS seems inappropriate on the fighter class, especially when you're also letting them grow large, which benefits that more "brute" style of fighting. I'm sure people would have something to say if a barbarian subclass granted the fighter's Extra Attack and Action Surge.

All that said, I just retheme the subclass. Probably my most favorite character to date is the one I'm currently playing and he's a human rune knight, and I flavor Giant's Might as 3.5 Righteous Might, as he is a devotee of Erythnul. The different runes are the different sacred forms Erythnul takes in combat, etc.

I think the rune knight can use some cleaning up for sure, and it doesn't exactly scream "giant history/culture" to me. But I don't need it to, I can just make of it what I want. And the busy features, well, a lot of times I just use the strongest ones, and in encounters that are either going on for much longer or aren't super challenging, I make use of the other features.

[stoutstien]

I think I'm starting to realise that A) the theme just isn't my cup of tea, which is getting in the way of my objectivity and B) I'm not really seeing the highlighted "number of builds" thing. Yes, RK adds a desired versatility to the Fighter, but by the end of the Class, you're choosing the one option you're not having that day, rather than the several you are. The pool of runes is very small and for a class that on the surface is offering a choice, it feels more restrictive than it perhaps actually is. Counterpoint it against the Totem Warrior Barbarian, even just the options from the PHB; there's 27 variations within the choices on offer over the course of the Class and while you only get to pick one of those suites of abilities and it's locked in once made, it's a great deal more variety of build than RK offers. Especially given how janky RK is. Let's face it, at level 3, I'd be willing to bet that most players are going to choose Cloud and Fire Runes and never look back on them because who doesn't want extra damage and one free Hammer Time per short rest? At 7th, most will choose Hill because they wanted to be a Barbarian. 10th Storm because Lore Bards and Diviners can't have all the fun messing with other peoples dice rolls and at 15th throw in Stone as "last picked" because Frost sucks by the time you're bothering to get it. Where's the build choice? It's a pretty monochromatic subclass, which again brings me back to the point that it just doesn't feel finished, let alone polished.

Stone isn't something to write off especially at lower levels. A reaction based CC that doesn't break on damage and targets a weak save vs big tough foes can out pace the mitigation of both fire and cloud combined.
Super DV is also one of the stronger passive at these levels.


As for comparisons to barbs, the chassis is bad and shouldn't be the baseline for anything. Talk about one note/one build/ one trick/ bad theme classes.

[Unoriginal]

Last year, I DM a Fighter-only one-shot, with all characters pre-gen by me.

Long story short, the 4 lvl 5 PCs found themselves having to defend a fort serving as chokepoint in a mountain pass against a whole hobgoblin army, at least until their allies could show up as reinforcement with their own army.

One of them was a Human Rune Knight with the Athlete background, specialized in unarmed fighting and wrestling.

The Rune Knight player had the idea of making it look and sound like the fort was defended by a whole garrison instead of just 4 people, and thanks to the Cloud Rune and the decent CHA he had he actually pulled it off.

This changed the hobgoblins' plans, and they decided to send an infiltration unit to get the fort's gates open or at least gather information, before sending the mooks en masse. The PCs managed to deal with them easily enough once they got spotted.

Then troll mercenaries got upset at the waiting-for-the-boss-to-arrive decision the hobgoblin currently in charge had taken, so the trolls did a frontal assault against the gates. It was a tough fight, but the PCs emerged victorious without losing anyone still, thanks to clever uses of their abilities and of the defensive measures they had the time to prepare.

After that, the hobgoblin leader arrived to take charge of the situation, and decided to talk with the PCs before attacking. After a short talk, thinking it would take too long to conquer the fort by sending the whole army, and seeing that the Rune Knight was a famous pugilist (as per the Athlete background's feature), the hobgoblin leader decided to propose solving this by a duel. Him vs the Rune Knight, no armor or weapon or outside help or lethal blow, and the side of whoever lost had to retreat.

The PCs agreed to that, and leader & Rune Knight entered the ring.

It was a pretty even fight, all things considered. The leader could punch more precisely and more often than his opponent, and could take a lot of punishment, but the Rune Knight punched harder and was simply the superior grappler, without a doubt, especially after growing to his Giant size.

The Rune Knight won, the leader kept his word, and his army retreated, with the group succeeding in keeping the fort safe until their allies' arrival a few hours later.

[JellyPooga]

Stone isn't something to write off especially at lower levels. A reaction based CC that doesn't break on damage and targets a weak save vs big tough foes can out pace the mitigation of both fire and cloud combined.
Super DV is also one of the stronger passive at these levels.
Stone's CC is decent, for sure. Quite why the DC is Con based I don't know; whatever happened to this being a subclass based on research and learning? I digress. Regardless of how effective it might be, the other runes (bar Frost) have shinier labels (Damage! Damage Reduction! Can't Touch This!) that I suspect are more appealing to the average "I want to push buttons but not cast spells" crowd. Stone's ability looks suspiciously like a spell. That and Charmed is a relatively commonly resisted status effect. I'm not saying it's worthless by any means, but it is one of the more limited rune features by comparison.


As for comparisons to barbs, the chassis is bad and shouldn't be the baseline for anything. Talk about one note/one build/ one trick/ bad theme classes.

The same criticisms might be levelled at the Fighter. Some might say the Fighter is the one with less dimensions and worse theming (dare I say, myself included). Potato Potato.

[Schwann145]

I think the underlying problem is really that, if we're being honest, Fighter lacks a theme. It's the "blank slate" class.
Barbarian is a "fighter" but it's a specific style/theme of fighter, and something like Rune Knight fits very well into that Barbarian theme.

But you can make that argument for literally every single Fighter subclass - a different "fighter" class could easily cover it.
Champion? Barbarian/Paladin both fit nicely.
Battle Master? Paladin/Ranger both do it well.
Eldritch Knight? Stepping on Bladelocks toes and Bladesinger Wizards have been doing it far longer.
On and on the list can go.

[Amnestic]

The same criticisms might be levelled at the Fighter. Some might say the Fighter is the one with less dimensions and worse theming (dare I say, myself included). Potato Potato.

Fighter gets one more subclass feature slot (3rd, 7th, 10th, 15th, 18th) vs. Barbarians (3rd, 6th, 10th, 14th). Easier to express a subclass' themes and stuff with an extra level to do so. Even if that is just "now you grow HUGE instead of LARGE"

(this is also part of my issues with Bard - 3 subclass features? Really?)

[stoutstien]

Stone's CC is decent, for sure. Quite why the DC is Con based I don't know; whatever happened to this being a subclass based on research and learning? I digress. Regardless of how effective it might be, the other runes (bar Frost) have shinier labels (Damage! Damage Reduction! Can't Touch This!) that I suspect are more appealing to the average "I want to push buttons but not cast spells" crowd. Stone's ability looks suspiciously like a spell. That and Charmed is a relatively commonly resisted status effect. I'm not saying it's worthless by any means, but it is one of the more limited rune features by comparison.



The same criticisms might be levelled at the Fighter. Some might say the Fighter is the one with less dimensions and worse theming (dare I say, myself included). Potato Potato.

How does stone look any more like a spell than any of the others? If anything it's evidence that spells get easy access to conditions where everything else is slatted for damage of movement.

[Rerem115]

...Didn't we just have another pair of 'Rogues/Fighters/Barbarians need more toys' threads? I like a lot of the Tasha's changes, and in some cases cough Ranger cough I feel like they didn't go far enough!

With that out of the way, I like the Rune Knight. It says 'Giants are cunning, crafty, tough, and most importantly, big bastards, and by learning their ways, you can be, too'. It speaks to the image of a warrior who, while steeped in the ways of the Old Magic, prefers to bludgeon people to bits. Really, the only options they had for that particular archetype were Fighter and Barbarian!

All of this is overlaid with a pop-cultural mishmash of iconic Norse and Celtic tropes, and it works well in play.

You are the carpenter, the stonemason, the smith. The biggest person in the room, the ordinarily straightforward warrior who can still surprise you with deception when need be, and the abilities all play into that fantasy.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

I think the underlying problem is really that, if we're being honest, Fighter lacks a theme. It's the "blank slate" class.
Barbarian is a "fighter" but it's a specific style/theme of fighter, and something like Rune Knight fits very well into that Barbarian theme.

But you can make that argument for literally every single Fighter subclass - a different "fighter" class could easily cover it.
Champion? Barbarian/Paladin both fit nicely.
Battle Master? Paladin/Ranger both do it well.
Eldritch Knight? Stepping on Bladelocks toes and Bladesinger Wizards have been doing it far longer.
On and on the list can go.

One day they'll be ready to hear me when I say rangers, barbarians, paladins and monks should all be fighters.

[JellyPooga]

How does stone look any more like a spell than any of the others? If anything it's evidence that spells get easy access to conditions where everything else is slatted for damage of movement.

Weeeell, giving someone the ol' laaazy eye and sending them into a sleepy stupor definitely feels more like a singular case of eyebrow wiggling and swirly eyes than if it were a good old fashioned bonk on the head and compared to swinging your axe around and it being somewhat more flamey than a regular axe, being tougher and/or stronger than usual for a bit, or even passivley chaneling the foresight granted by a mystic rune you've had carved in your forehead helmet all day...the Stone Rune definitely feels more like a spell than the others to me.

[Waazraath]

... B) I'm not really seeing the highlighted "number of builds" thing. Yes, RK adds a desired versatility to the Fighter, but by the end of the Class, you're choosing the one option you're not having that day, rather than the several you are. The pool of runes is very small and for a class that on the surface is offering a choice, it feels more restrictive than it perhaps actually is. Counterpoint it against the Totem Warrior Barbarian, even just the options from the PHB; there's 27 variations within the choices on offer over the course of the Class and while you only get to pick one of those suites of abilities and it's locked in once made, it's a great deal more variety of build than RK offers. Especially given how janky RK is. Let's face it, at level 3, I'd be willing to bet that most players are going to choose Cloud and Fire Runes and never look back on them because who doesn't want extra damage and one free Hammer Time per short rest? At 7th, most will choose Hill because they wanted to be a Barbarian. 10th Storm because Lore Bards and Diviners can't have all the fun messing with other peoples dice rolls and at 15th throw in Stone as "last picked" because Frost sucks by the time you're bothering to get it. Where's the build choice? ...

The build choice is not in the choice of runes (mainly) but in the options the subclass gives combined with other flexible parts (feats, race, multiclass).

For instance:
- go for heavy armor master, Hill rune (asap), and a source of temporary hp: combining these three features gives you a wicked tank, and something a barbarian can't do cause they can't use HAM.
- Pick a some stuff that improve grapple like the feat expertise: athletics, an option to start a grapple as a bonus action (Symic Hybrid or tavern brawler), or maybe a race that has fly so you can grapple and then drop enemies, and be an awesome grappler.
- max charisma, pick asap frost and cloud rune, maybe spend a feat on expertise, a suitable race like changeling, and be great face with advantage on deception and intimidation (in addition to being a fighter with a bunch of additional combat tricks).

I feel you can take the subclass in a number of different directions, where there is enough room to become really good at something (or focus on a non conventional niche) without your character suffering overtly on other dimensions of effectivity.

[stoutstien]

Weeeell, giving someone the ol' laaazy eye and sending them into a sleepy stupor definitely feels more like a singular case of eyebrow wiggling and swirly eyes than if it were a good old fashioned bonk on the head and compared to swinging your axe around and it being somewhat more flamey than a regular axe, being tougher and/or stronger than usual for a bit, or even passivley chaneling the foresight granted by a mystic rune you've had carved in your forehead helmet all day...the Stone Rune definitely feels more like a spell than the others to me.

Eh. Maybe everything and it's mother shouldn't be a spell so this wouldn't be an issue.
Creating magical flames that can shackle a foe is cool because the closest thing is probably ensnaring strike. The damage is ok but the ability to do something besides more damage is what makes RK stand out.

[Blatant Beast]

One day they'll be ready to hear me when I say rangers, barbarians, paladins and monks should all be fighters.

Chris Perkins has stated in interviews that he thinks the Barbarian could be a subclass of Fighter.
That stated, Warlocks, Sorcerers, and Barbarians have stand alone classes for around thirty years now.

Barbarians in 5e sorta fill the role of preternatural warrior, but so do Fighters, (Echo Knights, Psi Warriors, and Rune Knights). Paladins and Rangers fill the role of preternatural warriors that also use spells....but arguably so do Eldritch Knights, Arcane Tricksters and Sword Bards.

Monks are sufficiently different from medieval knights that a separate class seems warranted. If a Fighter can serve as a Monk, the character design system is going to be very, very different from D&D classes, and be more a point buy menu system.

[Amnestic]

One day they'll be ready to hear me when I say rangers, barbarians, paladins and monks should all be fighters.

I made a Paladin subclass (https://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/pZZ96gRYMsxj) for fighter and while it does its job well enough the necessity of making it a subclass means it's missing out on some key aspects (no Aura of Courage and no Find Steed, for instance). There's simply not enough of a subclass power budget to add everything in that people like as part of a 'Paladin', not without either taking away existing fighter features (what few they have) or by increasing the relative power of all other Fighter subclasses - which of course bleeds over into general class balance at that point.

While I'm here I'll shill my Barbarian Redux (https://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/xsW2P0hGuHz8), which trades out standard Rage for a bunch of Vengeance skills, which you use by expending Vengeance Points, that in turn you earn by dealing and taking damage. Some are shamelessly stolen from other sources, like Find Potion/Item which I cribbed from the Diablo 2 barbarian. While there are explicitly magical Vengance skills like Phoenix Leap or Aspect of the Hells/Heavens, you could still build a completely 'mundane' barbarian that can, as a bonus action, throw a creature up to three sizes larger 60ft away from you.

It commits the same 'crime' as Rune Knight does though, with a bunch of bespoke little features that are relevant to it alone, rather than a wider subsystem, but that's fine. That just means it's definitely unique and can't be turned into a fighter subclass.

[Kane0]

I really appreciate these sorts of threads, kt does wonders for honing in on pain points when homebrewing

[sithlordnergal]

Title says it all really, but here's why.

1) Theme. The theme just feels a bit tacked on, very much as if it's a class designed from the abilities it offers and upward, rather than starting with the theme and working down.
- Why is studying the runecraft of giants a Fighter thing? Inscribing runes feels more like an Artificer thing. Study feels like a Wizard or Bard thing. Creature-feature themes feel more Druidic or Sorcerous and invoking Giants and/or their power and learning, spiritually or magically feels way more Barbarian or Warlock, generally speaking, than Fighter. Skill focus, which every rune offers, is more Rogue and Bard. Just about any Class but the Cleric or Monk would be a better fit, thematically, than Fighter.


So, I can see where you're coming from. It does feel like this could easily slip into an Artificer or Wizard subclass very easily. But here's my counterpoint, while the Rune Knight is learning some Magic, they are not mastering it like a Wizard might, and they aren't becoming an expert in the creation of Rune powered objects like an Artificer is. They're dipping their toes into a specific type of magic, similar to the Eldritch Knight.

Additionally, we have fighter Subclasses that use a minor amount of Magic, such as the Psi Warrior, Eldritch Knight, and Echo Knight. So a Fighter making simple use of magic is pretty on brand for the class.




- Why/how does it study the runes of multiple giant species, from the brutish and crude Hill Giant to the sophisticated and isolationist Storm Giant? Dragonborn and Draconic Sorcerers have to pick a lane and stick to it. Why are Fighter-Giants different, except that whoever designed it didn't put that much effort or care into actually theming their subclass?


I mean, this one is pretty easy, not gonna lie. Dragonborn, Draconic Sorcerers, and really Sorcerers in general, are all based off of things you inherit from birth. Where as Rune Carving is based on a language you can learn. In fact, Draconic Sorcerers are an outlier when compared to classes that let you choose things from a list. Consider the Totem Barbarian. At level 3, I can choose between the Bear, Eagle, Elk, Tiger, and Wolf, and gain different benefits from choosing one of them. However, I am not locked into those choices at later levels. I could choose Bear at level 3, Tiger at level 6, and Eagle at level 14. I'm not forced to choose Bear for levels 6 and 14. Warlock goes even further, being fully customizable with very few restrictions.





- Where do the runes go after a long rest? Just a nit-pick, really, but inscribing a rune feels like something pretty permanent. Painting a rune on, yeah, I can go with that as a temporary thing, but inscribing implies a degree of permanence. After all, how are you supposed to..."[find] the giant's work carved into a hill or cave" if they all disappear after a day? Why does the Rune Knight get to pick and choose which runes to use every day outside of "because magic" or "something something game design"?


This is why I said Rune Knights are simply dipping their toes into Rune Magic. They aren't mastering it the way a Wizard or Artificer would, and as a result their Runes don't last as long as a Wizard or Artificer's might. And they certainly haven't mastered it in the way an actual Giant Rune Carver has. Hence why their runes disappear after a long rest.

As for why they get to pick and choose which runes to use every day, keep in mind they only know a certain number of Runes. They also can't swap out the Runes they know, except when leveling up, similar to Bards and Sorcerers. Its really no different than when a Wizard decides to prepare a spell for the day. They can't just change what they picked every single day.





2) Skewey Balance. It just feels...off. There's some aspects that I could easily point at as blatant power creep or niche infringement on other Classes (if there is such a thing) and then there's other aspects that I look at and wonder why it's even there. For example, offering permanent advantage on 2-4 Skill proficiencies at level 3 is very good. Probably too good. Similarly, Cloud Rune is straight up just OP for 3rd level (and I rarely make that kind of statement). The closest other ability to Cloud Runes attack redirect I can think of is the Rogue Mastermind's Misdirection at 13th level and that comes with a heap of caveats and conditions. How is it redirecting that attack? Why doesn't it have a range limitation? Can it at least have a chance of failure? Too many questions on that one for my liking.


I don't think permanent advantage in a few skills is too good. Is it nice? Sure, but you also get the same effect by having another player help you. And according to page 175 of the PHB, there aren't really any requirements to help someone with a Skill Check. You could be completely untrained in a skill that uses your Dump Stat, and still give someone advantage on their check. The only reason more people don't do it is because they forget about it.


As for the extra abilities each rune grants, keep in mind you can only use them once per Short/Long Rest. You really can't spam them every single encounter, unless your DM is giving you a Short Rest after every encounter. And outside of the Cloud Rune, the abilities you can get are on par with what you'd find from 3rd level Subclass Abilities.

As for the Cloud Rune itself, I could see it being something you get at level 7. But outside of the low level, its actually on par with all of the other redirection abilities I can think of in the game. The Mastermind Rogue, Drunken Master Monk, and Redemption Paladin have attack redirection abilities:

- The Mastermind gets their ability at level 13, they have the weirdest requirement to use it since the creature they're next to has to provide cover, but they can spam it every turn. It doesn't cost them any resources to redirect an attack outside of their Reaction

- The Drunken Master gets their ability at level 6. They just need the attack to be melee and have another creature within 5 feet of them to use their redirect, but it costs 1 Ki Point. Easier to use then the Rogue, and they get it earlier, but they can't just spam it because they will run out of Ki eventually.

- The Redemption Paladin can redirect all damage to themselves taken by a creature within 10 feet of them at level 7, upgraded to 30 feet at level 18. They don't really have any requirements to fulfill if they want to redirect the damage, its just they are the ones taking the damage instead of choosing a different creature to be targeted. One of the easiest redirects in the game, and spammable like the Rogue, only downside is you take the damage. Redemption Paladins also have a sort of Counter in the Channel Divinity.

The Cloud Rune seems like a nice middle ground when you compare all of those. The only thing I can say is that it should be level 6 or 7 when you get it, not level 3. Its the easiest redirect to trigger, sure, and it has the largest range, but at the same time you can only use it once per Short Rest. And there's never a guarantee that you can Short Rest right after an encounter, so you might only be able to use it once every two or three encounters. I'd say that's a fair trade off for being easy to trigger. As for how it redirects, that's left up to how the player wants to describe it.





Then on the flipside, Runic Juggernaut increases your 1/turn damage (it's not even once per anyone's turn, only on your own turn) from 1d8 to 1d10. Yes, you finally get to be Huge too (which if you're interested in being so, spellcasters have been offering with Polymorph since level 7)...but a whole extra point of average damage on one attack per turn for a minute? As your 18th level subclass capstone? Steady the horses of light and dark there, we need some balance back in this subclass! :smallamused: Seriously? Even the Champion Fighter is getting something vaguely exciting at that level.


As for capstones...lets face it, capstones have always been screwy. They're either underwhelming, over powered, or just plain weird. Just look at the Mastermind's capstone. Can you look at Soul of Deceit and honestly tell me with a straight face that its a good ability that should be gained at level 17? Especially if you compare it to other Rogue capstones like Sudden Strike from Scout, Thief's Reflexes from the Thief, Spell Thief from Arcane Trickster, or Death Strike from Assassin. Heck, Moon Druid is often considered one of the best Druid subclasses in the game, but the capstone for Circle of the Moon is being able to cast Alter Self at will. Like...yay, in a subclass focused on turning into powerful Beasts and Elementals, in a class with a TON of powerful concentration spells, I can now cast a Concentration spell that lets me choose between breathing under water and swimming, changing my appearance, and gaining a magical Unarmed Strike that deals 1d6+Strength Mod.

And I'd actually say Runic Juggernaut is pretty decent. Sure, the 1d10 isn't that impressive since its once per turn, but being Huge has other advantages. One, its just really neat. But a far more important advantage is that you can use Huge Sized weapons without any disadvantages, and you can Grapple Gargantuan sized creatures. Given a Huge Weapon deals triple damage dice, that's a pretty darn good buff, wouldn't you say?

As for Polymorph, it does allow you to become a Huge Beast, you're still stuck as a Beast. You lose access to all of your class and racial abilities, and lose access to all of your magic items. This allows you to become Huge without giving up any of your things.





Can someone who actually likes this subclass explain why?

Finally, you ask why, I can give a two reasons: for myself

First, its kind of fun being able to create a character that can enchant their own gear in a way. Its similar to the Forge Cleric or Artificer without actually being a Forge Cleric or Artificer.

Second, being able to turn Large and Huge is just fun. One of my favorite Fighters is a Fairy Rune Knight with the Unarmed Fighting Style, and a focus on Grappling. I go from this Small Sized Fairy to a Large behemoth. Heck, as a Fairy I gain Enlarge/Reduce as a racial spell, so I can skip straight to Huge on turn 1 due to how the spell interacts with the ability, and it is a ton of fun.

[MinimanMidget]

I want to like Rune Knight, but I just can't accept that runes and giants are a single theme. Ok, so let's look at the class features and see how they integrated these two wildly disparate themes. Oh. That's right, they didn't. Giant Might, Great Stature, and "Runic" Juggernaut are giant-themed, and Rune Carver, Runic Shield, and Master of Runes are rune-themed (no matter how many times they pointlessly sprinkle the word giant on the rune features and the word rune on the giant features). They have two completely separate sets of features that don't even interact with each other. That's not just bad theming, it's bad game design.

[Sorinth]

I want to like Rune Knight, but I just can't accept that runes and giants are a single theme. Ok, so let's look at the class features and see how they integrated these two wildly disparate themes. Oh. That's right, they didn't. Giant Might, Great Stature, and "Runic" Juggernaut are giant-themed, and Rune Carver, Runic Shield, and Master of Runes are rune-themed (no matter how many times they pointlessly sprinkle the word giant on the rune features and the word rune on the giant features). They have two completely separate sets of features that don't even interact with each other. That's not just bad theming, it's bad game design.

The theme is Norse-inspired. Both Giants and Runes are prominent in Norse mythology and culture.

[Sigreid]

One day they'll be ready to hear me when I say rangers, barbarians, paladins and monks should all be fighters.
That's so 1 and 2 e of you. Lol

[JNAProductions]

I want to like Rune Knight, but I just can't accept that runes and giants are a single theme. Ok, so let's look at the class features and see how they integrated these two wildly disparate themes. Oh. That's right, they didn't. Giant Might, Great Stature, and "Runic" Juggernaut are giant-themed, and Rune Carver, Runic Shield, and Master of Runes are rune-themed (no matter how many times they pointlessly sprinkle the word giant on the rune features and the word rune on the giant features). They have two completely separate sets of features that don't even interact with each other. That's not just bad theming, it's bad game design.

Yeah. That’s why every class should be like Wizard, where Diviners primarily cast Divinations and Abjurers primarily cast Abjurations!
…
Wait, that’s not it. :P

[Unoriginal]

I want to like Rune Knight, but I just can't accept that runes and giants are a single theme. Ok, so let's look at the class features and see how they integrated these two wildly disparate themes. Oh. That's right, they didn't. Giant Might, Great Stature, and "Runic" Juggernaut are giant-themed, and Rune Carver, Runic Shield, and Master of Runes are rune-themed (no matter how many times they pointlessly sprinkle the word giant on the rune features and the word rune on the giant features). They have two completely separate sets of features that don't even interact with each other. That's not just bad theming, it's bad game design.

The Runes came from the Giants.

It's like saying that you can't accept the Draconic Sorcerer because dragons and magic are wildly disparate themes.

(In fact Dragons and magic are more disparate than Giants and Runes, because there is non-dragon-related magic in the world).

[MinimanMidget]

The Runes came from the Giants.

It's like saying that you can't accept the Draconic Sorcerer because dragons and magic are wildly disparate themes.

If the Draconic Sorcerer was the Draconic/Treasure themed Sorcerer, because dragons are strongly affiliated with treasure, I wouldn't love it, because those are still two separate themes, but I'd understand it, since they're strongly related. If the Draconic Sorcerer was the Draconic/Backgammon themed Sorcerer, because backgammon came from dragons, I'd be like...what? Since when? You (or WotC) can't just tell me "these themes are related because I said so just now" and expect me to accept that. Not to mention, the Monster Manual has a lot about giants, and nothing about runes. So the runes didn't come from the giants until the Rune Knight needed them to in order to not be nonsense.

In general, if you have to explain how two things are thematically related, they're not thematically related. Themes are ingrained in culture, they're not something you can just invent. Why are dragons linked to treasure, or fey linked to nature? I can't explain it without writing a thesis, but it's not "because WotC said so".

[Skrum]

I don't entirely disagree that the theming is a little weird, but no more so than *any* class. Artificer is a mess, and that's a base class (as opposed to subclass). Solution: make your own theming!! My current rune knight is an elf that was cursed so he can't use traditional magic - he gets around it by tattooing spells on himself in the form of runes. While I kept that the runic technique came from giants, I changed the name of each of the runes to be more fitting to him, and more like he's casting a version of a spell when he uses a rune.

Power-wise, take my rune knight from my cold dead hands lol. Yes it's better than other fighter options. Yes it's better than most other martial subclasses. But yah know what it also is? Fun to play, and can legitimately hold its own in a party of full-casting heavy hitters. RK's get a lot of tools, including reactions; they actually get to interact with the entire turn in a way that usually only casters get to. Them being better than other martial classes is evidence that those classes are a little anemic, not that RK should be nerfed. If clerics continue to exist, arguments claiming whatever thing a fighter can do is OP will find no purchase with me.

==============

On the subject of who should be a subclass of who -

Base Classes (subclasses)
Fighter (barbarian, ranger, monk)
Cleric (paladin, druid)
Rogue (bard)
Wizard (artificer, sorcerer, warlock)

[diplomancer]

If the Draconic Sorcerer was the Draconic/Treasure themed Sorcerer, because dragons are strongly affiliated with treasure, I wouldn't love it, because those are still two separate themes, but I'd understand it, since they're strongly related. If the Draconic Sorcerer was the Draconic/Backgammon themed Sorcerer, because backgammon came from dragons, I'd be like...what? Since when? You (or WotC) can't just tell me "these themes are related because I said so just now" and expect me to accept that. Not to mention, the Monster Manual has a lot about giants, and nothing about runes. So the runes didn't come from the giants until the Rune Knight needed them to in order to not be nonsense.

In general, if you have to explain how two things are thematically related, they're not thematically related. Themes are ingrained in culture, they're not something you can just invent. Why are dragons linked to treasure, or fey linked to nature? I can't explain it without writing a thesis, but it's not "because WotC said so".

Giants and Runes had been connected since at least Storm King's Thunder, which predated the Rune Knight by quite a bit. Volo's guide to Monsters, which came out around the same time, repeats the connection.

[Kane0]

Have the 'growth' rune be one you select rather than one you get by default.

[Dr.Samurai]

The weird thing though is that giants don't do any of the stuff a Rune Knight does. They don't grow bigger than they are, they don't redirect attacks, or make you reroll your attack, or manifest chains that restrain you, or resist damages, or incapacitate you with a stare.

So it's kind of weird. If giants had runes that made them grow to Gargantuan size it'd make sense to learn how to carve that rune and gain its magic. I'm willing to guess even the Advantage on skills probably don't line up with giants.

So it is a bit weird. Nothing that can't be overcome, as I said I reskinned my rune knight. But it's more like... you've learned runes that someone created that was inspired by their idea of the giants.

[Mastikator]

If I enchant a magic item in my wizard's tower, it's magic, but if I enchant it in a 'lab' in the exact same way, it's tech?



Sounds like wizards spellbooks are tech then, as are all magic items.

Didn't know every D&D setting was so high tech before, but the more you know...

The difference between tech and magic is perspective. A commoner doesn't understand how a wizard conjures a fire elemental or constructs a tower out of thin air, so to them it's magic. The wizard does understand, to the wizard it's tech. A wizard's tower is a laboratory, it's where the wizard studies the physics of "the weave" (or other forces, depending on setting).
Even in this thread (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?666794-What-is-Magic-in-your-Setting) the answer to "what is magic in your setting" is "it's physics". Any sufficiently advanced technology is magic, and as a corollary, any sufficiently understood magic is science.

[JellyPooga]

The weird thing though is that giants don't do any of the stuff a Rune Knight does. They don't grow bigger than they are, they don't redirect attacks, or make you reroll your attack, or manifest chains that restrain you, or resist damages, or incapacitate you with a stare.

So it's kind of weird. If giants had runes that made them grow to Gargantuan size it'd make sense to learn how to carve that rune and gain its magic. I'm willing to guess even the Advantage on skills probably don't line up with giants.

So it is a bit weird. Nothing that can't be overcome, as I said I reskinned my rune knight. But it's more like... you've learned runes that someone created that was inspired by their idea of the giants.
This. Right here. This is my beef with the theming. My favourite part of the entire subclass is the bit where you permanently grow a few inches taller because you've been using "giant magic" for too long not to be irrevocably, physically influenced by it. If I'm going to grow giant because I'm using giant magic, it's not going to be for a minute at a time because giants aren't giant for a minute at a time; they're giant all the time! Likewise, I wouldn't gate runes behind an arbitrary number per day; it would be a "spells known" kind of affair rather than "spell slots per long rest"; if you're studying the runes of the Fire Giants you don't need magical rune power to be good with tools; you've just learned to be good with tools all the time. I might only be able to use the magical effect of adding fire damage or what-have-you a certain number of times a day, but the skill thing? Yeah, I'm not a fan of magical knowledge/proficiencies that come and go like that.

I would see a Rune Knight that grows permanently Large. Wanna be big? Be big. I would see a Rune Knight that really knows their Runes like a Wizard Knows their spells. I would see a Rune Knight that has more variety, based on language rather than giant type; after all, that's what Runes are, after all. Letters and words that have meaning. I would see a Rune Knight that starts off with temporary runes and develops more permanent ones when they've mastered their craft. I would see a Rune Knight that deals with all of giant kind, including bonuses to interacting with giants and their allies because you know their language and culture so intimately as a result of your study and research.

[JellyPooga]

Here's some of what I'd have like to have seen in Rune Knight:

1) More diverse runes, relating to various giant types (not just Giants) that would be useful/attractive to a Fighter specifically or broadly applicable as utilities. Some that come to mind;
- Invisibility, Flight, Gaseous Form (Oni)
- Enhanced Perception/Awareness (Ettin)
- Water Breathing, Weather Control (Storm Giant)
- Regeneration (Troll)
- Elemental Resistances (Fire/Frost/Storm/Cloud)
- Elemental Damage bonus (Fire/Frost/Storm/Cloud)
These would be level gated and a mix of permanent boons and activated "spell-like" abilities, much like Invocations. The pool of features is inherently limited by the Giant theme, so it doesn't have to be insanely big, but a good dozen or more would be decent enough (for reference, the Battlemaster has more than 20 to choose from). These would be selected as "Runes Known", locked in once chosen rather than changed every day (Fighter...not Wizard).

2) Cultural and Language consideration. For a subclass that claims to learn everything it knows from a specific culture, it doesn't do much to really highlight it. Learning Giant language doesn't quite cut it for me! At the very least, offer the same bonuses as Favoured Enemy. I'd go so far as to offer more, linguistically; Primordial feels right, as does Speak with Animals (either as a spell or as a language; perhaps specific animals only e.g. eagles as allies of Storm Giants) and we could probably offer Comprehend Languages and later Tongues as optional Rune effects, if not just features the subclass gains.

3) Size. This needs to be a permanent thing, for me. Yes, there's some giants with shape/size change and/or polymorph abilities, but if I'm playing a giant-themed Fighter, I want to be big and not for a handful of minutes a day. Increased carry/lift and treated as size(s) bigger for grapple are permanent effects that won't break the game at any level. Actually growing to Large size in Tier 2 isn't going to be an issue for game balance either.

4) Intimidation. If I'm giant themed, I'm probably hinging all my social proficiency on taking advantage of my prodigious size. This needs to be more centre stage.

What I really don't need in the class is an ally protection ability. As good as it might be for a Fighter, Giants are famously antisocial. Why would they get a teamwork feature like that?

I probably don't necessarily need a damage bonus outside of that offered by wielding larger weapons as a result of, y'know, being larger all the time.

[RSP]

I think it’s a fair point that “Giant Magic” isn’t what any of the giants do (at least not the main giants), they do spells (if any magic). Are the giants unaware of this aspect of their magic, and only a select few warriors, who really just dabble in the runes as they spend most of their time training with weapons and armor, were able to figure out that the language the giants use can do magic?

I think the subclass is fine, but I agree that it doesn’t make sense from the in-game explanation perspective.

[Amnestic]

I'm not against a perma size increase but I'm not surprised WotC turned it away - it's a dungeon delving game at its core, and "one of your party members is permanently the size of a house" would probably cause issues in a bunch of ways.

Sure, by tier 4, you might be in a position to mitigate those, but it's still something they're probably a bit iffy on from a 5e design perspective. It's the sort of thing that flies fine in homebrew but they're less eager for in official content.

[Unoriginal]

I think it’s a fair point that “Giant Magic” isn’t what any of the giants do (at least not the main giants)

All of the main Giants have Rune users, it's just that it took WotC until 2023 to release statblocks for those who can use the Runes in combat.

Still, even if they took their sweet time, the Hill Giant Avalancher, Frost Giant Ice Shaper, Fire Giant Forgecaller, Stone Giant Rockspeaker, Cloud Giant Destiny Gambler and Storm Giant Tempest Caller are in the game now.

I admit it would have been better if the Giant Runes users did have a power matching the relevant Rune Knight's Runes in a 1:1 manner, though.

[stoutstien]

The part I like is they seem to hit the mark as far as balancing each option's frequency, range, and availability. It's a design approach that threads the needle between the build a bear style of spells and the locked in options of stuff like BM maneuvers or other pick from the list features.

This could be modified to fit a lot of different themes and classes. My WIP artificer without spell casting is using something similar to good effect.

[Witty Username]

The Runes came from the Giants.

It's like saying that you can't accept the Draconic Sorcerer because dragons and magic are wildly disparate themes.

(In fact Dragons and magic are more disparate than Giants and Runes, because there is non-dragon-related magic in the world).

At least for me, that is one of my major issues with sorcerer.

It doesn't bother me as much with rune knight as much because I read it as mindsets embodied rather than actual abilities. There is a more of a frustration with rune knight that it seems to have absorbed all fighter discussion, like picking any other subclass is an unforced error. But that is other people not directly the subclasses fault.

[KorvinStarmast]

share a very similar game space So do wizard and sorcerer. Which one do you suggest we get rid of?
So do druid and cleric. Which one do you suggest we get rid of.

That is a poor argument.

but it doesn't address the fact that Giant's Might and Rage occupy very similar design space, If that's the hill you want to die on, your objection is rejected as being way down in the noise level. I am not sure if you are carping at the margins or complaining in order to have something to complain about. Maybe both.

Have you played one?

On and on the list can go.
Is this kinda like "Ranger steps all over Fighter, and renders Arcane Archer pointless." Am I reading you right?

Chris Perkins has stated in interviews that he thinks the Barbarian could be a subclass of Fighter.
Yes. Whomever suggested that Rune Knight would be a good fit for Barbarian is probably on to a good idea.

I want to like Rune Knight, but I just can't accept that runes and giants are a single theme. ?? Norse mythology gives us giants, fire giants, frost giants, and runes. Theme wise, it's a great fit.

The theme is Norse-inspired. Both Giants and Runes are prominent in Norse mythology and culture.
Oh, I see that's been covered. But in Faerun, I guess giants aren't norse?

That's so 1 and 2 e of you. Lol *Snigger*

The Runes came from the Giants.
It's like saying that you can't accept the Draconic Sorcerer because dragons and magic are wildly disparate themes.
Nicely said.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

That's so 1 and 2 e of you. Lol

I'm not ashamed. Retvrn to tradition, says I.

[Sorinth]

If you make Barbarian a Fighter subclass then I doubt you get more then 1 version of the Barbarian so you lose a lot of the diversity that the Barb subclasses bring. I can't think of any subclasses that share a major feature like rage within the same base class. There's features that get shared when the base class changes like Eldritch Knight/Arcane Trickster or Psi Warrior/Soulknife, but it seems extremely unlikely that we'd get a 2nd Fighter subclass that also uses Psi Dice but does different things compared to Psi Warrior.

And although some of the Barb subclasses don't really interest me personally, going from 9 subclasses to 1 sounds crappy.

[stoutstien]

If you make Barbarian a Fighter subclass then I doubt you get more then 1 version of the Barbarian so you lose a lot of the diversity that the Barb subclasses bring. I can't think of any subclasses that share a major feature like rage within the same base class. There's features that get shared when the base class changes like Eldritch Knight/Arcane Trickster or Psi Warrior/Soulknife, but it seems extremely unlikely that we'd get a 2nd Fighter subclass that also uses Psi Dice but does different things compared to Psi Warrior.

And although some of the Barb subclasses don't really interest me personally, going from 9 subclasses to 1 sounds crappy.

Not saying that barbarian deserves to be its own class or subclass or not but IMO you could get a lot done with the double subclass approach like warlocks have.

This would allow you to have a ton of potential options while also locking out combination as to prevent unwanted interactions as well.

[Tendril]

Having more modularity in general would be really nice. Too many classes are stuck with fairly narrow themes and mechanics and could really do with some more choices baked into the class. For example, why are all the best martial artists these super dextrous wise masters that have no need for physical strength? Monks could very easily have a choice somewhere to provide options for Strength-based brawlers, and other styles of martial arts, but instead we get the very narrow theme and mechanics of the current monk.

Fighters aren't as narrow, but there as well I wish you just got more choices in how to define your fighter. For a start, I'd love it if fighting styles actually had big impactful effects rather than numerical bonuses like "+2 damage".

[Amnestic]

There's plenty of "multiclass" subclasses you can make. We already have some in game - Eldritch Knight, Sword's Bard, Bladesinger, Divine Soul Sorcerer and Arcane Trickster are some of the more obvious ones.

You could certainly make a "Primal Warrior" fighter subclass.

At 3rd level you'd get...Rage+Unarmoured Defense?
At 7th Reckless Attack?
Maybe 10th would give you Danger Sense.
15th could give you Fast Movement.
18th Relentless or Persistent Rage.

And it'd be a serviceable fighter subclass.

Would you be a "better" barbarian than the barbarian? Mileage may vary, I guess. Those extra two ASIs really help with the unarmoured stuff, but you're also losing two skills from Primal Knowledge, Instinctive Pounce, Brutal Critical (hey, it's still a thing), Indomitable Might, Primal Champion, whichever of Relentless/Persistent you didn't choose, and all your subclass features, not to mention delaying stuff like Reckless Attack.

Just as how Giants Barb and Rune Knight Fighter can coexist, so too could Primal Warrior Fighter and Barbarian in general. That'd be fine.

[Witty Username]

On class compression, I wouldn't mind some 'scout style' subclasses where it is a class mixed with the theme of another to increase variety.

Cutting classes just removes something a chunk of the player base likes, I am not in favor of that. Even with sorcerer which I actively dislike.

[Sorinth]

There's plenty of "multiclass" subclasses you can make. We already have some in game - Eldritch Knight, Sword's Bard, Bladesinger, Divine Soul Sorcerer and Arcane Trickster are some of the more obvious ones.

You could certainly make a "Primal Warrior" fighter subclass.

At 3rd level you'd get...Rage+Unarmoured Defense?
At 7th Reckless Attack?
Maybe 10th would give you Danger Sense.
15th could give you Fast Movement.
18th Relentless or Persistent Rage.

And it'd be a serviceable fighter subclass.

Would you be a "better" barbarian than the barbarian? Mileage may vary, I guess. Those extra two ASIs really help with the unarmoured stuff, but you're also losing two skills from Primal Knowledge, Instinctive Pounce, Brutal Critical (hey, it's still a thing), Indomitable Might, Primal Champion, whichever of Relentless/Persistent you didn't choose, and all your subclass features, not to mention delaying stuff like Reckless Attack.

Just as how Giants Barb and Rune Knight Fighter can coexist, so too could Primal Warrior Fighter and Barbarian in general. That'd be fine.

Yeah for sure there's no problem with making a Fighter subclass that borrows from Barbarian like those other multiclass/subclasses do. But that in no way should replace the Barbarian as a class in itself. It's like Scout Rogue and Ranger, having Scout isn't a replacement for the Ranger class even if it can take the same role.

Having more ways to build the "same" character is good.

[Ignimortis]

Title says it all really, but here's why.

1) Theme. The theme just feels a bit tacked on, very much as if it's a class designed from the abilities it offers and upward, rather than starting with the theme and working down.
- Why is studying the runecraft of giants a Fighter thing? Inscribing runes feels more like an Artificer thing. Study feels like a Wizard or Bard thing. Creature-feature themes feel more Druidic or Sorcerous and invoking Giants and/or their power and learning, spiritually or magically feels way more Barbarian or Warlock, generally speaking, than Fighter. Skill focus, which every rune offers, is more Rogue and Bard. Just about any Class but the Cleric or Monk would be a better fit, thematically, than Fighter.
- Why/how does it study the runes of multiple giant species, from the brutish and crude Hill Giant to the sophisticated and isolationist Storm Giant? Dragonborn and Draconic Sorcerers have to pick a lane and stick to it. Why are Fighter-Giants different, except that whoever designed it didn't put that much effort or care into actually theming their subclass?
- Where do the runes go after a long rest? Just a nit-pick, really, but inscribing a rune feels like something pretty permanent. Painting a rune on, yeah, I can go with that as a temporary thing, but inscribing implies a degree of permanence. After all, how are you supposed to..."[find] the giant's work carved into a hill or cave" if they all disappear after a day? Why does the Rune Knight get to pick and choose which runes to use every day outside of "because magic" or "something something game design"?

2) Skewey Balance. It just feels...off. There's some aspects that I could easily point at as blatant power creep or niche infringement on other Classes (if there is such a thing) and then there's other aspects that I look at and wonder why it's even there. For example, offering permanent advantage on 2-4 Skill proficiencies at level 3 is very good. Probably too good. Similarly, Cloud Rune is straight up just OP for 3rd level (and I rarely make that kind of statement). The closest other ability to Cloud Runes attack redirect I can think of is the Rogue Mastermind's Misdirection at 13th level and that comes with a heap of caveats and conditions. How is it redirecting that attack? Why doesn't it have a range limitation? Can it at least have a chance of failure? Too many questions on that one for my liking. Then on the flipside, Runic Juggernaut increases your 1/turn damage (it's not even once per anyone's turn, only on your own turn) from 1d8 to 1d10. Yes, you finally get to be Huge too (which if you're interested in being so, spellcasters have been offering with Polymorph since level 7)...but a whole extra point of average damage on one attack per turn for a minute? As your 18th level subclass capstone? Steady the horses of light and dark there, we need some balance back in this subclass! :smallamused: Seriously? Even the Champion Fighter is getting something vaguely exciting at that level.

3) Niche infringement. This harkens back to the theming argument, but Skill focus is a Rogue/Bard thing, so why is it in a Fighter subclass? Rage is a Barbarian thing, so why is it in a Fighter subclass? Miscellaneous magical abilities and functions are kind of a Warlock thing, so why are they in a Fighter subclass? I often see Rune Knight heralded as a poster child for why X Class or subclass isn't good or lacks lustre, but if Rune Knight is the exception rather than the norm, isn't it also the problem?

I just can't take the subclass seriously. It's a jumble of mis-matched theme, abilities and power that really doesn't gel for me. It consistently seems to be called out as an outlier, both in terms of power balance and roleplaying, for good and ill, so much so that I can't help but wonder why anyone would want to play it. I don't see the appeal outside of bland theory-craft or high-op play and even then, I really struggle to fit it into a greater whole that makes the game more fun for everyone at the table.

Can someone who actually likes this subclass explain why?

While I am not a fan of Rune Knight, here's answers to your points:
1) Because if we were to exclude Fighters from anything that another class does better, Fighters would have NO niche left. Swinging big weapons? Barbarian is better. Sword and shield, tanky? Paladin. Ranged combat? Ranger, duh. Magic, any flavour? Every single caster. Skills? Rogue.
Let Fighters actually have powers other than "I basic attack, but like, a lot". If anything, we need more of that, not less.
2) 1/SR redirect isn't anything to write home about. Nobody bats an eye when Wizard gets at-will Silvery Barbs or Shield at level 18. If anything, Rune Knight active abilities aren't great overall, but serviceable, and passive benefits kind of even it out.
3) Again, if Fighter never intrudes on other people's niches, it doesn't do anything anymore. It's already one of the worst classes of the edition.

Let Fighters be cool. Let Fighters be mystical and weird. Let Fighters be actually powerful.

[RSP]

All of the main Giants have Rune users, it's just that it took WotC until 2023 to release statblocks for those who can use the Runes in combat.

I figured they came out with rune using giants, but I think it’s still fair to say the main idea one associates with giants is their MM versions (the generic Hill, Stone, Fire, Frost, Cloud and Storm, particularly).

My point was more, if you encounter a Cloud Giant, 99% of the time it’s the generic one from the MM which uses spells. If rune magic is the magic of giants, they did a very, very poor job of getting that into the game.

So now the idea of “a fighter who uses giant magic” leads me to “oh they have Cloud or Storm Giant type-spells”, not “oh, the magic of the giants probably just makes people larger for a short period of time”.

(I’ve never heard of such, but if Giants were originally created by taking medium humanoids and using rune magic to grow them to huge, I’m fine that being a power of the rune knight.)

[Skrum]

And although some of the Barb subclasses don't really interest me personally, going from 9 subclasses to 1 sounds crappy.

How much variety do the barb subclasses actually have? Like isn't that one of the main criticisms of barb, they're a one trick pony that has almost nothing to offer besides being kinda tough and hitting things in melee? None of the subclasses change that. Ergo, we're really talking about the color of the paint, not meaningfully different options.

A fighter that got rage and reckless at 3rd, fast movement and a skill proficiency at 6th, brutal critical, danger sense, and feral instincts at 10th, and relentless rage and indomitable might at 14th, like that's a barb. Plus they'd get a fighting style, second wind, action surge, an extra ASI, indomitable, scaling extra attack...that's just better than any barb option currently available. "A barb that can turn his hand into a claw" or "a barb that's easy to bring back from the dead" doesn't add anything to the barb mythos, IMO. They use rage, they hit stuff. That's about it.

[Sorinth]

How much variety do the barb subclasses actually have? Like isn't that one of the main criticisms of barb, they're a one trick pony that has almost nothing to offer besides being kinda tough and hitting things in melee? None of the subclasses change that. Ergo, we're really talking about the color of the paint, not meaningfully different options.

A fighter that got rage and reckless at 3rd, fast movement and a skill proficiency at 6th, brutal critical, danger sense, and feral instincts at 10th, and relentless rage and indomitable might at 14th, like that's a barb. Plus they'd get a fighting style, second wind, action surge, an extra ASI, indomitable, scaling extra attack...that's just better than any barb option currently available. "A barb that can turn his hand into a claw" or "a barb that's easy to bring back from the dead" doesn't add anything to the barb mythos, IMO. They use rage, they hit stuff. That's about it.

Look not every class or subclass is going to appeal to every person and that's perfectly fine. The OP doesn't like Rune Knight, lots of others love it. If you think all a barb is is rage and hit stuff then honestly I don't think it's a class that's aimed at you. But to answer your question yes I do find there's a lot of good variety in the subclasses

[Dr.Samurai]

People act like we can’t be reductive about the caster classes either.

Player: I’m playing a wizard. *hooks cable into the port in his back* I am now connected to the internet hivemind. I will choose all the best spells. I will dip all the best classes. I will engage in the same exact precise and perfect combo of actions every encounter.

/robot voice

[Kish]

Rune Knight doesn't like you either.

[Skrum]

Look not every class or subclass is going to appeal to every person and that's perfectly fine. The OP doesn't like Rune Knight, lots of others love it. If you think all a barb is is rage and hit stuff then honestly I don't think it's a class that's aimed at you. But to answer your question yes I do find there's a lot of good variety in the subclasses

I'm literally playing a barb right now, and I rarely play classes that aren't melee of some sort. It's exactly my type of class. But I'm under no illusions about 1) how good it is in the scheme of the game, and 2) how varied the play is.

Different domains of cleric? They feel and play quite differently. Warlock patrons? Same. Monk schools? Quite different, round to round. Artificer specialties? Probably the most amount of variance of any class. But a barb...? Idk. They hit stuff. They all share the same weaknesses. Out of combat is non-existent. What are any of the subclasses bringing that a fighter (barb) wouldn't?

[Sorinth]

I'm literally playing a barb right now, and I rarely play classes that aren't melee of some sort. It's exactly my type of class. But I'm under no illusions about 1) how good it is in the scheme of the game, and 2) how varied the play is.

Different domains of cleric? They feel and play quite differently. Warlock patrons? Same. Monk schools? Quite different, round to round. Artificer specialties? Probably the most amount of variance of any class. But a barb...? Idk. They hit stuff. They all share the same weaknesses. Out of combat is non-existent. What are any of the subclasses bringing that a fighter (barb) wouldn't?

Totem is great when you want to have a more scouting/ranger vibe and role. Speak with Animals gets slept on a lot but it can bring a ton of useful information, and allows Beast Sense which is pretty good scouting wise. It's often better then Find Familiar since the animal has local knowledge but is less flexible. Even in combat Bear, Elk, Wolf are likely going to play different. Even when your role is tank, Ancestral Guardians pushes you to do it in one manner, Bear Totem pushes towards another, and Battlerager is pushes to a 3rd.

And we can present the same arguments for pretty much every class. Who needs Ranger class when a Nature themed Fighter Subclass and the Rogue Scout subclass exists. Who needs Paladin when you could have Eldritch Knight but with Cleric spell list or just a War Cleric. Who needs Monk when you can just be a fighter with Unarmed Fighting Style, who needs Sorcerer when Wizard is there, why have any wizard subclasses when every meaningful difference is about spell selection.

[Skrum]

Totem is great when you want to have a more scouting/ranger vibe and role. Speak with Animals gets slept on a lot but it can bring a ton of useful information, and allows Beast Sense which is pretty good scouting wise. It's often better then Find Familiar since the animal has local knowledge but is less flexible. Even in combat Bear, Elk, Wolf are likely going to play different. Even when your role is tank, Ancestral Guardians pushes you to do it in one manner, Bear Totem pushes towards another, and Battlerager is pushes to a 3rd.

Maybe?



And we can present the same arguments for pretty much every class. Who needs Ranger class when a Nature themed Fighter Subclass and the Rogue Scout subclass exists. Who needs Paladin when you could have Eldritch Knight but with Cleric spell list or just a War Cleric. Who needs Monk when you can just be a fighter with Unarmed Fighting Style, who needs Sorcerer when Wizard is there, why have any wizard subclasses when every meaningful difference is about spell selection.

From page 2 :smallwink::smallbiggrin:



On the subject of who should be a subclass of who -

Base Classes (subclasses)
Fighter (barbarian, ranger, monk)
Cleric (paladin, druid)
Rogue (bard)
Wizard (artificer, sorcerer, warlock)

More serious answer, I would prefer "blander" base classes with a ton of customization options in the form of tech trees, feat and skill options, spell lists, etc. A more modular system.

[Kane0]

Here's some of what I'd have like to have seen in Rune Knight:

1) More diverse runes, relating to various giant types (not just Giants) that would be useful/attractive to a Fighter specifically or broadly applicable as utilities. Some that come to mind;
- Invisibility, Flight, Gaseous Form (Oni)
- Enhanced Perception/Awareness (Ettin)
- Water Breathing, Weather Control (Storm Giant)
- Regeneration (Troll)
- Elemental Resistances (Fire/Frost/Storm/Cloud)
- Elemental Damage bonus (Fire/Frost/Storm/Cloud)

2) Cultural and Language consideration.


On these two, 1) I like that and i'm going to take that and run with it and 2) fun fact the Giant language in its written form (I think its called Dethek?) is the same script used by dwarven, gnomish, goblin, and terran so you could get a lot of potential mileage out of some linguistics there.

[Dr.Samurai]

I'm literally playing a barb right now, and I rarely play classes that aren't melee of some sort. It's exactly my type of class. But I'm under no illusions about 1) how good it is in the scheme of the game, and 2) how varied the play is.

Different domains of cleric? They feel and play quite differently. Warlock patrons? Same. Monk schools? Quite different, round to round. Artificer specialties? Probably the most amount of variance of any class. But a barb...? Idk. They hit stuff. They all share the same weaknesses. Out of combat is non-existent. What are any of the subclasses bringing that a fighter (barb) wouldn't?
Have you played a Path of Giants Barbarian? Their size opens up grapple/shove options, they have increased reach, and at level 10 they can toss allies/enemies around the battlefield. Plays very differently to any other martial really (though admittedly that's level 10).

I'm not quite sure what the standard is you're looking for; I don't see much of a major variance between getting THP on a kill with the Fiend warlock, and getting a bonus action attack with the Fathom warlock. Yes, they are different. About as different as any barbarian subclasses are to each other. But certainly Totem, Wild Magic, Ancestral, Berserker/Battlerager, Beast, and Giants offer some different considerations in combat.

But more importantly... screw the fighter. The fighter gets... Action Surge... and Extra Attack. And we're tacking the barbarian onto that? Nah, let's tack on Extra Attack and Action Surge onto the barbarian please. Let me keep my d12 HD, increased mobility options/Initiative, immunity to Surprise, extra speed, Adv on Dex saves, and other goodies. Just add the 1 or 2 features that fighters get as an entire class onto the barbarian. Heck... you can probably just tack them on the base barbarian class and still let the barbarian take a subclass.

[tokek]

Rune Knight is my favourite fighter subclass. If I was not on vacation I’d happily write an essay length response. But let me address the flavour thing:

Firstly flavour is free. I re-flavoured it all as feywild power and trickery on a feywild hobgoblin (puck the trickster spirit of folklore is a hobgoblin)

But the core flavour makes sense. Fighters are students of martial prowess, giants are exemplars of martial prowess. The runes of the ordning are very much not arcane magic - they are an entirely different system somewhat alien to arcane casters.

Arcane casters are best at arcane magic, not at other systems of magic.

[Witty Username]

But more importantly... screw the fighter. The fighter gets... Action Surge... and Extra Attack. And we're tacking the barbarian onto that? Nah, let's tack on Extra Attack and Action Surge onto the barbarian please. Let me keep my d12 HD, increased mobility options/Initiative, immunity to Surprise, extra speed, Adv on Dex saves, and other goodies. Just add the 1 or 2 features that fighters get as an entire class onto the barbarian. Heck... you can probably just tack them on the base barbarian class and still let the barbarian take a subclass.

Well, heavy armor, fighting styles, second wind, action surge, rerolls to any save, extra attack, extra attack again, extra attack again again if that ever matters, and other goodies.

[Sigreid]

More serious answer, I would prefer "blander" base classes with a ton of customization options in the form of tech trees, feat and skill options, spell lists, etc. A more modular system.
If I were guiding design, there'd be 4 classes and each tier a choice would be made that branches out. So at tier 4 2 fighters, for example could be wildly different from each other based on choices made, but springing from the same root.

[Unoriginal]

Well, heavy armor, fighting styles, second wind, action surge, rerolls to any save, extra attack, extra attack again, extra attack again again if that ever matters, and other goodies.

Extra ASIs are pretty great.

[Amnestic]

Here's Fighter as a Barbarian subclass.

3rd: Well of Strength
1/SR Second Wind, but also activates Rage for free if you didn't have it active.

6th: Primal Surge
1/SR Action Surge, but also activates Rage for free if you didn't have it active.

10th: Indomitable Rage
1/Rage: Reroll failed saving throw, add any Brutal Critical dice to roll (so eventually 1d20+mods+3d6 from 17th level)

14th: Extra Attack (3)
Extra Attack...again.

[KorvinStarmast]

While I am not a fan of Rune Knight, here's answers to your points:
1) Because if we were to exclude Fighters from anything that another class does better, Fighters would have NO niche left. Swinging big weapons? Barbarian is better. Sword and shield, tanky? Paladin. Ranged combat? Ranger, duh. Magic, any flavour? Every single caster. Skills? Rogue.
Let Fighters actually have powers other than "I basic attack, but like, a lot". If anything, we need more of that, not less.
2) 1/SR redirect isn't anything to write home about. Nobody bats an eye when Wizard gets at-will Silvery Barbs or Shield at level 18. If anything, Rune Knight active abilities aren't great overall, but serviceable, and passive benefits kind of even it out.
3) Again, if Fighter never intrudes on other people's niches, it doesn't do anything anymore. It's already one of the worst classes of the edition.

Let Fighters be cool. Let Fighters be mystical and weird. Let Fighters be actually powerful. Said more concisely than I did. +1

Look not every class or subclass is going to appeal to every person and that's perfectly fine. The OP doesn't like Rune Knight, lots of others love it. If you think all a barb is is rage and hit stuff then honestly I don't think it's a class that's aimed at you. But to answer your question yes I do find there's a lot of good variety in the subclasses
+1

Rune Knight doesn't like you either.
Laughed, I did. :smallsmile:

Totem is great when you want to have a more scouting/ranger vibe and role. Speak with Animals gets slept on a lot but it can bring a ton of useful information, and allows Beast Sense which is pretty good scouting wise. It's often better then Find Familiar since the animal has local knowledge but is less flexible. Even in combat Bear, Elk, Wolf are likely going to play different. Even when your role is tank, Ancestral Guardians pushes you to do it in one manner, Bear Totem pushes towards another, and Battlerager is pushes to a 3rd. I have noticed that a good player gets a lot more out of a barbarian. (My Salt Marsh Totem barbarian is one such good player).

On these two, 1) I like that and i'm going to take that and run with it and 2) fun fact the Giant language in its written form (I think its called Dethek?) is the same script used by dwarven, gnomish, goblin, and terran so you could get a lot of potential mileage out of some linguistics there. That's something that PhoenixPhyre has tapped into in his game world, in terms of how runes fit into things. For my own reasons I chose Arcana as one of my skill proficiencies, and have leaned into this a bit.

Firstly flavour is free. I re-flavoured it all as feywild power and trickery on a feywild hobgoblin (puck the trickster spirit of folklore is a hobgoblin)

But the core flavour makes sense. Fighters are students of martial prowess, giants are exemplars of martial prowess. The runes of the ordning are very much not arcane magic - they are an entirely different system somewhat alien to arcane casters.

Arcane casters are best at arcane magic, not at other systems of magic. *golf clap*

Extra ASIs are pretty great.
And/or feats, depending on the table.

As an aside:
I noticed that Tanarii isn't visiting with us much these days. Guess 5e has lost its shine for him. (Which is a pity, I value the input).

[Guy Lombard-O]

Rune Knight is my favourite fighter subclass. If I was not on vacation IÂ’d happily write an essay length response. But let me address the flavour thing:

Firstly flavour is free. I re-flavoured it all as feywild power and trickery on a feywild hobgoblin (puck the trickster spirit of folklore is a hobgoblin)

Arcane casters are best at arcane magic, not at other systems of magic.

Gotta say, RK is my favorite as well. The only subclass that actually interested me in fighter enough to play one.

I reflavored mine into "Dragon Runes" (which probably has less support in the lore, but makes the magical nature of many of the runes make more sense, at least IMHO). I used it to create a dragonborn who was trying to study his way into eventually actually becoming a real dragon. The FS of Blind Fighting seemed on point. Using a gem dragonborn's 30' telepathy to piggy-back Stone Rune's 30' charm effect into a telepathic serpent's charm dovetailed nicely. Getting uncommonly skillful at things like deception and Insight seemed thematic. Doing more damage which large/huge...yeah, I managed to convince my DM to divide my extra damage to each hit (1-3 extra damage) made the illusion of being big/strong more convincing. Overall, flavor IS free, and RK gives you some pretty good bones to do things in the game which otherwise just wouldn't really work.

I do think some of the runes are a bit janky and need a bit of fixing for a smooth power progression. I personally held off on taking Cloud Rune until 15th level, as it feels both more magical and more powerful than some of the others, more like a high-level feature of a PC increasingly in tune with the magic of the runes. So I agree that they could have/should have level-locked things a bit better.

I also agree that the 18th level huge capstone abilities were unimaginative and lacking. I'd have argued that instead, they should have allowed the PC to use a charge of Giant's Might 1/LR to actually transform into a CR-appropriate version of a giant for a minute, possibly using a stat block a la the new Summon spells to make the various giant types all valid and appealing (including actually switching creature type), or possibly including a new suite of buffs related to the giant type you change into. You know...something that actually felt impactful, powerful, and thematically satisfying as a transformation?

I'd also suggest that using the fighter chassis as the basis for the RK subclass was partially appropriate if for no other reason than that the martial classes are largely dragging at higher levels and therefore allow a much greater budget for some new, additional abilities to be added by the subclass. To me, RK's level of power-creep is substantial when compared to other subclasses, but also gives a breadth of new abilities in the non-combat theater, gives a good way to use some non-physical ability points (to better utilize the skill advantages of the features), and allows for enough BC options to give the basic fighter a number of other things to focus upon (grapple, much?) than just pumping out the DPR.

[KorvinStarmast]

Gotta say, RK is my favorite as well. The only subclass that actually interested me in fighter enough to play one.

I reflavored mine into "Dragon Runes" (which probably has less support in the lore, but makes the magical nature of many of the runes make more sense, at least IMHO). I used it to create a dragonborn who was trying to study his way into eventually actually becoming a real dragon. The FS of Blind Fighting seemed on point. Using a gem dragonborn's 30' telepathy to piggy-back Stone Rune's 30' charm effect into a telepathic serpent's charm dovetailed nicely. Getting uncommonly skillful at things like deception and Insight seemed thematic. Doing more damage which large/huge...yeah, I managed to convince my DM to divide my extra damage to each hit (1-3 extra damage) made the illusion of being big/strong more convincing. Overall, flavor IS free, and RK gives you some pretty good bones to do things in the game which otherwise just wouldn't really work.

I do think some of the runes are a bit janky and need a bit of fixing for a smooth power progression. I personally held off on taking Cloud Rune until 15th level, as it feels both more magical and more powerful than some of the others, more like a high-level feature of a PC increasingly in tune with the magic of the runes. So I agree that they could have/should have level-locked things a bit better.

I also agree that the 18th level huge capstone abilities were unimaginative and lacking. I'd have argued that instead, they should have allowed the PC to use a charge of Giant's Might 1/LR to actually transform into a CR-appropriate version of a giant 1/LR for a minute, possibly using a stat block a la the new Summon spells to make the various giant types all valid and appealing (including actually switching creature type), or possibly including a new suite of buffs related to the giant type you change into. You know...something that actually felt impactful, powerful, and thematically satisfying as a transformation?
1. I think the longer reach should come on line sooner. Rather than "just got taller" the reach ought to increase to 10'. (My two cents).
2. I agree with your idea on the level 18 feature.
3. Cloud rune ought to be "within reach" for melee attacks and "within 30' for ranged attacks"...it would feel less janky that way.

One of the reasons that I boosted my Con to 18 rather than take Tough feat was to get the rune save DCs up.
Using Fire Rune on round 1, and having it succeed, and then following with attacks that have advantage is nice, in terms of doing the nova damage thing on a restrained creature. Also lets you or an ally back off without an OA if need be.

[Dr.Samurai]

Gotta say, RK is my favorite as well. The only subclass that actually interested me in fighter enough to play one.

I reflavored mine into "Dragon Runes" (which probably has less support in the lore, but makes the magical nature of many of the runes make more sense, at least IMHO). I used it to create a dragonborn who was trying to study his way into eventually actually becoming a real dragon. The FS of Blind Fighting seemed on point. Using a gem dragonborn's 30' telepathy to piggy-back Stone Rune's 30' charm effect into a telepathic serpent's charm dovetailed nicely. Getting uncommonly skillful at things like deception and Insight seemed thematic. Doing more damage which large/huge...yeah, I managed to convince my DM to divide my extra damage to each hit (1-3 extra damage) made the illusion of being big/strong more convincing. Overall, flavor IS free, and RK gives you some pretty good bones to do things in the game which otherwise just wouldn't really work.
Pretty much agree with all of this.

I played a battle master for a birthday one shot a friend ran for us, and it was... okay. Rune Knight is the only fighter subclass that actually made me interested in playing a fighter long term, and it was because it had features that I could actually theme to my character. Any power level compared to other subclasses was secondary, it was just that it had features to play around with in realizing the character concept.

[Evaar]

I have long struggled with the theme of the Rune Knight, because "generic giant" doesn't really feel like enough of a theme. The whole thing about giants is that they are extremely varied, how can one possibly revere the mischievous Cloud Giants, the contemplative Storm Giants, and the dull and ravenous Hill Giants? What, are you just a fan of big bois? You just see a chungus and you're like "yeah, that's my kinda guy."

But there's a take that does work, which is based in the older lore of Giants from when they were a unified kingdom called Ostoria or whatever it is in the setting you're playing with. Xen'drik in Eberron, etc, most settings seem to have an ancient super-advanced giant empire. The evidence of this is in the Giant language, which remains consistent among all the various types of giants. Somehow, they kept the same language. What the Fighter is tapping into is the virtues of that ancient empire, and it's WHY this is on a Fighter. You don't represent the rage of Frost or Hill giants, or the introspection of Stone or Storm giants, or the cunning of Cloud giants, or the rigid discipline of Fire giants. You represent all of it, or you aspire to. And that's why the runes work for you and no one else - it's your ability to embody these virtues that empowers the runes and causes them to empower you in return, not just the fact that you have carved it on a piece of gear. Where appropriate to the setting, you're tapping into a system of order set in place by gods. The actual subclass description does nothing to help get you to this, and certainly could have been written better, but it doesn't contradict this at least.

All that said, I have certainly taken time to reflavor the subclass and looked for other themes where it makes sense. Because of the variety of rune effects, there are actually a lot of options. Usually the tricky part is explaining the "also I grow big" part. So far the one that I think works best is flavoring it after Hags, because Hags also often hide prodigious strength and size. In order of Cloud, Fire, Frost, Hill, Stone, Storm, the names I use are Green Hag's Silver Tongue, Night Hag's Feverish Touch, Bheur Hag's Icy Heart, Annis Hag's Iron Flesh, Sea Hag's Evil Eye, Dusk Hag's Second Sight. Note that Dusk Hags are an Eberron invention, but whatever just bring them into your setting and make them super rare and reclusive. Their deal is cursed prophecies.
But other themes that work are channeling archdemons (same order: Fraz-Urbluu, Oublivae, Baphomet, Orcus, Grazzt, Demogorgon), archfey (make 'em up according to the theme, take story archetypes that would have these abilities like a Blind Oracle, a Foolish Prince, a Forgemaster), the elements/body humours (same order: blood/air, yellow bile/fire, phlegm/water, spirit, black bile/earth, mind), etc. If you put in some creativity, you can match a bunch of different themes. Pantheons, too.

As for the rest of it, I agree there are wonky balance issues like Cloud Rune is crazy good by comparison to most other options. I would not say it's an overpowered feature because its use is too limited for that, but it is basically a compulsory pick. Getting an extra +1 damage and being Huge is a pretty mild capstone bonus, I agree, but an extra 5 feet of reach is nice. But we're talking about level 18, it kinda doesn't matter what the feature is here unless it's completely game breaking or literally useless. You don't want something here that feels defining to the subclass, because that means the first 17 levels don't have that.

[Amnestic]

What, are you just a fan of big bois? You just see a chungus and you're like "yeah, that's my kinda guy."

Works for warlocks with their patrons...

[Dalinar]

For me, when I played RK, I actually wanted to do an Unarmed Fighting fighter foremost. That PC was made for a T1 adventure that was supposed to be around 5 sessions, scope crept to nearly triple that, and the guy has now probably been in upwards of 25 sessions considering later games in the same setting. He was intended as a joke character inspired by Captain Falcon as well as fighting-game grapplers such as Zangief and Potemkin, so I wanted his main form of combat to be punching things really hard and/or grappling and shoving.

Rune Knight was a natural fit for the size increase, since a part of the joke was that this guy was a massive, muscular dude anyway, and I knew I'd probably want the damage bump too since I wouldn't be able to benefit from the likes of GWM. So the question was: how do I explain Rune Carver? The given Rune Knight lore is very Forgotten Realms-specific, and we're playing in a setting that has nothing to do with FR, so I felt it was pretty important to come up with something.

Since I hadn't been planning particularly far ahead, I looked at the situation he'd gotten himself in by the time he got to level 3. One of the leaders of a friendly local faction was a fairly talented forger of weapons, and she was particularly known for a type of magical handaxe that dealt extra fire damage and returned to hand after thrown. My PC got it into his head that he wanted to learn how to make those himself, so during some downtime he enlisted a couple of her apprentices to teach him what they could. He wasn't able to complete the magic weapon properly, but he did figure out some of the components its magic used. He thus learned two runes and applied them to his gauntlets, which now have Fire Rune (inspired by the heat of the forge and the fire of the handaxes; it manifests as a fiery gauntlet reaching from the ground) and the Cloud Rune (redirects attacks, inspired by how the handaxe redirects its momentum to return to the thrower).

I think that was about the point he stopped being a joke character.

By the time I grabbed Skill Expert at level 4, he had noticed that despite his overwhelming physical strength, he was limited by his very narrow access to magic. (The martial/caster divide is a topic that's been discussed to death here and in other places, so I thought, "why not use it for storytelling purposes?") While the main point of Skill Expert had been to bump STR to 18 and also grab Athletics expertise, I also gave him Arcana proficiency to reflect his initial efforts at expanding his horizons.

Much later, he hit level 7. Storm Rune was inspired by a druid buddy who was into tarot reading--I describe it as a charmed necklace he'd made with her assistance. The passive Arcana advantage played further into the "insecure about the martial/caster divide" angle.

He also picked up Magic Initiate (Druid) at around this time, so I flavored Runic Shield as an extension of that and of Storm Rune--causing plants to abruptly grow and impede attacks. Last we left him, he'd just hit level 9, so no thoughts on Great Stature or the next rune quite yet.

---

Anyway, the point of this rambling story of how this PC came about is this: I really like playing this guy. It's already fun to play into things like physically punching walls down, tearing apart metal objects bare-handed, and the like, but you could do that on a Barb arguably more easily. The story Rune Knight specifically helps me tell is that of a guy who, due to his physically imposing look, lack of formal education, and quiet personality, sometimes feels pigeonholed into the "dumb muscle" stereotype. This works out nicely when it's people trying to kill him who underestimate him (I got to do the "use Giant's Might while under the effects of Reduce" interaction and it felt awesome), but it's enough of an insecurity for him that he went out of his way to prove he can do some magic too.

You could tell a similar story with EK, but that has more of a formal-education feel to it due to using slots and the wizard list. Likewise Psi Warrior, where the abilities afforded feel like they have a slightly more coherent mechanical theme (short-range psionic telekinesis)--the greater variety in Rune Knight's effects is a feature for this character, not a bug.

And I think that's my explanation for why I like RK--one, because I like the character I play who happens to be RK, and two, because it gave me some hints on a way I could flesh that character out more as it became clear he was going to stick around a while.

I actually don't think every class or subclass needs to have its abilities be mechanically self-similar for the sake of coherence. It's the same argument I make when people claim Hexadin is a narratively suspicious multiclass (well, in that case I do it by pointing them at Stormlight Archive): if a class or subclass or any other set of powers feels disjointed to you, that's an opportunity for you to tell stories about how the character came into those powers, not necessarily a sign of bad design.

[Elenian]

Rune Knights inscribe magical sigils that grant them:

- Knowledge of the arcane and of the future
- Resistance to physical harm
- The ability to see in darkness and to plunge others into dream-filled trance
- More resistance to physical harm
- Expertise with tools and the ability to bind foes with tendrils of solid fire
- Sneakiness and the ability to make blows that strike you inflict wounds on those nearby

Like if you told me this class was called "Knower of the Elder Signs" and came from Halaster's Grimoire of the Mythos, I could maybe fathom the flavor...

[Kane0]

Some that come to mind;
- Invisibility, Flight, Gaseous Form (Oni)
- Enhanced Perception/Awareness (Ettin)
- Regeneration (Troll)


Oni:
Passive: Darkvision (including thru magical darkness)
1/SR: Bonus action turn invisible until start of next turn

Ettin:
Passive: Dont need to sleep
1/SR: Reaction to ignore an instance of being blinded, charmed, frightened or confused

Troll:
Passive: Immune to effects that reduce your Max HP
1/SR: Action, for 1 min heal prof bonus HP at the start of each turn unless you take fire or acid damage

[Skrum]

But more importantly... screw the fighter. The fighter gets... Action Surge... and Extra Attack. And we're tacking the barbarian onto that? Nah, let's tack on Extra Attack and Action Surge onto the barbarian please. Let me keep my d12 HD, increased mobility options/Initiative, immunity to Surprise, extra speed, Adv on Dex saves, and other goodies. Just add the 1 or 2 features that fighters get as an entire class onto the barbarian. Heck... you can probably just tack them on the base barbarian class and still let the barbarian take a subclass.

I mean, I like the fighter as the base for the warrior-type because it's both bland and has a good base of abilities. They attack up to 4 times. They get proficiency with all weapons and armor. They get extra ASI's. They can do the really cool and powerful action surge. They get a self-heal. Is it narratively boring? Yes, but that's a good thing IMO. I want the flavor to come from the subclass, or something I make up myself.

I think people missed it up thread, but if I was going to make barb a fighter subclass I'd do something like -

3rd: rage, reckless attack
6th: fast movement, skill proficiency
10th: brutal critical, danger sense, feral instincts
14th: relentless rage, indomitable will

I would play this version of the barb over any options that currently exist (well, at least if I was restricted to straight fighter (barb) or barb (subclass)).

[Witty Username]

I played a battle master for a birthday one shot a friend ran for us, and it was... okay. Rune Knight is the only fighter subclass that actually made me interested in playing a fighter long term, and it was because it had features that I could actually theme to my character. Any power level compared to other subclasses was secondary, it was just that it had features to play around with in realizing the character concept.

On this, I think there is a bit of discard and draw on this.
Some classes have strong themes, and do well in that space, Barbarian is a fine example but I think Paladin is the most indicative of it. But that does create friction with ideas outside that space. Fighter on the other end has this as an advantage ( I also note wizard on this) since they are light on inherent themes they are easier to fit a character to rather than the reverse.

Some direct examples, say I want to make a patient hunter type, as barbarian I could do this but I now have to get into the rage and reckless attack and what that means for this character. That can result in a fun and interesting character, but part of that is due to the inherent tension. On the other, fighter doesn't bring its own strong theme which allows for more design space for the sublcass but also a character. It can allow for things like species or background to get more focus as well.

I can definitely understand people having a preference but for me personally it depends a lot on my mood. Sometimes Monk or Ranger is just what the doctor ordered, other times Fighter is the ice cream base for the banana split to shine. One isn't worse or better than the other from a design point.