So besides a non-wildshape based nature class like a Shaman, a swordmage/magus like class and a pure psionics class (Which seems to be the big three mentioned in this thread).....what other base classes would fit to add to the roster?
Edit: I'd also like Blood Hunter to become its own class with more subclasses.
Yeah, those seem to be the main 4 classes mentioned:
Psion
Shaman
Magus
Blood Hunter
I would like a Warlord, Oracle/Seer, Runemage, and maybe a Witch or Bladesinger, but I want those 4 above classes more than the others.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Aaaaaaaaaaaand, now we're back to having Psionics Argument #3,681. Great.
Heck. Even I am managing to stay out of this one. And someone already got my Irish up first thing this morning. If I’m managing to keep a lid on my tendency to shout for Psionic Independence then you know it has to have been talked to death by now.
I'll second the need for a Warlord. I really, really want a fighter that fights with their brain as well as their weapon. A non-spellcasting, martial class with intelligence as a secondary score.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
There's been a lot of call over the years for a nonmagical ranger, as well. The Scout subclass for the rogue hits some of it, but many folks desire a pure survivalist. Something one can drop naked in the middle of an iceberg, deuce out, and come back six months later to find the character has built a house, a water purification system, an animal capture farm, backups for all those, and possibly their own multimedia center using nothing but their bare hands, their wits, and braids of pubic hair.
Not sure how well D&D5e can accommodate that sort of brutal survival fantasy, but I've seen many a call for it.
Yeah, those seem to be the main 4 classes mentioned:
Psion
Shaman
Magus
Blood Hunter
I would like a Warlord, Oracle/Seer, Runemage, and maybe a Witch or Bladesinger, but I want those 4 above classes more than the others.
I might even see Oracle/Seer as somehow tied into the Shaman idea as a potential subclass I’d done correctly.
Well, if I were designing it, it would be "connected" the same way the Paladin and Ranger are connected. They're both martial half-casters, one nature based, the other divine based. The Oracle/Seer would be a divine spell based half caster, and the Shaman would be a nature spell based half caster. There certainly could be a subclass of shaman devoted to discerning the future, like how there's a divination wizard and stars druid. Similar purpose, different mechanics and class.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
I'll second the need for a Warlord. I really, really want a fighter that fights with their brain as well as their weapon. A non-spellcasting, martial class with intelligence as a secondary score.
Same here, I would like a more utility sytle martial class. One less about beating everything with a weapon themselves and more about bettering there allies with support-like abilities. I also second it's main features being Int based.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
I'll second the need for a Warlord. I really, really want a fighter that fights with their brain as well as their weapon. A non-spellcasting, martial class with intelligence as a secondary score.
Same here, I would like a more utility sytle martial class. One less about beating everything with a weapon themselves and more about bettering there allies with support-like abilities. I also second it's main features being Int based.
I agree. It would be cool to have Intelligence based non-magical support abilities.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
So besides a non-wildshape based nature class like a Shaman, a swordmage/magus like class and a pure psionics class (Which seems to be the big three mentioned in this thread).....what other base classes would fit to add to the roster?
Edit: I'd also like Blood Hunter to become its own class with more subclasses.
Yeah, those seem to be the main 4 classes mentioned:
Psion
Shaman
Magus
Blood Hunter
I would like a Warlord, Oracle/Seer, Runemage, and maybe a Witch or Bladesinger, but I want those 4 above classes more than the others.
If you don't mind me asking, in what way would a Witch or Runemage differ from a Sorcerer, Wizard or Warlock mechanically?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
I would imagine that the reason those who subscribe to the OSR don't want more classes is because it doesn't fit what they think D&D should be. Am I right, grognards?
What did you just call me?!?
Grognard is a general term for old school players, or did I use the wrong term?
It is generally used as an insult.
Google doesn't exactly agree with you. Grognards don't agree with you either.
A grognard is indeed an old school player. Old folks like myself who refer to ourselves as grognards.
Generally, they like older games or older versions of games and sometimes have trouble adjusting to newer games and versions. You can use the term as an insult but if the person isn't 40+ years old it would be inappropriate as that person hasn't earned their spurs.
Now get off my lawn you rascals!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
If you don't mind me asking, in what way would a Witch or Runemage differ from a Sorcerer, Wizard or Warlock mechanically?
I don't mind.
First, the Witch. Witches are pretty similar to Warlocks and Wizards, but would work a bit differently. I personally see it as a darker side of the Wizard, using weird magic and fueling their powers with blood and bone magic. If you've ever read the Last Apprentice series by Joseph Delaney, that heavily inspires how I view a possible witch class in D&D. They would have different available arcane foci (bones, jack-o-lanterns, candles, etc), cast darker spells (hex, find familiar, inflict wounds, etc), and overall be a spookier blend of Warlocks, Wizards, and Death Clerics.
Second, the Runemage. They would have a different way of channeling their magic, runes, instead of spellcasting. These would scale when they level up, give them access to more at later levels, and so on. Subclasses would probably be based around the types of giant.
Does this help?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Second, the Runemage. They would have a different way of channeling their magic, runes, instead of spellcasting. These would scale when they level up, give them access to more at later levels, and so on. Subclasses would probably be based around the types of giant.
As great as that would be, I fear that the Rune Knight subclass will either prevent that, or immediately be overshadowed by that should it be made. It's probably not going to happen, because the theme is very similar. Which, in hindsight, probably means the Rune Knight should have been a martial subclass for the Rune Caster, instead of the Fighter.
If you don't mind me asking, in what way would a Witch or Runemage differ from a Sorcerer, Wizard or Warlock mechanically?
I don't mind.
First, the Witch. Witches are pretty similar to Warlocks and Wizards, but would work a bit differently. I personally see it as a darker side of the Wizard, using weird magic and fueling their powers with blood and bone magic. If you've ever read the Last Apprentice series by Joseph Delaney, that heavily inspires how I view a possible witch class in D&D. They would have different available arcane foci (bones, jack-o-lanterns, candles, etc), cast darker spells (hex, find familiar, inflict wounds, etc), and overall be a spookier blend of Warlocks, Wizards, and Death Clerics.
Second, the Runemage. They would have a different way of channeling their magic, runes, instead of spellcasting. These would scale when they level up, give them access to more at later levels, and so on. Subclasses would probably be based around the types of giant.
Does this help?
Witch sounds like a generic warlock. Runemage sounds like probably an artificer variant, depending on exactly what 'runes' mean.
If you don't mind me asking, in what way would a Witch or Runemage differ from a Sorcerer, Wizard or Warlock mechanically?
I don't mind.
First, the Witch. Witches are pretty similar to Warlocks and Wizards, but would work a bit differently. I personally see it as a darker side of the Wizard, using weird magic and fueling their powers with blood and bone magic. If you've ever read the Last Apprentice series by Joseph Delaney, that heavily inspires how I view a possible witch class in D&D. They would have different available arcane foci (bones, jack-o-lanterns, candles, etc), cast darker spells (hex, find familiar, inflict wounds, etc), and overall be a spookier blend of Warlocks, Wizards, and Death Clerics.
Second, the Runemage. They would have a different way of channeling their magic, runes, instead of spellcasting. These would scale when they level up, give them access to more at later levels, and so on. Subclasses would probably be based around the types of giant.
Does this help?
Witch sounds like a generic warlock. Runemage sounds like probably an artificer variant, depending on exactly what 'runes' mean.
Warlock, but no pacts, with spellcasting instead of pact magic, no eldritch invocations, a different (larger) spell list, and different overall abilities. I would love a rune based artificer, but I think there should be a runemage that has unique mechanics as well.
Second, the Runemage. They would have a different way of channeling their magic, runes, instead of spellcasting. These would scale when they level up, give them access to more at later levels, and so on. Subclasses would probably be based around the types of giant.
As great as that would be, I fear that the Rune Knight subclass will either prevent that, or immediately be overshadowed by that should it be made. It's probably not going to happen, because the theme is very similar. Which, in hindsight, probably means the Rune Knight should have been a martial subclass for the Rune Caster, instead of the Fighter.
Who cares? I mean, both the Eldritch Knight, Swords Bard, and Bladesinger exist. I think there's room in the game for a magic caster runemage and a combat focused rune knight.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
If you don't mind me asking, in what way would a Witch or Runemage differ from a Sorcerer, Wizard or Warlock mechanically?
I don't mind.
First, the Witch. Witches are pretty similar to Warlocks and Wizards, but would work a bit differently. I personally see it as a darker side of the Wizard, using weird magic and fueling their powers with blood and bone magic. If you've ever read the Last Apprentice series by Joseph Delaney, that heavily inspires how I view a possible witch class in D&D. They would have different available arcane foci (bones, jack-o-lanterns, candles, etc), cast darker spells (hex, find familiar, inflict wounds, etc), and overall be a spookier blend of Warlocks, Wizards, and Death Clerics.
Second, the Runemage. They would have a different way of channeling their magic, runes, instead of spellcasting. These would scale when they level up, give them access to more at later levels, and so on. Subclasses would probably be based around the types of giant.
Does this help?
It does, thank you. I forgot that Runes are very much connected to giants, but making their sub-classes be based on the different types of giant is a solid Idea.
I could see the Witch then having sub-classes based on a couple of concepts. One could be based on shape-shifting (both themselves and others), many witches are known for doing so and having another class that can morph into different creatures would be interesting. Having a more alchemist-style witch would be fun (And being the more nature style alchemist to the Artificers more magical/science alchemist). Maybe a witch subclass that enhances the base classes ability to use curses, hexes and other debuffs spells. Some interesting possibilities.
Warlord would be cool, but I don't think I'm in quite the right headspace to take a crack at it just now.
I would absolutely love a spell-less ranger. It'd be tricky, but I have a half-formed thought in my head of giving it something like the monk's martial arts dice to play of some of its abilities, as well as a point-based resource to fuel said abilities. Again, it's half-formed, but I think I may play around with it.
I've also been thinking (since before this thread, actually) of how a non-martial divine half-caster might work, and by and large I am kinda stumped. However, one thought that did occur is that the Channel Divinity mechanic is *seriously* underutilized in 5e. I think if I were to approach it, I'd lean more heavily into that and give a broader range of options you could choose from, rather than tying them to class/subclass. I'm not sure if that's enough, but I think that's a start.
I've also been thinking (since before this thread, actually) of how a non-martial divine half-caster might work, and by and large I am kinda stumped. However, one thought that did occur is that the Channel Divinity mechanic is *seriously* underutilized in 5e. I think if I were to approach it, I'd lean more heavily into that and give a broader range of options you could choose from, rather than tying them to class/subclass. I'm not sure if that's enough, but I think that's a start.
That could be cool. Maybe give them a list of 6-10 Channel Divinities that they can pick and choose from, taking 2 options, maybe later getting more (not being able to change them, though). They could get 1 use of Channel Divinity up until level 11, when they would get 2 uses. The subclasses could be: Oracle, Wanderer, Hallowed, and Gloam.
Maybe the class could be called the Herald? Seer? Blessed?
It wouldn't as much focus on the cleric-y things as much as it would on utility support spells.
Second, the Runemage. They would have a different way of channeling their magic, runes, instead of spellcasting. These would scale when they level up, give them access to more at later levels, and so on. Subclasses would probably be based around the types of giant.
As great as that would be, I fear that the Rune Knight subclass will either prevent that, or immediately be overshadowed by that should it be made. It's probably not going to happen, because the theme is very similar. Which, in hindsight, probably means the Rune Knight should have been a martial subclass for the Rune Caster, instead of the Fighter.
Who cares? I mean, both the Eldritch Knight, Swords Bard, and Bladesinger exist. I think there's room in the game for a magic caster runemage and a combat focused rune knight.
I would agree that there can be room for both the Rune Knight and a true Rune Caster. The Cleric has domains that give a taste of the Artificer (Forge), Wizard (Arcane) and Druid (Nature) classes. Both the Rogue and the Fighter have sub-classes that have a taste of the wizard class (Arcane Tricker and Eldritch Knight). The Divine Sorcerer shares the cleric spell list. Giving a base class a taste of a different class through a sub-class in not all that far-fetched.
I don't think its impossible to say that the Rune Knight could be the Fighter's taste of a Rune Caster class. Will it happen, possibly not. It's still fun to brainstorm though.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
Yeah, those seem to be the main 4 classes mentioned:
I would like a Warlord, Oracle/Seer, Runemage, and maybe a Witch or Bladesinger, but I want those 4 above classes more than the others.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Heck. Even I am managing to stay out of this one. And someone already got my Irish up first thing this morning. If I’m managing to keep a lid on my tendency to shout for Psionic Independence then you know it has to have been talked to death by now.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I might even see Oracle/Seer as somehow tied into the Shaman idea as a potential subclass I’d done correctly.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I'll second the need for a Warlord. I really, really want a fighter that fights with their brain as well as their weapon. A non-spellcasting, martial class with intelligence as a secondary score.
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
There's been a lot of call over the years for a nonmagical ranger, as well. The Scout subclass for the rogue hits some of it, but many folks desire a pure survivalist. Something one can drop naked in the middle of an iceberg, deuce out, and come back six months later to find the character has built a house, a water purification system, an animal capture farm, backups for all those, and possibly their own multimedia center using nothing but their bare hands, their wits, and braids of pubic hair.
Not sure how well D&D5e can accommodate that sort of brutal survival fantasy, but I've seen many a call for it.
Please do not contact or message me.
Well, if I were designing it, it would be "connected" the same way the Paladin and Ranger are connected. They're both martial half-casters, one nature based, the other divine based. The Oracle/Seer would be a divine spell based half caster, and the Shaman would be a nature spell based half caster. There certainly could be a subclass of shaman devoted to discerning the future, like how there's a divination wizard and stars druid. Similar purpose, different mechanics and class.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Same here, I would like a more utility sytle martial class. One less about beating everything with a weapon themselves and more about bettering there allies with support-like abilities. I also second it's main features being Int based.
"Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
Characters for Tenebris Sine Fine
RoughCoronet's Greater Wills
I agree. It would be cool to have Intelligence based non-magical support abilities.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
If you don't mind me asking, in what way would a Witch or Runemage differ from a Sorcerer, Wizard or Warlock mechanically?
"Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
Characters for Tenebris Sine Fine
RoughCoronet's Greater Wills
Google doesn't exactly agree with you. Grognards don't agree with you either.
A grognard is indeed an old school player. Old folks like myself who refer to ourselves as grognards.
Generally, they like older games or older versions of games and sometimes have trouble adjusting to newer games and versions. You can use the term as an insult but if the person isn't 40+ years old it would be inappropriate as that person hasn't earned their spurs.
Now get off my lawn you rascals!
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
I don't mind.
First, the Witch. Witches are pretty similar to Warlocks and Wizards, but would work a bit differently. I personally see it as a darker side of the Wizard, using weird magic and fueling their powers with blood and bone magic. If you've ever read the Last Apprentice series by Joseph Delaney, that heavily inspires how I view a possible witch class in D&D. They would have different available arcane foci (bones, jack-o-lanterns, candles, etc), cast darker spells (hex, find familiar, inflict wounds, etc), and overall be a spookier blend of Warlocks, Wizards, and Death Clerics.
Second, the Runemage. They would have a different way of channeling their magic, runes, instead of spellcasting. These would scale when they level up, give them access to more at later levels, and so on. Subclasses would probably be based around the types of giant.
Does this help?
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
As great as that would be, I fear that the Rune Knight subclass will either prevent that, or immediately be overshadowed by that should it be made. It's probably not going to happen, because the theme is very similar. Which, in hindsight, probably means the Rune Knight should have been a martial subclass for the Rune Caster, instead of the Fighter.
Witch sounds like a generic warlock. Runemage sounds like probably an artificer variant, depending on exactly what 'runes' mean.
Somebody has to stop making stuff up.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
Warlock, but no pacts, with spellcasting instead of pact magic, no eldritch invocations, a different (larger) spell list, and different overall abilities. I would love a rune based artificer, but I think there should be a runemage that has unique mechanics as well.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Who cares? I mean, both the Eldritch Knight, Swords Bard, and Bladesinger exist. I think there's room in the game for a magic caster runemage and a combat focused rune knight.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
It does, thank you. I forgot that Runes are very much connected to giants, but making their sub-classes be based on the different types of giant is a solid Idea.
I could see the Witch then having sub-classes based on a couple of concepts. One could be based on shape-shifting (both themselves and others), many witches are known for doing so and having another class that can morph into different creatures would be interesting. Having a more alchemist-style witch would be fun (And being the more nature style alchemist to the Artificers more magical/science alchemist). Maybe a witch subclass that enhances the base classes ability to use curses, hexes and other debuffs spells. Some interesting possibilities.
"Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
Characters for Tenebris Sine Fine
RoughCoronet's Greater Wills
Warlord would be cool, but I don't think I'm in quite the right headspace to take a crack at it just now.
I would absolutely love a spell-less ranger. It'd be tricky, but I have a half-formed thought in my head of giving it something like the monk's martial arts dice to play of some of its abilities, as well as a point-based resource to fuel said abilities. Again, it's half-formed, but I think I may play around with it.
I've also been thinking (since before this thread, actually) of how a non-martial divine half-caster might work, and by and large I am kinda stumped. However, one thought that did occur is that the Channel Divinity mechanic is *seriously* underutilized in 5e. I think if I were to approach it, I'd lean more heavily into that and give a broader range of options you could choose from, rather than tying them to class/subclass. I'm not sure if that's enough, but I think that's a start.
That could be cool. Maybe give them a list of 6-10 Channel Divinities that they can pick and choose from, taking 2 options, maybe later getting more (not being able to change them, though). They could get 1 use of Channel Divinity up until level 11, when they would get 2 uses. The subclasses could be: Oracle, Wanderer, Hallowed, and Gloam.
Maybe the class could be called the Herald? Seer? Blessed?
It wouldn't as much focus on the cleric-y things as much as it would on utility support spells.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I would agree that there can be room for both the Rune Knight and a true Rune Caster. The Cleric has domains that give a taste of the Artificer (Forge), Wizard (Arcane) and Druid (Nature) classes. Both the Rogue and the Fighter have sub-classes that have a taste of the wizard class (Arcane Tricker and Eldritch Knight). The Divine Sorcerer shares the cleric spell list. Giving a base class a taste of a different class through a sub-class in not all that far-fetched.
I don't think its impossible to say that the Rune Knight could be the Fighter's taste of a Rune Caster class. Will it happen, possibly not. It's still fun to brainstorm though.
"Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
Characters for Tenebris Sine Fine
RoughCoronet's Greater Wills