@drag0n_77 - 2/3 of that you get with Echo Knight fighter
Not what I envision, no. Echo Knight can only sustain a single Echo until 18th level. A summoning class would start with 2 or 3 rather weak minions, but as they level the minions get stronger, and you can control more of them, up to 5 or so.
Different subclasses can use them in different ways. For example, the Necromancer can sacrifice them for an explosion of Necrotic Damage. The not-quite clones would cost health to create, but they'd have a lot more offensive potential than the others, almost another PC -- but this comes at the cost of you taking damage if they are destroyed, and their own health is extremely low. The quasi-magical effect one would be more of a support, able to initiate a number of supportive effects through their summons, relying on positioning them for optimal effect.
I would love to play a class that is a more dedicated minion or summons control like this.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
It would be a half caster... just like paladin, ranger, and artificer.
It would empower its weapon with magic for striking... just like paladin and ranger.
It's essentially an arcane/elemental version of paladin and ranger and would be on par power wise.
Yes you can multiclass wizard and fighter. But then you don't blend magic and combat seamlessly like paladin and ranger. You can just choose to hit half as well as a fighter, or cast half as well as a wizard. You can multiclass fighter and cleric to make a 'paladin'. It's not a paladin though, and fails to play like one should.
I've seen concepts for sword/weapon mages or magus, like THIS one. I understand the theme, but as that example highlights, many who want new classes actually want power creep (or in that case, blatantly overpowered) levels of utility.
My main concern with sword-mages is this: Casters have to invest in their primary spell casting stat to increase their spell casting to-Hit and/or their save DC's. This is part of the balance in the game. Sword-mages would either be:
Overpowered if their spell to-hit or save DC is is replaced by the weapon attack To-Hit. IE: the spell is stored in the weapon, successfully hitting the target with the weapon delivers the spell. This would allow the class to focus heavily on their martial abilities and get spell levels of damage or utility for 'free'.
Overpowered if spells stored in their weapons are not lost on successful saving throws. IE: use a spell slot to cast a spell with a 100% chance it gets applied, given enough tries.
On the other hand, if a melee weapon attack hits but the spell doesn't take effect because the target still has to and succeeds a follow-up saving throw, then at best, this class would have better action economy than other classes by having the option to use their action to imbue their weapons with a spell, that will trigger in another round. Mild levels of power-creep.
In order to not make this concept overpowered, I really don't see how it doesn't become nothing more than a new martial class with a re-skinned smite.
We have a gish which ties spells in its weapons. Two in fact (paladin and ranger). They're not broken overpowered. One is even considered underpowered.
Sadly both are extremely fixed themewise, and so neither works as an arcane/elemental gish.
It's not impossible to make a balanced arcane/elemental half caster. Just throwing out the most overpowered example you can find as proof it will never work is a strawman.
I think just about 95% of character ideas can be pulled off with a single class. There's a ton of subclasses now, and on top of that, you can multiclass or even homebrew.
That said, while I feel it would overlap with the Bard and so it shouldn't exist, I would like to see a Lord of the Rings inspired "Loremaster" class: combatively weak but focused on healing and friendly to low-magic settings. Similar to the Scholar class in Adventures in Middle -Earth.
i don’t mean multiple pets I mean a single creature. But a class where this a principal trait even beastmaster ranger this is more of an additional mechanic than the principal one .
i don’t want to litter the battlefield and slow up combat as much as I want something that works symbiotically. I would almost make it have zero weapon proficiencies
Edit - in essence the creature would be the character and the owner would be the familiar.
Ok, so in an adventuring party today, some characters would be melee-focused and others would be skills/social focused. 2 or more classes to get 2 or more jobs done (well).
Enter your 'beastmaster'. During combat, the 'beast' is a melee-focused or caster-focused combat pillar in the group. You pick your creature to have good AC, good action economy... good combat abilities. Outside of combat, the beast is a foot-note and your 'character' takes center stage as a focused skill character or a face character.
Congratulations, you've created a class concept that replaces what would have taken two characters to do before.
It was not my intention to make a straw man argument. It was pure coincidence that I read that proposed Gish class just before reading this thread. And my point was that people that want new classes, usually want power creep (even if they don't realize it themselves). There's not much room left for new game mechanics (class wise) that won't simply step on the toes of other existing classes.
It is true that it wouldn't be impossible to make a balanced arcane half caster, although the concept at this point would be difficult to reign in and maintain balance. Spells are incredibly diverse and being able to take advantage of wasted turns to store a spell in a weapon, or having enough intel to prepare a spell before initiative is already super strong. If those spells are more than just damage, then a Gish can do in one turn what it would take 2 characters to do. That's power creep. If the stored spells are just limited to pure damage spells (not aoe), then I don't see how this class wouldn't just be a re-skinned arcane 'paladin' instead of a divine paladin.
At this point I think that we need half classes/subclass+/prestige classes (whatever you want to call them).
There are several concepts where the concept simultaneously does not make a satisfying subclass, but overlaps too much with a main class. For example a swordmage or death knight would play basically the same as paladin in many ways, but thematically simply do not fit with the paladin main chassis at all. The divine spell list, lay on hands, sacred oath, divine sense, radiant damage smites all simply don't make sense on such a class. However many other things would overlap too much to be their own class.
A half class could work like the class feature variants, but the replacement features you get are pre-set. There could even be subclasses designed to function with them.
A swordmage would be built on a paladin chassis, but divine sense, lay on hands, sacred oath, and the paladin spell list would be replaced with things things which suit (only working up to lvl 6 here), fighting style, spellcasting progression, divine health (renamed), divine smite (elemental damage), extra attack, and a different aura instead of protection would work as replacement features in the same way as class variant features (but fixed.
It is true that it wouldn't be impossible to make a balanced arcane half caster, although the concept at this point would be difficult to reign in and maintain balance. Spells are incredibly diverse and being able to take advantage of wasted turns to store a spell in a weapon, or having enough intel to prepare a spell before initiative is already super strong. If those spells are more than just damage, then a Gish can do in one turn what it would take 2 characters to do. That's power creep. If the stored spells are just limited to pure damage spells (not aoe), then I don't see how this class wouldn't just be a re-skinned arcane 'paladin' instead of a divine paladin.
I don't understand the logic that this is unbalanced. We have it in game already. Ensnaring strike, hail of thorns, searing smite, thunderous smite, wrathful smite, branding smite, blinding smite, lightning arrow, staggering smite, and banishing smite. I'm talking about that when I talk about weaving magic and combat together. These spells work by casting on a bonus action, and then remaining on the weapon for 1 min or until they manage to hit with a weapon attack. Are paladin and ranger unbalanced classes to be able to do this?
Because spells are incredibly diverse and combat in 5e is front loaded (ie: combat doesn't last very long). Let me paint a scenario where a Swordmage has a repertoire of level 1 wizard spells they are able to imbue into their melee weapon. In all cases, in the event the Swordmage hits on a turn, they do weapon damage PLUS one of the below:
Ice Knife (+1d10 piercing + 5ft AoE DEX save for another 2d6 cold damage)
Magic Missile (+3d4+3 force to one target, or up to 1d4+1 force to 3 targets)
Ray of Sickness (+2d8 poison + CON save or suffer poisoned condition)
Sleep (potentially inflict Unconscious condition on many targets)
Hideous Laughter (WIS save or suffer Prone AND Incapacitated conditions)
Thunderwave (CON save or all creatures in a area within a 15 ft cube take 2d8 Thunder and are pushed 10 ft away on a fail, etc..)
That's just level 1 using only wizard spells. In situations where the Swordmage can prepare, or use otherwise wasted turns to imbue a spell, they end up doing the work of 2 classes in one single turn.
The Swordmage fills several roles given the circumstance.
Magic Missile is akin to the arcane version of a plain smite; extra damage at the cost of a spell slot.
Ice Knife and Thunderwave gives a Swordmage the ability to do AoE damage while being engaged in melee, something *usually* reserved for classes that do not want to ever be in melee.
Ray of Sickness straight up deprecates a poisoner's kit. If you want to poison enemies, pick a Swordmage.
Sleep! OMG. Say your Swordmage is high enough level to have 2 melee attacks. The first does damage then puts the creature to sleep. Then your second attack gets advantage (due to prone) AND is automatically a critical if it hits due to Unconscious condition.
Hideous Laughter is similar to sleep, but requires a save and can't critical. But still, Prone gives advantage on follow-up hits.
That's JUST level 1 wizard spells and from my point of view, is already unbalanced.
A swordmage would not be able to put magic missile or ice knife or ray of sickness or sleep or hideous laughter or thunderwave in their weapon.
Can someone please point me to the part in those spells description which says '1 bonus action' and 'The next time you hit a creature with a weapon attack before this spell ends'. As nowhere in those spells description can I spot it.
They would cast branding smite as a bonus action, and then hit someone for fire damage, or wrathful smite and cause the enemy to be frightened. Or some new freezing strike spell which does frost damage and slows the enemies movement.
If that is overpowered, then paladin and ranger are also overpowered.
There is no such thing as a Swordmage in any official content, so asking us to point you to rules makes no sense. You are talking about making a whole new class, which has no rules attached to it yet, just a concept.
They would cast branding smite as a bonus action, and then hit someone for fire damage, or wrathful smite and cause the enemy to be frightened. Or some new freezing strike spell which does frost damage and slows the enemies movement.
That's not overpowered, but it is just a paladin with different spell names. Nothing mechanically different about them, just reskinned and renamed spells/smites. I don't see how this warrants a new class all it's own.
If you imbue a spell before initiative is rolled, and the combat only lasts 2 rounds (not unreasonable), then the Swordmage gets 3 turns worth of 'power' while the other classes only get 2.
Presuming neither side has surprise and the PC goes first. The Wizard will use their first turn to cast Sleep. They can cast this spell from 20 feet away. If the bandit falls to sleep, they can use their next turn to cast Fire bolt. If the bandit passes the save, they can use their movement to get out of range of the bandit's melee attacks.
The Gish will use their first turn to imbue Sleep onto their weapon. The Bandit gets a turn to hit them, possibly breaking their concentration. Then they can attack the bandit. If the attack misses, they just wasted two turns. If it hits, they have done basically the same amount of stuff that the wizard has, and they had to take damage.
If you argue that the gish can imbue before initiative, the gish is doing well because they got an extra turn to act, not becuase they are overpowered.
All in all, the wizard is doing much better in this scenario.
There is no such thing as a Swordmage in any official content, so asking us to point you to rules makes no sense. You are talking about making a whole new class, which has no rules attached to it yet, just a concept.
They would cast branding smite as a bonus action, and then hit someone for fire damage, or wrathful smite and cause the enemy to be frightened. Or some new freezing strike spell which does frost damage and slows the enemies movement.
That's not overpowered, but it is just a paladin with different spell names. Nothing mechanically different about them, just reskinned and renamed spells/smites. I don't see how this warrants a new class all it's own.
That's why I suggested the half class concept. There are some concepts which cannot work as subclasses, but aren't different enough to be a full class as they have too much overlap.
If you try to reskin your paladin as an elemental swordmage, you're still forced into all the divine holy warrior stuff, and you're forced into an oath as well. You have a spell list lacking things like ice knife, and being full of spells like bless and heroism.
There are several concepts which fall into this design space black hole, and 5e has completely failed to do them justice.
Sounds easy enough to Homebrew. Start with a paladin, rename everything to have an arcane flair instead of divine and there you go. For example: instead of oaths, you specialize in schools of magic.
Edit: Ooops. Can't homebrew a whole class (on D&D Beyond)
Ok first draft of a half class idea. What do people think of this idea for classes which don't fit neatly into subclasses or full classes?
Half Classes
For certain class concepts, the currently available classes and subclasses do not match the theme or mechanics in a satisfying or coherant manner. When forced into a subclass, they remain tied too heavily to the main class, often giving them class features which simply to not make sense for the concept.
However these concepts also have considerable role and mechanical overlap with existing classes, meaning that there is not enough of an arguement to be made for their implementation as a full class.
Half classes are a proposal to build on the class feature variants mechanics, with the half class providing its own feature variants which replace those in the base class. These half classes would have their own set of subclasses, designed around the new half class mechanics.
It would be a half caster... just like paladin, ranger, and artificer.
It would empower its weapon with magic for striking... just like paladin and ranger.
It's essentially an arcane/elemental version of paladin and ranger and would be on par power wise.
Yes you can multiclass wizard and fighter. But then you don't blend magic and combat seamlessly like paladin and ranger. You can just choose to hit half as well as a fighter, or cast half as well as a wizard. You can multiclass fighter and cleric to make a 'paladin'. It's not a paladin though, and fails to play like one should.
I've seen concepts for sword/weapon mages or magus, like THIS one. I understand the theme, but as that example highlights, many who want new classes actually want power creep (or in that case, blatantly overpowered) levels of utility.
My main concern with sword-mages is this: Casters have to invest in their primary spell casting stat to increase their spell casting to-Hit and/or their save DC's. This is part of the balance in the game. Sword-mages would either be:
Overpowered if their spell to-hit or save DC is is replaced by the weapon attack To-Hit. IE: the spell is stored in the weapon, successfully hitting the target with the weapon delivers the spell. This would allow the class to focus heavily on their martial abilities and get spell levels of damage or utility for 'free'.
Overpowered if spells stored in their weapons are not lost on successful saving throws. IE: use a spell slot to cast a spell with a 100% chance it gets applied, given enough tries.
On the other hand, if a melee weapon attack hits but the spell doesn't take effect because the target still has to and succeeds a follow-up saving throw, then at best, this class would have better action economy than other classes by having the option to use their action to imbue their weapons with a spell, that will trigger in another round. Mild levels of power-creep.
In order to not make this concept overpowered, I really don't see how it doesn't become nothing more than a new martial class with a re-skinned smite.
If you want to argue against adding more classes in the game, I suggest you go to the other thread. This one is for ideas for new classes, not debating whether or not the game needs more.
Also, I do not want the class to be overpowered. I want the class to be on par with the Paladin. If you think there are balance issues with the class I recently made, go to the thread you linked above and give your feedback. I am aware it has problems, as every class in the first draft does. If you think you can design a class better and more balanced on the first try, do it yourself. If you disagree with the concept, go to the "Lack of new classes in 5e" thread. My thread is for feedback, the other is for debating, this one is for ideas. Please respect the topics of the threads.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Ok first draft of a half class idea. What do people think of this idea for classes which don't fit neatly into subclasses or full classes? (snipped)
I know you're trying to help with a possible gish class as just a variant paladin, but I don't think it would work in 5e. It would have to be a 6e that completely changes how classes work.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
I mean 5e has shown an almost complete refusal to add any new classes at all, so in reality any new class suggestion is futile.
It's my main dislike of 5e as a whole. I'm hoping 6e will start from scratch with its design philosophy on classes and characters, while keeping 5e's core rules.
I'm not suprised people dislike the half classes idea. One camp says you can make a good gish from either EK or just pretending in your mind that your paladins lay on hands is actually fire damage, and don't need anything more. The other camp wants a full new class or nothing. A compromise makes both groups unhappy.
I would love to play a class that is a more dedicated minion or summons control like this.
"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
We have a gish which ties spells in its weapons. Two in fact (paladin and ranger). They're not broken overpowered. One is even considered underpowered.
Sadly both are extremely fixed themewise, and so neither works as an arcane/elemental gish.
It's not impossible to make a balanced arcane/elemental half caster. Just throwing out the most overpowered example you can find as proof it will never work is a strawman.
I think just about 95% of character ideas can be pulled off with a single class. There's a ton of subclasses now, and on top of that, you can multiclass or even homebrew.
That said, while I feel it would overlap with the Bard and so it shouldn't exist, I would like to see a Lord of the Rings inspired "Loremaster" class: combatively weak but focused on healing and friendly to low-magic settings. Similar to the Scholar class in Adventures in Middle -Earth.
Wizard (Gandalf) of the Tolkien Club
If you focus on maximizing social aspects, then your summoned creatures will be less powerful. Anyways, a well built warlock can take up three roles in a party: Social, with it's Charisma focus and various invocations, combat by simply spamming agonizing blasts, and exploration with a boosted familiar. You can even multiclass to fill every role in a party. Check out this thread: https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/dungeons-dragons-discussion/tips-tactics/81511-5e-throwdowns-d-d-beyond-edition-3-the-solo-tour
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
It was not my intention to make a straw man argument. It was pure coincidence that I read that proposed Gish class just before reading this thread. And my point was that people that want new classes, usually want power creep (even if they don't realize it themselves). There's not much room left for new game mechanics (class wise) that won't simply step on the toes of other existing classes.
It is true that it wouldn't be impossible to make a balanced arcane half caster, although the concept at this point would be difficult to reign in and maintain balance. Spells are incredibly diverse and being able to take advantage of wasted turns to store a spell in a weapon, or having enough intel to prepare a spell before initiative is already super strong. If those spells are more than just damage, then a Gish can do in one turn what it would take 2 characters to do. That's power creep. If the stored spells are just limited to pure damage spells (not aoe), then I don't see how this class wouldn't just be a re-skinned arcane 'paladin' instead of a divine paladin.
At this point I think that we need half classes/subclass+/prestige classes (whatever you want to call them).
There are several concepts where the concept simultaneously does not make a satisfying subclass, but overlaps too much with a main class. For example a swordmage or death knight would play basically the same as paladin in many ways, but thematically simply do not fit with the paladin main chassis at all. The divine spell list, lay on hands, sacred oath, divine sense, radiant damage smites all simply don't make sense on such a class. However many other things would overlap too much to be their own class.
A half class could work like the class feature variants, but the replacement features you get are pre-set. There could even be subclasses designed to function with them.
A swordmage would be built on a paladin chassis, but divine sense, lay on hands, sacred oath, and the paladin spell list would be replaced with things things which suit (only working up to lvl 6 here), fighting style, spellcasting progression, divine health (renamed), divine smite (elemental damage), extra attack, and a different aura instead of protection would work as replacement features in the same way as class variant features (but fixed.
I don't understand the logic that this is unbalanced. We have it in game already. Ensnaring strike, hail of thorns, searing smite, thunderous smite, wrathful smite, branding smite, blinding smite, lightning arrow, staggering smite, and banishing smite. I'm talking about that when I talk about weaving magic and combat together. These spells work by casting on a bonus action, and then remaining on the weapon for 1 min or until they manage to hit with a weapon attack. Are paladin and ranger unbalanced classes to be able to do this?
Because spells are incredibly diverse and combat in 5e is front loaded (ie: combat doesn't last very long). Let me paint a scenario where a Swordmage has a repertoire of level 1 wizard spells they are able to imbue into their melee weapon. In all cases, in the event the Swordmage hits on a turn, they do weapon damage PLUS one of the below:
That's just level 1 using only wizard spells. In situations where the Swordmage can prepare, or use otherwise wasted turns to imbue a spell, they end up doing the work of 2 classes in one single turn.
The Swordmage fills several roles given the circumstance.
That's JUST level 1 wizard spells and from my point of view, is already unbalanced.
And they just spent two turns doing that.
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
A swordmage would not be able to put magic missile or ice knife or ray of sickness or sleep or hideous laughter or thunderwave in their weapon.
Can someone please point me to the part in those spells description which says '1 bonus action' and 'The next time you hit a creature with a weapon attack before this spell ends'. As nowhere in those spells description can I spot it.
They would cast branding smite as a bonus action, and then hit someone for fire damage, or wrathful smite and cause the enemy to be frightened. Or some new freezing strike spell which does frost damage and slows the enemies movement.
If that is overpowered, then paladin and ranger are also overpowered.
There is no such thing as a Swordmage in any official content, so asking us to point you to rules makes no sense. You are talking about making a whole new class, which has no rules attached to it yet, just a concept.
That's not overpowered, but it is just a paladin with different spell names. Nothing mechanically different about them, just reskinned and renamed spells/smites. I don't see how this warrants a new class all it's own.
If you imbue a spell before initiative is rolled, and the combat only lasts 2 rounds (not unreasonable), then the Swordmage gets 3 turns worth of 'power' while the other classes only get 2.
Here is a breakdown. We have a level 2 wizard, with the spells Sleep and Fire bolt, and we have a level 2 Gish, who knows Sleep.
They are fighting a Bandit.
Presuming neither side has surprise and the PC goes first. The Wizard will use their first turn to cast Sleep. They can cast this spell from 20 feet away. If the bandit falls to sleep, they can use their next turn to cast Fire bolt. If the bandit passes the save, they can use their movement to get out of range of the bandit's melee attacks.
The Gish will use their first turn to imbue Sleep onto their weapon. The Bandit gets a turn to hit them, possibly breaking their concentration. Then they can attack the bandit. If the attack misses, they just wasted two turns. If it hits, they have done basically the same amount of stuff that the wizard has, and they had to take damage.
If you argue that the gish can imbue before initiative, the gish is doing well because they got an extra turn to act, not becuase they are overpowered.
All in all, the wizard is doing much better in this scenario.
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
That's why I suggested the half class concept. There are some concepts which cannot work as subclasses, but aren't different enough to be a full class as they have too much overlap.
If you try to reskin your paladin as an elemental swordmage, you're still forced into all the divine holy warrior stuff, and you're forced into an oath as well. You have a spell list lacking things like ice knife, and being full of spells like bless and heroism.
There are several concepts which fall into this design space black hole, and 5e has completely failed to do them justice.
Sounds easy enough to Homebrew. Start with a paladin, rename everything to have an arcane flair instead of divine and there you go. For example: instead of oaths, you specialize in schools of magic.
Edit: Ooops. Can't homebrew a whole class (on D&D Beyond)
Still not sure what the best name would be for the concept.
Half classes? Subclass Plus? Variant Classes? Prestige Classes?
Ok first draft of a half class idea. What do people think of this idea for classes which don't fit neatly into subclasses or full classes?
Half Classes
For certain class concepts, the currently available classes and subclasses do not match the theme or
mechanics in a satisfying or coherant manner. When forced into a subclass, they remain tied too
heavily to the main class, often giving them class features which simply to not make sense for the
concept.
However these concepts also have considerable role and mechanical overlap with existing classes,
meaning that there is not enough of an arguement to be made for their implementation as a full class.
Half classes are a proposal to build on the class feature variants mechanics, with the half class
providing its own feature variants which replace those in the base class. These half classes would
have their own set of subclasses, designed around the new half class mechanics.
Swordmage Paladin Half Class
Proficiency Replacements
Equipment Replacements
Arcane Attunement
Replaces Lay on Hands
Magesight
Replaces Divine Sense
Spellcasting (Swordmage)
Replaces Spellcasting
Arcane Strike
Replaces Divine Smite
Improved Arcane Strike
Replaces Improved Divine Smite
Counterstrike
Replaces Cleansing Touch
If you want to argue against adding more classes in the game, I suggest you go to the other thread. This one is for ideas for new classes, not debating whether or not the game needs more.
Also, I do not want the class to be overpowered. I want the class to be on par with the Paladin. If you think there are balance issues with the class I recently made, go to the thread you linked above and give your feedback. I am aware it has problems, as every class in the first draft does. If you think you can design a class better and more balanced on the first try, do it yourself. If you disagree with the concept, go to the "Lack of new classes in 5e" thread. My thread is for feedback, the other is for debating, this one is for ideas. Please respect the topics of the threads.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I know you're trying to help with a possible gish class as just a variant paladin, but I don't think it would work in 5e. It would have to be a 6e that completely changes how classes work.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I mean 5e has shown an almost complete refusal to add any new classes at all, so in reality any new class suggestion is futile.
It's my main dislike of 5e as a whole. I'm hoping 6e will start from scratch with its design philosophy on classes and characters, while keeping 5e's core rules.
I'm not suprised people dislike the half classes idea. One camp says you can make a good gish from either EK or just pretending in your mind that your paladins lay on hands is actually fire damage, and don't need anything more. The other camp wants a full new class or nothing. A compromise makes both groups unhappy.
I agree that it is unlikely to add more classes, but it's worth a try.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms