PHB is going to be left to limited size, so I think we will be stuck with the traditional 12 classes we have. However Artificer will probably be re-added later on as an Expert Class, which means to balance things out we should get a new caster, a new warrior and a new priest.
I would like to see Eldritch Knight split off from fighter into it's own warrior class as an arcane half-caster, since we already have Paladin (divine) and Ranger (primal). Where it becomes a mixture of where Eldritch Knight currently is and Bladesinger, so when it gets extra attack it can switch a single attack for a cantrip and instead of getting action surge, it gets essentially a once per short rest quickened spell, able to cast a spell with a duration of 1 action as a bonus action, once per short rest, increasing to twice in tier 3. Since cantrips scale to level, no need to get more extra attacks past level 5, instead gaining advantage on their cantrip attack in tier 3.
For caster, it's a bit difficult to say, perhaps something more summon or necromancy based, perhaps from class features, still getting arcane spell list tho not evocation or abjuration but getting bonuses to conjuration and necromancy
For priest, I'd like to see something kind of like a primal based celestial warlock, not entirely a full caster but getting some strong healing options and instead of getting eldritch blast, getting something that heals party members via damaging targets or some other interesting ideas like that.
I would like to see Eldritch Knight split off from fighter into it's own warrior class as an arcane half-caster, since we already have Paladin (divine) and Ranger (primal). Where it becomes a mixture of where Eldritch Knight currently is and Bladesinger, so when it gets extra attack it can switch a single attack for a cantrip and instead of getting action surge, it gets essentially a once per short rest quickened spell, able to cast a spell with a duration of 1 action as a bonus action, once per short rest, increasing to twice in tier 3. Since cantrips scale to level, no need to get more extra attacks past level 5, instead gaining advantage on their cantrip attack in tier 3.
Yeah, some kind of spellblade is just begging to be made. It's realized through so many subclasses - eldritch knight (which is not, in fact, eldritch), bladesinger, hexblade - but they're all not quite it.
For caster, it's a bit difficult to say, perhaps something more summon or necromancy based, perhaps from class features, still getting arcane spell list tho not evocation or abjuration but getting bonuses to conjuration and necromancy
A psionic class. With a different casting system. Also asking to be made. Current implementations... leave much to be desired.
There will be no new classes in the 1DD PHB. Frankly at the rate the community is going we'll be lucky if the original R5e twelve all make it in. We're in real danger of losing a couple of the 'outlier' classes like sorcerer, warlock or monk.
I can't imagine Monk getting axed at any point, but I can imagine it getting a major overhaul like we've seen with Rangers.
As for new classes... I don't personally think they'll be making any new ones. They seem hesitant to even include Artificer in 1D&D. I find it hard to think of what new classes the game could even support that wouldn't get the feeling that it could have been a subclass instead. I even recently tried my hand at a Psionics class that I actually ended up spending way too much time and energy on, but even that could probably have just been separated into subclasses (similar to the actual psionics subclasses they've already released).
If I had one thing i'd like to see, maybe some kind of Shaman character, specifically a fully dedicated Wild spellcaster who isn't tied down to wild shape as a major class feature. Not that I actively dislike Druids or anything, but I've seen a few people who have been interested in characters that are built around nature and druid-like features, but aren't interested in being turned into animals.
There will be no new classes in the 1DD PHB. Frankly at the rate the community is going we'll be lucky if the original R5e twelve all make it in. We're in real danger of losing a couple of the 'outlier' classes like sorcerer, warlock or monk.
that would honestly suck, i love my cha casters, and its fun to sometimes be a punchy goku ripoff (yes ik its cheesy but fun be fun)
There will be no new classes in the 1DD PHB. Frankly at the rate the community is going we'll be lucky if the original R5e twelve all make it in. We're in real danger of losing a couple of the 'outlier' classes like sorcerer, warlock or monk.
If WotC dares to cut something out, community will storm their office with torches and pitchforks.
I would like to see Eldritch Knight split off from fighter into it's own warrior class as an arcane half-caster, since we already have Paladin (divine) and Ranger (primal). Where it becomes a mixture of where Eldritch Knight currently is and Bladesinger, so when it gets extra attack it can switch a single attack for a cantrip and instead of getting action surge, it gets essentially a once per short rest quickened spell, able to cast a spell with a duration of 1 action as a bonus action, once per short rest, increasing to twice in tier 3. Since cantrips scale to level, no need to get more extra attacks past level 5, instead gaining advantage on their cantrip attack in tier 3.
Yeah, some kind of spellblade is just begging to be made. It's realized through so many subclasses - eldritch knight (which is not, in fact, eldritch), bladesinger, hexblade - but they're all not quite it.
For caster, it's a bit difficult to say, perhaps something more summon or necromancy based, perhaps from class features, still getting arcane spell list tho not evocation or abjuration but getting bonuses to conjuration and necromancy
A psionic class. With a different casting system. Also asking to be made. Current implementations... leave much to be desired.
and which Over class would it belong to? Psions and Psionics in D&D have always been a problematic system/set of mechanics. The balance is always off. And apparently the only way to "balance" them; means then they are no longer psionics according to the "fans."
and which Over class would it belong to? Psions and Psionics in D&D have always been a problematic system/set of mechanics. The balance is always off. And apparently the only way to "balance" them; means then they are no longer psionics according to the "fans."
The gish is definitely a part of warrior group. Psionics have indeed never quite been implemented properly, and given that WotC can't even make warlock slots function in a satisfying way... I dunno, I'd try something akin to metamagic points with a system of discounts and returns, but I'm not working at WotC.
I agree that shaman would be a fitting Barbarian subclass. Warlord could probably fit into Fighter or Barbarian though, depending on how you handle it.
Fighter is more of a tactician, it would fit for fighter to have some Commander subclass with fancy tactical maneuvers. Barbarian's Warlord could be more about raw aplha presence, inspiring allies and demoralizing the enemies, like a mighty khan showing his dominance by brutalizing a defeated enemy. Either way, I think both fighter and barbarian could have subclasses leaning towards support and teamwork.
Many of the classes that are being said can perfectly well be a subclass.
To need a new class it has to be something that doesn't use existing mechanics. For example, if you wanted to fully include psionics in the game, you would need a new class. And if they want to do it, it is best to have it raised from the PHB to avoid future problems.
On the other hand, the artificer breaks the symmetry of 3 classes per group. So they may include 3 new classes to balance that out. But it is difficult for them to fit into the PHB, since the space in the book is limited.
There will be no new classes in the 1DD PHB. Frankly at the rate the community is going we'll be lucky if the original R5e twelve all make it in. We're in real danger of losing a couple of the 'outlier' classes like sorcerer, warlock or monk.
Losing Sorc would be a quit moment for me. I love my half-elf sorcerer girls too much and losing my favorite class... I'd be done.
They are not going to remove any current classes. That is out of the question. In the PHB we will see the current 12 classes. The artificer (and perhaps another class for each group) will have to wait for a future supplement, but it's also quite possible that it will be referenced in PHB so that it can be played with existing material. But certainly none of the 2014's classes are going to disappear.
Losing classes like the Warlock and Monk might be a shame, because they're fairly interesting in there ways. I don't know if I can say the same thing about the Sorcerer, because it's never felt fully realized and more like a relic of older editions; which one might say about the Warlock and to lesser degree Monk. However, something about the mechanics and progression of the Monk has always seemed off to me. And I can't help but think that so much of what's good about it could be folded into the Fighter without leaving much leftover. And that's before taking Expert Classes into consideration.
I dunno, monk feels distinct enough to me, it's a class with many aspects, pretty specific. Barbarian and fighter, on the other hand, always felt like they should've been one class, like it was in 2nd edition IIRC. Fighter feels empty in terms of class features, while barbarian has too little going on in terms of subclasses and aspects to its identity, it's like 50 shades of rage, all of them feel the same.
The big problem the monk has now is the empty hand fighting style of the fighter. The monk doesn’t get the same damage (D8) as a L1 fighter until L11 and doesn’t surpass it until L17. Hopefully this will be fixed in 1DND, either by lowering the open hand damage or raising the monk’s damage (or both - make openhand a straight D6 with a bump to D8 at L5 and move the monk’s initial damage to D6 and then have the progression go up to D12 not D10 in the standard places (D8@L5, D10@L11, D12@L17).
The big problem the monk has now is the empty hand fighting style of the fighter. The monk doesn’t get the same damage (D8) as a L1 fighter until L11 and doesn’t surpass it until L17. Hopefully this will be fixed in 1DND, either by lowering the open hand damage or raising the monk’s damage (or both - make openhand a straight D6 with a bump to D8 at L5 and move the monk’s initial damage to D6 and then have the progression go up to D12 not D10 in the standard places (D8@L5, D10@L11, D12@L17).
Yeah, I have a monk in my home game and the only house rule I used was to bump his martial arts die up one level. It works well with no other changes. I like simple solutions, and he's happy with his combat ability.
I don't fundamentally think that every class should do equal damage. The monk has a lot of things going for it other than raw power. It's a great theme and a staple fantasy for many people, so it would be really sad to lose the class. It has tons of abilities that offset the damage output. The monk can fly around the battlefield and engage enemies no one else can reach, and save allies at critical moments. All of my players owe their character's lives to our monk, the number of times he's grabbed someone and carried them to safety. Monks are really cool.
From the experience of this one table at least, raising the damage die one category is all the fix they need. (Well, that and some heavy subclass reworks for a few of them)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Anyone think we’ll get any in One D&D? 🤔
What would you like to see? 🧐
PHB is going to be left to limited size, so I think we will be stuck with the traditional 12 classes we have. However Artificer will probably be re-added later on as an Expert Class, which means to balance things out we should get a new caster, a new warrior and a new priest.
I would like to see Eldritch Knight split off from fighter into it's own warrior class as an arcane half-caster, since we already have Paladin (divine) and Ranger (primal). Where it becomes a mixture of where Eldritch Knight currently is and Bladesinger, so when it gets extra attack it can switch a single attack for a cantrip and instead of getting action surge, it gets essentially a once per short rest quickened spell, able to cast a spell with a duration of 1 action as a bonus action, once per short rest, increasing to twice in tier 3. Since cantrips scale to level, no need to get more extra attacks past level 5, instead gaining advantage on their cantrip attack in tier 3.
For caster, it's a bit difficult to say, perhaps something more summon or necromancy based, perhaps from class features, still getting arcane spell list tho not evocation or abjuration but getting bonuses to conjuration and necromancy
For priest, I'd like to see something kind of like a primal based celestial warlock, not entirely a full caster but getting some strong healing options and instead of getting eldritch blast, getting something that heals party members via damaging targets or some other interesting ideas like that.
Yeah, some kind of spellblade is just begging to be made. It's realized through so many subclasses - eldritch knight (which is not, in fact, eldritch), bladesinger, hexblade - but they're all not quite it.
A psionic class. With a different casting system. Also asking to be made. Current implementations... leave much to be desired.
There will be no new classes in the 1DD PHB. Frankly at the rate the community is going we'll be lucky if the original R5e twelve all make it in. We're in real danger of losing a couple of the 'outlier' classes like sorcerer, warlock or monk.
Please do not contact or message me.
We won’t be getting any new classes in 1DD, that’s for sure. However I doubt we’ll loose any of the existing 12 classes either.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I can't imagine Monk getting axed at any point, but I can imagine it getting a major overhaul like we've seen with Rangers.
As for new classes... I don't personally think they'll be making any new ones. They seem hesitant to even include Artificer in 1D&D. I find it hard to think of what new classes the game could even support that wouldn't get the feeling that it could have been a subclass instead. I even recently tried my hand at a Psionics class that I actually ended up spending way too much time and energy on, but even that could probably have just been separated into subclasses (similar to the actual psionics subclasses they've already released).
If I had one thing i'd like to see, maybe some kind of Shaman character, specifically a fully dedicated Wild spellcaster who isn't tied down to wild shape as a major class feature. Not that I actively dislike Druids or anything, but I've seen a few people who have been interested in characters that are built around nature and druid-like features, but aren't interested in being turned into animals.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
Then look for a barbarian half caster Gish with primal spells.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
that would honestly suck, i love my cha casters, and its fun to sometimes be a punchy goku ripoff (yes ik its cheesy but fun be fun)
Both seem like good candidates for barbarian subclasses. Existing ones are all the same anyway.
If WotC dares to cut something out, community will storm their office with torches and pitchforks.
and which Over class would it belong to? Psions and Psionics in D&D have always been a problematic system/set of mechanics. The balance is always off. And apparently the only way to "balance" them; means then they are no longer psionics according to the "fans."
The gish is definitely a part of warrior group. Psionics have indeed never quite been implemented properly, and given that WotC can't even make warlock slots function in a satisfying way... I dunno, I'd try something akin to metamagic points with a system of discounts and returns, but I'm not working at WotC.
Fighter is more of a tactician, it would fit for fighter to have some Commander subclass with fancy tactical maneuvers. Barbarian's Warlord could be more about raw aplha presence, inspiring allies and demoralizing the enemies, like a mighty khan showing his dominance by brutalizing a defeated enemy. Either way, I think both fighter and barbarian could have subclasses leaning towards support and teamwork.
Many of the classes that are being said can perfectly well be a subclass.
To need a new class it has to be something that doesn't use existing mechanics. For example, if you wanted to fully include psionics in the game, you would need a new class. And if they want to do it, it is best to have it raised from the PHB to avoid future problems.
On the other hand, the artificer breaks the symmetry of 3 classes per group. So they may include 3 new classes to balance that out. But it is difficult for them to fit into the PHB, since the space in the book is limited.
Losing Sorc would be a quit moment for me. I love my half-elf sorcerer girls too much and losing my favorite class... I'd be done.
They are not going to remove any current classes. That is out of the question. In the PHB we will see the current 12 classes. The artificer (and perhaps another class for each group) will have to wait for a future supplement, but it's also quite possible that it will be referenced in PHB so that it can be played with existing material.
But certainly none of the 2014's classes are going to disappear.
I dunno, monk feels distinct enough to me, it's a class with many aspects, pretty specific. Barbarian and fighter, on the other hand, always felt like they should've been one class, like it was in 2nd edition IIRC. Fighter feels empty in terms of class features, while barbarian has too little going on in terms of subclasses and aspects to its identity, it's like 50 shades of rage, all of them feel the same.
The big problem the monk has now is the empty hand fighting style of the fighter. The monk doesn’t get the same damage (D8) as a L1 fighter until L11 and doesn’t surpass it until L17. Hopefully this will be fixed in 1DND, either by lowering the open hand damage or raising the monk’s damage (or both - make openhand a straight D6 with a bump to D8 at L5 and move the monk’s initial damage to D6 and then have the progression go up to D12 not D10 in the standard places (D8@L5, D10@L11, D12@L17).
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Yeah, I have a monk in my home game and the only house rule I used was to bump his martial arts die up one level. It works well with no other changes. I like simple solutions, and he's happy with his combat ability.
I don't fundamentally think that every class should do equal damage. The monk has a lot of things going for it other than raw power. It's a great theme and a staple fantasy for many people, so it would be really sad to lose the class. It has tons of abilities that offset the damage output. The monk can fly around the battlefield and engage enemies no one else can reach, and save allies at critical moments. All of my players owe their character's lives to our monk, the number of times he's grabbed someone and carried them to safety. Monks are really cool.
From the experience of this one table at least, raising the damage die one category is all the fix they need. (Well, that and some heavy subclass reworks for a few of them)