I’m just super curious about if they will release another class and what it will be, i know it’s gonna all be speculation so maybe put your own ideas in too? I’m just curious

I'm guessing no new classes, at least for a while. When/if they make a new one... I have no idea what it would be... Maybe a warlord?

I'm hoping there won't be any more classes.  We have 13 of them already, and a couple of semi-official ones from out of Critical Roll.  I remember the days of the Prestige Classes and what a horror those ended up being when you multi-classed them.  If I had to pick one, I'd say the strongest outcry has been for a real "Arcane Gish", because nothing quite makes it, the Eldritch Knight is kind of the closest thing, but they lack the seamless ability to switch between caster mode and battle mode.  They are more one or the other, and they entirely lack Arcane Smites that let you charge up your weapon with Arcane elemental damage.  The Bladesinger was a decent try, but they're too squishy.  It's a similar thing with the Hexblade Warlock, for all their tremendous power they're still just a little too fragile and their magic is very sharply limited.

I don't like them really.  The combination of a Paladin and Wizard without having to multi-class is just a bit more powerful than any other class.

I think the "flexible subclasses" thing from Strixhaven is more likely to represent the standard for how WotC will approach character customization in the future than any entirely new classes. Given that WotC has been putting increasing effort into subverting the rigidity of character creation and customization I don't really see further classes being a thing TBH.

And it's not like 5e ever made new classes a priority in the first place, seeing as within seven years we've had a total of two new classes (and one is only semi-official).

Quote from Geann >>

The combination of a Paladin and Wizard without having to multi-class is just a bit more powerful than any other class.

Just reskin the Paladin. Change radiant to elemental damage if it offends your sensibilities (radiant gets resisted less often, so it's not like you'd be making the class more powerful), change Divine Sense to Magic Sense (or ignore it altogether, it's not like it's a mainstay ability) and don't pick one of the few Oaths that feel a little too divine-ish. Works fine as a gish. 

On topic, I wouldn't mind something warlord-like but that seems eminently doable as a subclass for Bard, Paladin or Warlock. Or even Fighter. I don't really expect any actual new classes this edition, and if they were to pop up I'd expect to see something in UA first.

you'd think something along the lines of what's been proven popular - witch, pugilist, gunslinger.

edit, but fir when….I’d say maybe when e5.5 hits.

There won't be any further new classes in 5e.  Wizards has introduced one, and that one was to cover the single largest hole left in character creation, namely The Stuffmonger/Buildy Guy.  No other class or subclass covered the tech specialist/gearmancer role worth a spit; now the artificer does.

The only other remote possibility is a full psion class released alongside a Dark Sun book, but Wizards specifically abandoned the Psion/Mystic and decided to implement weak, terrible, painfully insufficient subclasses with essentially no psionic talents, power, flavor, or cool factor instead, so blegh.  No Mystic, and likely a strong blow against ever getting Dark Sun.  But yeah.  The only people who'll ever introduce new base classes are third-party books, and we'll never see them in DDB.  We got the Blood Hunter strictly because of DDB's affiliation with Critical Role; if it don't show up in CR, we ain't gonna see it.

Quote from HeathSmith >>

you'd think something along the lines of what's been proven popular - witch, pugilist, gunslinger.

 Not to criticize this, but witch could be done as a variant on warlock (thematically appropriate too, it doesn't really need any changes) or druid, or even wizard, bard or artificer. Pugilist would fit under barbarian, fighter or monk. For Gunslinger there's fighter or artificer and possibly rogue or ranger depending on flavour. If it can be done through subclasses (or even just reskinning ) it's vanishingly unlikely to get a full class of its own.

Quote from pangurjan >>

Quote from HeathSmith >>

you'd think something along the lines of what's been proven popular - witch, pugilist, gunslinger.

 Not to criticize this, but witch could be done as a variant on warlock (thematically appropriate too, it doesn't really need any changes) or druid, or even wizard, bard or artificer. Pugilist would fit under barbarian, fighter or monk. For Gunslinger there's fighter or artificer and possibly rogue or ranger depending on flavour. If it can be done through subclasses (or even just reskinning ) it's vanishingly unlikely to get a full class of its own.

yeah exactly and those sound far more like a subclass than a base class with 3-4 subs in it (3 flavors of punchy guy thats not a monk for instance?) anyway.  Could be neat subs but as a base class it'd be to narrow 

Quote from GrizwoldTheGoblin >>

I think the "flexible subclasses" thing from Strixhaven is more likely to represent the standard for how WotC will approach character customization in the future than any entirely new classes. Given that WotC has been putting increasing effort into subverting the rigidity of character creation and customization I don't really see further classes being a thing TBH.

And it's not like 5e ever made new classes a priority in the first place, seeing as within seven years we've had a total of two new classes (and one is only semi-official).

 Hopefully they'll clean it up, because the Strixhaven UA was kind of a mess in my opinion.

I'd honestly prefer that they stick to just more variety of subclasses. Almost anything I can think of as a potential class can probably be accomplished with some form of subclass to the existing classes.

I think it helps if you think of the various classes as "functions" rather than just their story function. You can play virtually any spellcasting class as  "witch" depending on how you flavor it... and, indeed, the idea of what a "Witch" is will vary enormously whether you personally view Witches more along the lines of the naturalist sort of "Wiccan" archetype or if you think of them more as cackling monstrous, Halloween-decoration style witches. All you need is a big floppy hat and you're good to go.

Well the simple answer is: Porting over Swordmage and Warlord from 4e and mixing them together.

Able to mark one or more enemies with their aegis ability.
Can reduce damage taken for teammates if the enemy(s) doesn't attack them. [shielding aegis]
Can teleports around the battlefield in response to enemy attacks that don't attack them [assault aegis]
Access to a variety of spells up to a certain level, like 4th or 5th, that can be used for buffs/debuffs or damage (but not healing).
Initial proficiencies is light armor, simple weapons, and martial weapons.
Able to use special actions, perhaps a pool, to influence how their teammates fight by giving them an extra action to attack or to move even when its not that player's turn.
Primary attributes for builds circling around Dexterity and Intelligence, same with saves.

I'm in the "maybe psion but probably nothing" camp. Just about anything else fits easily within the constraints of existing classes, and honestly I'm ok with psionics being jammed in as subclasses as well. There are plenty of very vocal proponents of psion-as-a-class here, but honestly there is not a single iteration of psionics released that didn't receive significant backlash at the time throughout the history of D&D. I'd bet even money a new class version that works totally differently would upset more people than it would please, including those upset with the current system.

Quote from WarJinn >>

Well the simple answer is: Porting over Swordmage and Warlord from 4e and mixing them together.

Able to mark one or more enemies with their aegis ability.
Can reduce damage taken for teammates if the enemy(s) doesn't attack them. [shielding aegis]
Can teleports around the battlefield in response to enemy attacks that don't attack them [assault aegis]
Access to a variety of spells up to a certain level, like 4th or 5th, that can be used for buffs/debuffs or damage (but not healing).
Initial proficiencies is light armor, simple weapons, and martial weapons.
Able to use special actions, perhaps a pool, to influence how their teammates fight by giving them an extra action to attack or to move even when its not that player's turn.
Primary attributes for builds circling around Dexterity and Intelligence, same with saves.

 I feel like that would work as a Fighter Subclass.

I think one of the problems with Subclasses is that WoTC seem to have taken the stance that the non-caster classes only get one subclass that focuses on spellcasting. Like... if you want to be a fighter who casts spells, you need to be either an Eldritch Knight, or multiclass and stock up on feats. Rogues only have Arcane Trickster, Monks have uh... 4 Elements.

This concept seems like it could be accomplished by a combination of unique abilities and a limited spell choice to accomplish the flavor.