I realize that magic usage in D&D is a big part of the game, and I am cool with that. I know this may sound strange, but, is there ever a chance that we may get a couple more classes that don't use magic, like the fighter for example?
You know, I kind of hope so. They have added another half caster (completing the 3 casting abilities and settling my OCD). The question is: is there a unique idea for a class that doesn't use magic? (No one say mystic, it is no more a martial class than a sorcerer and you know it).
We have a raw strength martial class, a raw finesse martial class, and 2 classes that bridge the gap.
I'm always in favor of new stuff but every martial archetype is pretty well covered right now. We have the barbarian that is pure strength the rogue that is finesse and the monk for that hand to hand archetype. We also have the Fighter that can do pretty much anything. The fighter is so versatile that it can go strength or dex, and can also go melee or ranged. It can also go two handed, sword and board, or dual wielding. There are also fighter subclasses that fill niches even further. With so many feats, the fighter can do pretty much anything.
I think any further martial only class would be somewhat redundant. That isn't to say it would be a bad move or idea. The sorcerer and Wizard are somewhat redundant but still feel unique to each other. Whatever class does pop up though would need to feel different enough to warrant its existence. While exciting to hope for, I think it would be tricky to pull off successfully.
You know, I kind of hope so. They have added another half caster (completing the 3 casting abilities and settling my OCD). The question is: is there a unique idea for a class that doesn't use magic? (No one say mystic, it is no more a martial class than a sorcerer and you know it).
We have a raw strength martial class, a raw finesse martial class, and 2 classes that bridge the gap.
Only thing I can think of is if they made an official gunslinger as it's own class? I've always had mixed feelings with it as a fighter subclass.
You know, I kind of hope so. They have added another half caster (completing the 3 casting abilities and settling my OCD). The question is: is there a unique idea for a class that doesn't use magic? (No one say mystic, it is no more a martial class than a sorcerer and you know it).
We have a raw strength martial class, a raw finesse martial class, and 2 classes that bridge the gap.
Lancer/dragoon
no class really emphasizes spears/halberds/pikes/lances
knight/cavalry:
no class is specialized to be more effective on a mount than when slowly and loudly walking along themselves
dancer:
like a monk but leg based and no Ki. Maybe more utility like a bard without spells. So a spell-less Bard, that uses unarmed attacks with legs, like a monk.
The "problem" is that most ideas for a non-magical class are perfectly fine as a fighter subclass. You only need a new class if you're designing some radically different mechanics, and "focusing on a different type of weapon" usually doesn't require radically different mechanics.
You know, I kind of hope so. They have added another half caster (completing the 3 casting abilities and settling my OCD). The question is: is there a unique idea for a class that doesn't use magic? (No one say mystic, it is no more a martial class than a sorcerer and you know it).
We have a raw strength martial class, a raw finesse martial class, and 2 classes that bridge the gap.
Lancer/dragoon
no class really emphasizes spears/halberds/pikes/lances
knight/cavalry:
no class is specialized to be more effective on a mount than when slowly and loudly walking along themselves
dancer:
like a monk but leg based and no Ki. Maybe more utility like a bard without spells. So a spell-less Bard, that uses unarmed attacks with legs, like a monk.
etc etc.
it can be done if people really want to.
I feel like all of those would make better subclasses than full classes. The lancer would be a good fighter subclass (if you can justify it over literally any other subclass+PAM). The cavalier already is a fighter subclass. Dancer could work as a monk subclass with ability to spend ki while performing dances that have different bonuses.
It needs to be an idea that is both different from what any other class is doing and can be further differentiated by a number of subclasses. The dancer idea might work for this with different dance schools, being a support class.
I realize that magic usage in D&D is a big part of the game, and I am cool with that. I know this may sound strange, but, is there ever a chance that we may get a couple more classes that don't use magic, like the fighter for example?
You know, I kind of hope so. They have added another half caster (completing the 3 casting abilities and settling my OCD). The question is: is there a unique idea for a class that doesn't use magic? (No one say mystic, it is no more a martial class than a sorcerer and you know it).
We have a raw strength martial class, a raw finesse martial class, and 2 classes that bridge the gap.
I'm always in favor of new stuff but every martial archetype is pretty well covered right now. We have the barbarian that is pure strength the rogue that is finesse and the monk for that hand to hand archetype. We also have the Fighter that can do pretty much anything. The fighter is so versatile that it can go strength or dex, and can also go melee or ranged. It can also go two handed, sword and board, or dual wielding. There are also fighter subclasses that fill niches even further. With so many feats, the fighter can do pretty much anything.
I think any further martial only class would be somewhat redundant. That isn't to say it would be a bad move or idea. The sorcerer and Wizard are somewhat redundant but still feel unique to each other. Whatever class does pop up though would need to feel different enough to warrant its existence. While exciting to hope for, I think it would be tricky to pull off successfully.
Only thing I can think of is if they made an official gunslinger as it's own class? I've always had mixed feelings with it as a fighter subclass.
Lancer/dragoon
no class really emphasizes spears/halberds/pikes/lances
knight/cavalry:
no class is specialized to be more effective on a mount than when slowly and loudly walking along themselves
dancer:
like a monk but leg based and no Ki. Maybe more utility like a bard without spells. So a spell-less Bard, that uses unarmed attacks with legs, like a monk.
etc etc.
it can be done if people really want to.
Blank
The "problem" is that most ideas for a non-magical class are perfectly fine as a fighter subclass. You only need a new class if you're designing some radically different mechanics, and "focusing on a different type of weapon" usually doesn't require radically different mechanics.
I feel like all of those would make better subclasses than full classes. The lancer would be a good fighter subclass (if you can justify it over literally any other subclass+PAM). The cavalier already is a fighter subclass. Dancer could work as a monk subclass with ability to spend ki while performing dances that have different bonuses.
It needs to be an idea that is both different from what any other class is doing and can be further differentiated by a number of subclasses. The dancer idea might work for this with different dance schools, being a support class.