# Classes: What changes do you predict?



## Aldarc (Aug 22, 2022)

Based upon what we have seen and heard so far about One D&D, what class and subclass changes do you expect or predict for the One D&D playtest? 

Note: Not what you want to be changed, but what you predict will be changed.


----------



## Stalker0 (Aug 22, 2022)

I think we can expect changes to the monk, sorcerer, and ranger....as I think those are consistently the classes with the lowest polling. 4 elements monk is probably the number 1 subclass for a redesign.

the barbarian may get some higher level ability adjustments but I think its core is rock solid, one of the best designed classes. However, they will probably adjust the berserker subclass, and may try to balance the other totem warrior modes with bear a bit more.


----------



## Minigiant (Aug 22, 2022)

Overall I predict 3 things.


Short rest classes will be given options to nova for short adventuring day games
Based on how WOTC is changing rule based on how some groups play vs the RAW (see autosuccess nat20), WOTC will likely add or change features to adjust short rest classes to short adventuring days.
This is what I see for the fighter, monk, and possibly warlock of having new ways to recharge themselves X/day. 

HD will be giving new class base uses
There is a theme in the first UA off making things they give you usable and not a forgotten bit wasting page space.
This is likely how the recharging will function. Burn HD for ki points, Action Surge, etc

Class and subclass features that missed playtesting in 2012-2013 that were deemed weak will be changed
AKA the monk, ranger, sorcerer, and possibly barbarian.


----------



## delericho (Aug 22, 2022)

My two main predictions are that short rest powers will be change to "Prof Bonus per Long Rest", and that Wizards will get a much-needed power boost.


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Aug 22, 2022)

Extra attack will be worded differently:

During your turn, you can take an extra action which you can only use to take the attack action.

This makes it so much more easy to work with dragon breath, multiclass and will allow a fighter to be so much more versatile in combat. Especially when he has 4 actions at level 20.
Maybe the fighter will also be allowed to do more shiny things with their third action, like dodge or dash.


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Aug 22, 2022)

delericho said:


> My two main predictions are that short rest powers will be change to "Prof Bonus per Long Rest", and that Wizards will get a much-needed power boost.



Oh yes. The wizard is right at the bottom of the pit...


----------



## Aldarc (Aug 22, 2022)

delericho said:


> My two main predictions are that short rest powers will be change to "Prof Bonus per Long Rest", and that Wizards will get a *much-needed *power boost.



Wait. Are you serious?


----------



## delericho (Aug 22, 2022)

Aldarc said:


> Wait. Are you serious?



About Wizards getting a boost? Yes. About it being "much-needed"? No.


----------



## John R Davis (Aug 22, 2022)

If things are getting more simple and conforming to a system the warlock could go


----------



## MarkB (Aug 22, 2022)

With the new rules on Inspiration, some integration of the mechanic into class features, both for obtaining and spending it.

Possibly more availability of feats to go along with the revision of those.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Aug 22, 2022)

Aldarc said:


> Based upon what we have seen and heard so far about One D&D, what class and subclass changes do you expect or predict for the One D&D playtest?



I mean, this is kind of a hard question, because there are two different questions really:

1) What changes will WotC suggest to classes/subclasses.

2) What changes will actually end up getting made, based on feedback, WotC randomly changing their mind at the last minute, and so on.

For me, 2 makes it hard to answer your question with much certainty.

I'm sure WotC will propose significant changes to the baseline for:

Ranger
Sorcerer
Monk

All three basically need a full re-write, and Sorcerer needs a reason to exist beyond having stolen all the metamagic and being the spontaneous-caster version of the Wizard. Whether the neo-grogs 5E has bred will allow any of these changes is another question (I'm picturing them as kind of Uruk-Hai, which I guess makes us old grogs just basic-ass Tolkien orcs/goblins!).

I expect they will tweak and or speculatively suggest major baseline changes to:

Fighters
Paladins
Bards
Druids
Rogues
Warlocks

I expect they will barely touch:

Wizards
Clerics
Barbarians

I think we'll see some different subclasses in 1D&D PHB, a lot of replacements. Most of it isn't worth speculating about until we're a bit further a long, but I do expect some fairly obvious stuff like integrating some Hexblade stuff into Pact of the Blade to make it less of a trap option.



delericho said:


> and that Wizards will get a much-needed power boost.



ROFL brutal but quite likely. Wizards have very little design space because they're so OP already, so I'd be unsurprised if someone at WotC decides that it's fine if they get even more OP in order to have more design space.


----------



## Art Waring (Aug 22, 2022)

I predict that they will make a space clown jugallo subclass for the rogue


----------



## Horwath (Aug 22, 2022)

Sorcerers getting spell points system by default.


----------



## Charlaquin (Aug 22, 2022)

Horwath said:


> Sorcerers getting spell points system by default.



That would be quite a bold change, but I would love to see it!


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (Aug 22, 2022)

Hmm...

1. I think they have to do something about the short rest / long rest imbalance. A lot of the issues in class balance are actually just issues with parties that have a mix of short rest classes and long rest classes, but don't take enough short rests. They either have to expand short rest mechanics (so that every class has at least some reason to want to take it), or they have to provide the classes that are heavily dependent on it (Monk, Warlock, Fighter) expanded, "long rest" equivalent resources. 

2. They will probably use this as an opportunity finally release a perfected Ranger of some kind.

3. They will likely continue to keep the artificer out of the core rules.

4. Finally, they will get rid of the Bard. Now, that's a consummation devoutly to be wish'd!


----------



## Horwath (Aug 22, 2022)

Snarf Zagyg said:


> Hmm...
> 
> 1. I think they have to do something about the short rest / long rest imbalance. A lot of the issues in class balance are actually just issues with parties that have a mix of short rest classes and long rest classes, but don't take enough short rests. They either have to expand short rest mechanics (so that every class has at least some reason to want to take it), or they have to provide the classes that are heavily dependent on it (Monk, Warlock, Fighter) expanded, "long rest" equivalent resources.



best way would be to either leave short rest only for spending HD or using some ability during short rest that is only usable 1/long rest. Like wizards arcane recovery. Or reduce short rest to 1-5 min duration.


Snarf Zagyg said:


> 2. They will probably use this as an opportunity finally release a perfected Ranger of some kind.



3.0 ranger was worst class, 3.5 was quite good. 3.75(PF1) really good


Snarf Zagyg said:


> 3. They will likely continue to keep the artificer out of the core rules.



I hope not, no reason to keep it out, outside page count


Snarf Zagyg said:


> 4. Finally, they will get rid of the Bard. Now, that's a consummation devoutly to be wish'd!



if they reduce bard to 2/3 or 1/2 casting, I would be interested in keeping bard. With more expert(ise) abilities.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Aug 22, 2022)

Horwath said:


> I hope not, no reason to keep it out, outside page count



There are loads of reasons to keep it out, as I specified upthread. Not least that it is drastically more full of traps and potential ways to make your character not work well than any other D&D class, and the base power level without optimization is lower than most classes (whereas with optimization it's very high). Compared to all the PHB classes it's complicated, fiddly, confusing, and likely to go wrong.


----------



## Horwath (Aug 22, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> There are loads of reasons to keep it out, as I specified upthread. Not least that it is drastically more full of traps and potential ways to make your character not work well than any other D&D class, and the base power level without optimization is lower than most classes (whereas with optimization it's very high). Compared to all the PHB classes it's complicated, fiddly, confusing, and likely to go wrong.



so basically, problem with artificer is L2P.
Just dont suggest it to new players.

Same with tiefling wildfire druid with shadow touched, fey touched and telekinetic feats.
too many spells for new player to use optimally.


----------



## Tales and Chronicles (Aug 22, 2022)

UngeheuerLich said:


> Extra attack will be worded differently:
> 
> During your turn, you can take an extra action which you can only use to take the attack action.
> 
> ...



This is exactly what I had in mind when I saw the dragonborn's breath thing!


----------



## Tales and Chronicles (Aug 22, 2022)

Rewording Extra attack (Another action used only for a single attack/cast a cantrip for some archetypes)
Removing school restrictions on EK and AT
Build-in Tasha's features.
More ''scholar'' features for the Wizard (the ''brain'' class) and better theme definition in their subclasses.
Assassin with better non-crit sneak attacks and poison features. Maybe an Initiative boost to go with the new Surprise rules.
Reworked monk and 4E archetypes (I'd say closer to the previous playtest)
Berserker with either an HP or HD cost to use Fury instead of exhaustion (or a modified Exhaustion chart)
Bard's Inspiration will recharge on short-rest (or the new recharge paradigm for short rests) or have way more uses at 1st level.
Hopefully Fighters will have a few more features.
The Champion will steal some features from the UA Brutes who was shot down because it was a better Champion than the Champion!
Battlemaster will have the same recharge as the Psi-Knight (Psionic Energy dice, which are each a d6. You have a number of these dice equal to twice your proficiency bonus, and they fuel various psionic powers you have, which are detailed below. Some of your powers expend the Psionic Energy die they use, as specified in a power's description, and you can't use a power if it requires you to use a die when your dice are all expended. You regain all your expended Psionic Energy dice when you finish a long rest. In addition, as a bonus action, you can regain one expended Psionic Energy die, but you can't do so again until you finish a short or long rest.) and gaining extra die will not be considered as a feature, leaving space to add more thematic feature.


----------



## Undrave (Aug 22, 2022)

delericho said:


> and that Wizards will get a much-needed power boost.






Ruin Explorer said:


> ROFL brutal but quite likely. Wizards have very little design space because they're so OP already, so I'd be unsurprised if someone at WotC decides that it's fine if they get even more OP in order to have more design space.




I need to write my "Wizards are a problem" rant...


----------



## Aldarc (Aug 22, 2022)

- Sorcerer, Monk, and Ranger will receive a more substantial rework, though the Ranger may appear more like it does in the more recent rework 

- The Bladelock and Hexblade will enter a cage match but only one will remain alive.

- Wizards will have a more restricted Arcane spell list but subclasses will provide more Tradition specific bonus spells in order to better differentiate spell traditions

- Bards will have the Arcane spell list but may receive bonus spells from the Divine/Primal spell lists.

- alternate class features will become the new norm

- reworked wild shape and possibly Moon Druid


----------



## gametaku (Aug 22, 2022)

Short rest will be used for healing and abilities that help your alias (similar to musician)

Some of Tasha's features will be built in.  Primally those that add to options but don't replace an 
existing one.

Existing subclasses will work with the updated classes; however, some might get errata to make use of new subclass design options.

The existing subclass levels will remain the same

However, I do think the design will open up and allow subclass improvements to be gained at additional levels.  That some but not all subclasses will make use of. 

Either the subclass will give improvements at additional levels, but their overall power level won't change.  For example, the Eldritch Knight could gain their first cantrip and weapon bond at level one.  Then at third level instead of learning two cantrips they would instead learn one.

Alternatively subclasses improvements might replace the feature(s) you get at that level. If a class gets multiple features at a level, it could replace all or only one. Though this is less likely as the design allows the possibly to replace all 20 levels and effectively create a new class.


----------



## TerraDave (Aug 23, 2022)

So ranger, monk and sorcerer getting big changes seem to be consensus. 

Rogue getting at least a Tasha's type boost is another easy one. 

Fighter champion and maybe eldritch knight, or maybe maybe a more sweeping change to the whole class, seems very possible. 

Then its things like tweaking berserker, the trickery domain, pactblade, ect, maybe adding some subclasses. 

A bolder pick would be a full on arcane half-caster. As discussed in other thread(s) there would certainly be interest.


----------



## Horwath (Aug 23, 2022)

Spellcasters should only have spells known,
1 spell per caster level until 11, then one spell every other level(13,15,17,19), 
with cantrips equal to prof mod.

then every subclass of caster get 2 specific spells for spell levels cantrip-5th(12 in total).

maybe add 10th level spells for full casters at 19th level...


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Aug 23, 2022)

Undrave said:


> I need to write my "Wizards are a problem" rant...



They're an absolutely huge problem, because of the tradition that they:

A) Basically don't have any class features at all, so have near-zero design space.

and

B) Can know ALL of the Arcane spells and cast them at ton, so are kind of overpowered out of combat because access that broad is overpowered (Sorcerers aren't because they have far less access).

So they delimit what you can do with a caster, and also demand a design that's both unengaging and powerful, and benefits heavily from system mastery. Previous editions were a problem too.

In 3E, even ignoring LFQW, they caused a massive problem for Prestige Classes, because basically any Prestige Class which allowed you to continue to advance as a full caster and had any features at all was Objectively Superior to being a single-class Wizard. And single-class Wizards were _already_ at the top of the power rankings.

In 4E, they actually had to conform to 4E's class design, so were a non-problem, but people who wanted the usual OP system-mastery Wizard were at the sort of levels of rage and grief only previously experienced by Achilles after Patroclus died.

They really need a rethink, and busting down to "just one of the boys", class-wise. They need actual class features, too. This is will absolutely definitely never happen in 5E or 1D&D though, zero chance.


----------



## FireLance (Aug 23, 2022)

I predict paladin Divine Smites will either be scaled back damage wise or limited to PB uses per long rest so that paladins will actually cast spells instead of using all their spell slots to power Divine Smites. 

I would love for Lay on Hands to be powered by the paladin's Hit Dice. Maybe to compensate, allow the paladin to recover half level Hit Dice 1/day after taking a short rest.


----------



## Leatherhead (Aug 23, 2022)

Sorcerer subclasses will use the Tashsa's subclass rules, which when combined with the new free feats, will give sorcerers a massive number of spells known from a highly customizable spell list. To the point where they will actually run out of the "good" spells, and can actually use their picks for flavor/fun/quirkiness and not effectively suffer for it. 

Warlocks will break free of Eldritch Blast, instead they will have thematically appropriate Patron-specific attacks. Like Hellfire on Fiendlocks.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Aug 23, 2022)

Leatherhead said:


> Warlocks will break free of Eldritch Blast, instead they will have thematically appropriate Patron-specific attacks. Like Hellfire on Fiendlocks.



I think this is quite likely, but I also predict that all but like one or two of the Patron-specific attacks are obviously mechanically inferior to Eldritch Blast, so whatever Patrons get "the good ones" will be used much more than all the rest put together, and by a few years into the edition people will be grousing endlessly about how things were better when all Warlocks had Eldritch Blast, and indeed maybe Tasha's 2.0 will essentially give Eldritch Blast back as an "alternative class feature" lol.


----------



## delericho (Aug 23, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> A) Basically don't have any class features at all, so have near-zero design space.



Do they actually _need_ design space, though? They're a really fun class to play as-is, even without class features, and they don't actually need any more subclasses. Plus, there's plenty of Wizard-adjacent design space - every time a new Arcane spell is added, the Wizard gets more toys to play with.



Ruin Explorer said:


> B) Can know ALL of the Arcane spells and cast them at ton, so are kind of overpowered out of combat because access that broad is overpowered (Sorcerers aren't because they have far less access).
> 
> They really need a rethink, and busting down to "just one of the boys", class-wise. They need actual class features, too. This is will absolutely definitely never happen in 5E or 1D&D though, zero chance.



Given that people _hate_ having their toys taken away, surely the better answer is to try to bring everyone else _up_ to meet the Wizard? Give the Fighters, Clerics, and others more things to do - and especially a wider range of cool things to be doing outside of combat.

Of course, that's easier said that done - it's been a challenge ever since the days of Exceptional Strength, double specialisation, and the like.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Aug 23, 2022)

delericho said:


> Do they actually _need_ design space, though?



Yes.

You can't have a Wizard-like class that can actually DO anything EXCEPT cast spells, because Wizards don't have any design space. So you somehow have to make that class "worse at spells" in order to justify class features at all, which is hard, because D&D doesn't like that.


delericho said:


> Given that people _hate_ having their toys taken away, surely the better answer is to try to bring everyone else _up_ to meet the Wizard?



You can't easily do that, because there's no design space. Wizards are just "ALL OF THE SPELLS NO ALL OF THEM!!!" and nothing else except an increasingly unpopular casting method (which 5E almost turns into spontaneous casting anyway).

You can see this with Sorcerers particularly, who have less design space than they should, because it's difficult to make them "bad at spells", and it's why people get mad about the 5E Bard, because it is very slightly overstuffed design-space-wise, even with its godawful spell list.


delericho said:


> Of course, that's easier said that done



Exactly. It's not completely impossible, but it's very hard. If Wizards had like actual class features and an actual class identity it'd be a lot easier.

But there's no point worrying because there is literally no chance *Wizards* of the Coast is going to let anyone even slightly nerf Wizards. It's much more likely they'll get some cool stuff on top of what they have, with no compensation to other classes. Maybe in 7E/D&D Refresh they'll pull the other classes up a bit.

The "Arcane" spell list presents a future problem here. If all Wizard spells are on the Arcane list, then Sorcerers and Bards get access to a bunch of new stuff which frankly will make them a bit more powerful even with limited spells known. If not, then Wizard will have to have additional spells from class, which would be a bit weird.


----------



## delericho (Aug 23, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> You can see this with Sorcerers particularly, who have less design space than they should, because it's difficult to make them "bad at spells"



Except that, as you noted, Sorcerers have a vastly reduced access to spells compared to Wizards. The big problem with them is that WotC underestimated the amount of design space they should have had.


----------



## Undrave (Aug 23, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> So they delimit what you can do with a caster, and also demand a design that's both unengaging and powerful, and benefits heavily from system mastery.



Wouldn't have been able to put it better myself! 

I can't believe the most empty class is the one that got EIGHT bloody subclasses in the PHB and all of them except maybe the Diviner were boring as heck. 



delericho said:


> Do they actually _need_ design space, though? They're a really fun class to play as-is, even without class features, and they don't actually need any more subclasses. Plus, there's plenty of Wizard-adjacent design space - every time a new Arcane spell is added, the Wizard gets more toys to play with.



YES they do! The fact they are 'fun' has little to no bearing on wether they are problematic or not. Let's not kid ourselves: The Wizard class is incredibly bland but people say it's still fun? That's because people like to be OP, not because it's engaging. Wizard players just get their rocks off by telling the GM “Hold it right there! I have a SPELL prepared for that!”, and they like to do it more than anybody else around the table. It’s not a healthy fun. It's like the player equivalent of the 'Gotcha!' DM. 


Ruin Explorer said:


> You can see this with Sorcerers particularly, who have less design space than they should, because it's difficult to make them "bad at spells", and it's why people get mad about the 5E Bard, because it is very slightly overstuffed design-space-wise, even with its godawful spell list.



Remember Spell Flexibility? If Wizards had something other than their damn Spellbook as a class feature the Wizard players wouldn't have raised such a stink about it.


----------



## Zubatcarteira (Aug 23, 2022)

I imagine something like this for their Monk rework.


----------



## clearstream (Aug 23, 2022)

Snarf Zagyg said:


> 4. Finally, they will get rid of the Bard. Now, that's a consummation devoutly to be wish'd!



All classes will be reconceptualised as Bard sub-classes.

Bardbarian 
Bard-bard
Prayer-bard
Beast-bard
Fighting-bard
Martial-bardist
Pal-bard
Wandering-bard
Sorca-bard
Bardlock
Wiz-bard

One edition will _rock_!


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (Aug 23, 2022)

clearstream said:


> Martial-bardist


----------



## payn (Aug 23, 2022)

Snarf Zagyg said:


>







Rad.


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Aug 23, 2022)

-I suspect Way of the Elements Monk will get something like offensive cantrips which can be cast as a bonus action or part of an attack, and other abilities will cost less Ki.
-Wild Mage Sorcerer's Tides of Chaos recharge will be initiated by the Player rather than the DM, maybe it's prof bonus per day or sorcery points. Rolling for a chance at having a Wild Surge will be done after casting any spell 1st level or higher.
-Necromancer's Wizard will not have a potentially large number of Undead Thralls under their control, because Animate Dead or Undead Thralls will change.


----------



## MoonSong (Aug 23, 2022)

delericho said:


> Except that, as you noted, Sorcerers have a vastly reduced access to spells compared to Wizards. The big problem with them is that WotC underestimated the amount of design space they should have had.



The problem is there has never been a point in history were WotC hasn't severely preventive handicapped the class. The class by itself has a lot of possible design space if only thematic, but everybody on WotC seems afraid of the class becoming overpowered and it is always saddled with pointless restrictions that prevent it not only from being overpowered, but from being actually any good. Most of the time the best we can hope is for it to be mediocre.


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (Aug 23, 2022)

payn said:


> Rad.




Do you think your Wu-Tang guitar can defeat me?


----------



## clearstream (Aug 23, 2022)

Snarf Zagyg said:


> Do you think your Wu-Tang guitar can defeat me?



I see I have struck a chord.


----------



## HammerMan (Aug 23, 2022)

UngeheuerLich said:


> Extra attack will be worded differently:
> 
> During your turn, you can take an extra action which you can only use to take the attack



I would like a list. Like you say later dodge dash disengage I would add mark disarm


----------



## Aldarc (Aug 23, 2022)

I am somewhat curious whether or not some subclasses, like the Wild Magic Sorcerer for example, will be replaced in favor of a more popular Sorcerer subclass from the past decade.


----------



## TarionzCousin (Aug 23, 2022)

Will there be a Marshal--even as a subclass?


----------



## Tales and Chronicles (Aug 23, 2022)

TarionzCousin said:


> Will there be a Marshal--even as a subclass?



I think building on the PDK chassis and adding a pool of maneuvers die restricted to warlord-y maneuvers and maybe some ''improved help'' features from the Expert sidekick would go a long way to have a somewhat decent support fighter.


----------



## MonsterEnvy (Aug 23, 2022)

I predict Fighters will get Superiority Dice by default rather then it just being part of one subclass


----------



## Parmandur (Aug 23, 2022)

I think they will at least propose making all Classes choose Subclass at 1, and maybe radically rewrite some of the Classes. Interesting to see if that flies.


----------



## Undrave (Aug 23, 2022)

Kobold Avenger said:


> -Wild Mage Sorcerer's Tides of Chaos recharge will be initiated by the Player rather than the DM, maybe it's prof bonus per day or sorcery points. Rolling for a chance at having a Wild Surge will be done after casting any spell 1st level or higher.



I would make it a 'push your luck' mechanic. Every time you use it, you roll a dice and then downgrade that dice to a smaller size d20->d12->d10->d8->d6->d4 and you get a bad result on a result of 1 or 2 so your chances of having it blow up in your face increase as you use it, and when it blows up your can't use it anymore until your long rest. Long rest also resets your dice. Maybe your starting die is smaller at lower level? 



MoonSong said:


> The problem is there has never been a point in history were WotC hasn't severely preventive handicapped the class. The class by itself has a lot of possible design space if only thematic, but everybody on WotC seems afraid of the class becoming overpowered and it is always saddled with pointless restrictions that prevent it not only from being overpowered, but from being actually any good. Most of the time the best we can hope is for it to be mediocre.



I think they're clearly scared of sorcerer being better than their Golden Boy the Wizard, because they know the Wizard is boring and the Sorcerer can be fun.


----------



## Undrave (Aug 23, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> I think they will at least propose making all Classes choose Subclass at 1, and maybe radically rewrite some of the Classes. Interesting to see if that flies.



If Subclass become standardized we could finally get some class-less subclass!


----------



## Parmandur (Aug 23, 2022)

Aldarc said:


> I am somewhat curious whether or not some subclasses, like the Wild Magic Sorcerer for example, will be replaced in favor of a more popular Sorcerer subclass from the past decade.



Perhaps in general, and I do expect some serious surprises on that front, but thatnot the best example. Forum discourse aside, D&D Beyond data shows that the Wild Mage is extremely popular...the second most popular Sorcerer Subclass, and it isn't even close.

I'd like to see the Four Elements Monk replaced with...four Subclasses, each one for an Element.

While we are on Monks...I don't think the Orientalist elements can stand, so I think theybwill try to shake that off.


----------



## Remathilis (Aug 24, 2022)

What kind of changes are being made to classes?

Less than are needed, more than people want.


----------



## Remathilis (Aug 24, 2022)

MonsterEnvy said:


> I predict Fighters will get Superiority Dice by default rather then it just being part of one subclass




From your fingers to Crawford's eyeballs.


----------



## Aldarc (Aug 24, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> Perhaps in general, and I do expect some serious surprises on that front, but thatnot the best example. Forum discourse aside, D&D Beyond data shows that the Wild Mage is extremely popular...the second most popular Sorcerer Subclass, and it isn't even close.



The D&D Beyond data I recall showed the three most popular single-classed Sorcerer subclasses as (1) Draconic (28%); (2) Divine Soul (22%); and (3) Shadow (20%) for those who had everything unlocked.

The Wild Mage was the second most popular Sorcerer subclass in single-class characters who didn't have everything unlocked (i.e., more than the SRD or PHB), but that changes when looking at the bigger picture. Then it's as above.



Parmandur said:


> I'd like to see the Four Elements Monk replaced with...four Subclasses, each one for an Element.
> 
> While we are on Monks...I don't think the Orientalist elements can stand, so I think theybwill try to shake that off.



I'm not sure what they will end up doing to the monk. I do agree that I wish the monk was less orientalist and maybe more neutral, such as gaining their powers from their vows or oaths, but that is more wish than prediction.


----------



## James Gasik (Aug 24, 2022)

The Bard class will be expanded, and Fighter, Rogue, and Druid will become Bard subclasses, to really get that 1e feel.  They will no longer have a set spell list, instead having Songs of Creation, which allows then to cast any spell in existence based on their level, in a similar fashion to Pact magic, but instead of being renewed on a short rest, they are renewed by drinking at a tavern.

Summon Drink and Find Tavern will be cantrips for them, though they won't cost anything and will be given for free.

Also, they can use musical instruments a number of times each day equal to their proficiency bonus to cast a spell, specific to that instrument.  This will include:

Flutes can cast Sleep.

Lutes can cast Charm Maiden.

Bagpipes can cast Haste.

Ocarinas can cast Time Stop.

Sorcerers will gain a Bardic Origin, as Bards are the primary reason most Sorcerers exist, having bred with various things (some of which are impossible) to create Sorcerous Bloodlines.


----------



## FireLance (Aug 24, 2022)

Snarf Zagyg said:


> Do you think your Wu-Tang guitar can defeat me?



I'll see your guitar and raise you a violin.


----------



## Parmandur (Aug 24, 2022)

Aldarc said:


> The D&D Beyond data I recall showed the three most popular single-classed Sorcerer subclasses as (1) Draconic (28%); (2) Divine Soul (22%); and (3) Shadow (20%) for those who had everything unlocked.
> 
> The Wild Mage was the second most popular Sorcerer subclass in single-class characters who didn't have everything unlocked (i.e., more than the SRD or PHB), but that changes when looking at the bigger picture. Then it's as above.
> 
> ...



Ah, I see what I was looking st, then. Still, the Wild Mage hasn't been ill received per se, and in my experience it is actually pretty effective in play.

I do think some sort of reckoning for the Monk and Barbarian is likely, given the changing climate in society (and about time). I just don't think they can get away with that in 2024, and that they know it, too.


----------



## Aldarc (Aug 24, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> Ah, I see what I was looking st, then. Still, the Wild Mage hasn't been ill received per se, and in my experience it is actually pretty effective in play.
> 
> I do think some sort of reckoning for the Monk and Barbarian is likely, given the changing climate in society (and about time). I just don't think they can get away with that in 2024, and that they know it, too.



I don't think that the Wild Mage is ill-received but it is less popular than other subclasses.

So it's a question for me about whether WotC will stick to the subclasses that are in the 2014 PHB for the sake of preserving that or whether they will use the opportunity to switch things around based on trends over the past decade. The latter seems more useful when it comes to updating the game for their expected 2024 client base rather than their prior 2014 client base.

I don't expect that the PHB will get much bigger. It needs to be useable. So something will need to get the axe to accomodate the space. Things may be added to One D&D, but things will also need to be subtracted to accomodate the limited space. 

For example, I don't think that having one wizard subclass per tradition is a good use of space.


----------



## Bluenose (Aug 24, 2022)

Barbarian - probably not going to see much change, though they might add resistance while ranging to force damage after virtually every creature with magical s/p/b damage had it switched to force damage in MotM. Or that might be the point of the change, a stealth nerf for barbarians.
Bard - without their own specific spell list with the switch to Arcane/Divine/Primal combined lists, I'm not sure where they'll go with the Bard's spells. This assumes Cure Wounds wouldn't be stuck into the Arcane list, but the current Bard has a mix from several lists.
Cleric - no change likely here, though some of the subclasses are likely to be balanced better
Druid - as with Cleric, any changes are likely to be in the subclasses for better balance. Primal spell list, of course.
Fighter - they're not going to do much. WotC won't make  Fighter that does anything but dumb thug as the default, and certainly aren't going to let one class overshadow the others in combat so it stays as is. It will live or die for usefulness based on what the high level feats do, and I wouldn't expect much
Monk - still won't work. Drop it if the concept is so vague.
Paladin - unlikely to see change at all, certainly nothing large, and probably doesn't need it.
Ranger - will end up becoming mildly useful a few years later after some splats have provided extra features
Rogue - well someone has to be there so the wizard doesn't have to waste spell slots opening locks when they could do important things with them. Unfair, but this isn't a character that's going to steal from the gods at 20th level without a lot more.
Sorceror - Don't think it'll happen but a sorceror who could pick any of the spell lists (and had to stick to it) would cover a lot of "instinctive/natural" spellcasters, ones who don't rely on book learning but simply have the ability. The illiterate prophet of a god, granted magic not through the church, the wild magician with no idea where there powers come from, the hermit of the wilds with strange abilities. Or it could be another way to access arcane spells.
Warlock - probably not much different, people including WotC designers seem pretty satisfied with it
Wizard - pretty sure there are people who won't be satisfied if it doesn't get a significant power increase, whether that's needed or not. While they're not explicitly saying, "Wizards need to have more stuff they can do," there are already people arguing for extra skills to be awarded for high intelligence and with the Wizard likely being the only PHB class using Int... It probably doesn't need too much but will get some extras anyway


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Aug 24, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> I do think some sort of reckoning for the Monk and Barbarian is likely, given the changing climate in society (and about time). I just don't think they can get away with that in 2024, and that they know it, too.



I dunno if that's true.

Remember lineage? And how it went back to being race?

Pathfinder 2E is kind of the "mine canary" here. People who like D&D-ish games but are more "right-on" are often PF2 fans/boosters, because, frankly, PF2 has done a better job with diversity/modernity etc. Part of this is having a specific setting - Golarion - which they were able to update timeline-wise to get rid of stuff they didn't like. Part of it is that their core team is I believe more diverse and certainly has better instincts than WotC on this kind of thing. I don't think WotC are less committed to be clear, but they're not doing as well (even with this playtest they misstepped on half-races and by assigning languages to jobs - even I, only mildly "woke" (due to my 44-year-old decrepitude) when "UH OH" when I saw the languages assigned to jobs thing).

Anyway, whatever, point is they're basically a couple of years ahead, minimum, of where WotC is (at least for the last few years).

And they still have Barbarians and Monks (even still called that). I also don't see much discussion on left-RPG-Twitter of Barbarian anymore. A few years ago people were like "Omg so problematic!". Now it seems almost like it's been accepted as a class-name not connected to real-world stuff (not sure that's quite right...). I dunno if that'll stick but...

Worth noting PF2 Monks aren't forced-Shaolin Monks like 5E though - that's one option among many due to the way PF2 uses Feats (which ends up being more like Warlock Eldritch Invocations than D&D's Feats).


----------



## Mind of tempest (Aug 24, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> I dunno if that's true.
> 
> Remember lineage? And how it went back to being race?
> 
> ...



the monk always badly needs an overhaul and that is just the name.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Aug 24, 2022)

Mind of tempest said:


> the monk always badly needs an overhaul and that is just the name.



And yet sadly I suspect 1D&D will overhaul the mechanics but keep the name and basic concept.


----------



## cbwjm (Aug 24, 2022)

Undrave said:


> If Subclass become standardized we could finally get some class-less subclass!



This would also make those strixhaven subclasses actually work, I'm hopeful, though I don't want to get my hopes up too high.


----------



## Branduil (Aug 24, 2022)

Wizards should become far more specialized, and far less generalized, but I sadly doubt it will ever be accepted after the reaction to 4E. Give each school of magic far more cool school-specific stuff, but heavily restrict casting outside your school. The difference between an Illusionist and a Diviner should be immediately obvious.


----------



## clearstream (Aug 24, 2022)

Branduil said:


> The difference between an Illusionist and a Diviner should be immediately obvious.



The difference between an illusionist... should never be _immediately_ obvious  

Your point is clear: I mean the above only in humour


----------



## Horwath (Aug 24, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> Worth noting PF2 Monks aren't forced-Shaolin Monks like 5E though - that's one option among many due to the way PF2 uses Feats (which ends up being more like Warlock Eldritch Invocations than D&D's Feats).



This could be only "legacy" reputation on monk.

In 5E there is nothing forcing you to be "shaolin" kind of monk.

I played two monks in 5E and neither had any shaolin-like philosophy.


----------



## Aldarc (Aug 24, 2022)

Branduil said:


> Wizards should become far more specialized, and far less generalized, but I sadly doubt it will ever be accepted after the reaction to 4E. Give each school of magic far more cool school-specific stuff, but heavily restrict casting outside your school. The difference between an Illusionist and a Diviner should be immediately obvious.



I think that it's possible, and I believe that WotC has hinted as to how it's possible. There is an Arcane Spell List. The Arcane spell list need not have every Arcane spell list on it. It could serve as the "Basic" Arcane Spell List. Classes or Subclasses may get bonus spells added to that Arcane spell list. This means that Wizard Traditions could provide them with spells that other Wizards do not get. Wizards may even be able to learn all the spells on the Arcane spell list but not all Arcane spells, so to speak. That would go a longer way in differentiating Wizards. Would Wizard players mutiny? Probably. But I do think that WotC could be opening the way for that.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Aug 24, 2022)

Horwath said:


> In 5E there is nothing forcing you to be "shaolin" kind of monk.



I'm not talking philosophy, I'm talking abilities. The default Monk chassis contains a huge number of Shaolin-specific (particularly when taken together) abilities that don't fit "all mystical martial artists". If, like with PF2, you could pick and choose which ones you took, you could represent mystical martial artists way, way better.


----------



## James Gasik (Aug 24, 2022)

The problem with Wild Magic Sorcerers is that their one neat trick, Wild Surge, isn't under your control, and is only good 33% of the time.  Tides of Chaos, your best way to invoke said trick, is only restored if the DM says it is.  When I played a Wild Magic Sorcerer, the DM would often forget (or, after seeing a particularly explosive Wild Surge, deliberately not give back, lol) about it.  I hated having to pester him about it, so in my home game, I made a house rule to have it refresh when specific events occur in game.

But compare to even the Dragon Sorcerer, who gets always available benefits from their subclass, and you can see why the Wild Sorcerer has issues.  That isn't to say it's not fun though, because random havoc and weird magic have their appeal.


----------



## Mind of tempest (Aug 24, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> And yet sadly I suspect 1D&D will overhaul the mechanics but keep the name and basic concept.



if it at least worked well that would be nice any improvement is good


----------



## Horwath (Aug 24, 2022)

Mind of tempest said:


> if it at least worked well that would be nice any improvement is good



monk just need some minor improvement in few areas:

HD: raised to d10, maybe even d12

Armor: proficiency in light armor, can use wis instead of dex in light armor.
then it's 3 options for AC: armor+dex, armor+wis or dex+wis

wis bonus to amount of ki points

whenever you crit or enemy crits you with an attack you regain 1 ki point

martial arts damage form d4->10 increased to d6->d12

+1 skill point at 1st level


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Aug 24, 2022)

Horwath said:


> monk just need some minor improvement in few areas:
> 
> HD: raised to d10, maybe even d12
> 
> ...



That is a bold definition of "minor improvements".


----------



## Mind of tempest (Aug 24, 2022)

Horwath said:


> monk just need some minor improvement in few areas:
> 
> HD: raised to d10, maybe even d12
> 
> ...



that would bring them to functional I want good which would build a whole lot more than this.


----------



## Parmandur (Aug 24, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> I dunno if that's true.
> 
> Remember lineage? And how it went back to being race?
> 
> ...



Fair, but PF2E is fairly old now, and WotC design staff has taken a quantum leap in diversity when they started growing.


----------



## payn (Aug 24, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> Fair, but PF2E is fairly old now, and WotC design staff has taken a quantum leap in diversity when they started growing.



PF2 is 3 years old...


----------



## Undrave (Aug 24, 2022)

Aldarc said:


> Would Wizard players mutiny? Probably. But I do think that WotC could be opening the way for that.



Augh... we should not be constantly shackled to the whims of Wizard players! 


Ruin Explorer said:


> That is a bold definition of "minor improvements".



It's mostly just Bigger Numbers so it's pretty easy.


----------



## Undrave (Aug 24, 2022)

Bluenose said:


> Wizard - pretty sure there are people who won't be satisfied if it doesn't get a significant power increase, whether that's needed or not. While they're not explicitly saying, "Wizards need to have more stuff they can do," there are already people arguing for extra skills to be awarded for high intelligence and with the Wizard likely being the only PHB class using Int... It probably doesn't need too much but will get some extras anyway



Wizard players are NEVER satisfied unless their pet class is the GOD KING of the edition and is way better than anybody else.


----------



## Parmandur (Aug 24, 2022)

payn said:


> PF2 is 3 years old...



Yes, 3 years is a long time. American culture has gone through major changes since 2019.


----------



## Branduil (Aug 24, 2022)

The ship has sailed on dethroning Wizards from their #1 spot, barring a 4e-style change to the entire game's structure it can't happen. What can be done is narrowing the scope of their power, so that they're not also the best utility class. It's one thing to best the most powerful member of your party, it's another thing to also step on the niches of every character out of combat as well. Limiting spells to mostly their school would do a lot for that.


----------



## TwoSix (Aug 24, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> That is a bold definition of "minor improvements".



I probably wouldn't call that "minor improvements", as they're just straight-up buffs, but they work in the sense they cause no issue with backwards compatibility for previously existing monk subclasses.

To my mind, you can't really "fix" monk until you get rid of Stunning Strike and spread its power budget out among other class features.  SS is simultaneously too powerful to ignore but really annoying in play.


----------



## TwoSix (Aug 24, 2022)

Branduil said:


> The ship has sailed on dethroning Wizards from their #1 spot, barring a 4e-style change to the entire game's structure it can't happen. What can be done is narrowing the scope of their power, so that they're not also the best utility class. It's one thing to best the most powerful member of your party, it's another thing to also step on the niches of every character out of combat as well. Limiting spells to mostly their school would do a lot for that.



They can do it, they just have to be ballsy enough to narrow down the scope of the arcane spell list to around "2014 sorcerer" levels, and then give the wizard a limited feature (like Bard secrets) to expand beyond it.  That mostly preserves backwards compatibility (individual wizard characters might need adjustment, but the subclasses and feats still work) but puts more strict limits on the wizard's main source of power.


----------



## Stalker0 (Aug 24, 2022)

Cleric is actually the number 1 class on my list to fix, as I found the class very disappointing in play. It’s just boring as heck, no real flavor, and incredibly dependent on 3 spells: bless, spiritual weapon, spirit guardians.

Every cleric I have ever seen played is basically just some version of these 3 spells, boring boring boring.


----------



## James Gasik (Aug 24, 2022)

Stalker0 said:


> Cleric is actually the number 1 class on my list to fix, as I found the class very disappointing in play. It’s just boring as heck, no real flavor, and incredibly dependent on 3 spells: bless, spiritual weapon, spirit guardians.
> 
> Every cleric I have ever seen played is basically just some version of these 3 spells, boring boring boring.



The reason is that the Cleric is expected to keep spell slots open to deal with hit point damage and removing status ailments over the course of the day. Unfortunately, they weren't given anything particularly interesting to do outside of this, and I've noticed that players want to use their abilities, not save them in case they might need them later.

So they gravitate towards their few proactive spells.  There is an exception, however, that I've seen, though.  Once Clerics start getting spells that let them deal with status ailments proactively, those get used as well, such as _Heroes' Feast_, which can be a real game changer.

Another issue Clerics run into is concentration- lacking Con save proficiency, and being built to be a melee caster, the Cleric can't just throw out concentration spells willy nilly if they're just going to fall off once an enemy hits them.

One round of _Spirit Guardians_ can make a huge impact on an encounter, and the spell also somewhat incentivizes enemies to get away from the Cleric, and unlike, say, _Hold Person_, the spell has a guaranteed effect.


----------



## Aldarc (Aug 24, 2022)

TwoSix said:


> They can do it, they just have to be ballsy enough to narrow down the scope of the arcane spell list to around "2014 sorcerer" levels, and then give the wizard a limited feature (like Bard secrets) to expand beyond it.  That mostly preserves backwards compatibility (individual wizard characters might need adjustment, but the subclasses and feats still work) but puts more strict limits on the wizard's main source of power.



I'm glad that we are of a a similar opinion here.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Aug 24, 2022)

Cleric is a lot like Wizard with even worse issues in some ways.

It's main thing is knowing like, a huge number of different spells and being able to cast them quite a lot. For reasons of tradition and in order to excuse it having class features, most of those spells not cool stuff for the Cleric to do, but things to help other people.

It has some class features, at least, but there's not a huge amount to work with.

And as @James Gasik points out, they're expect to hold back on a significant proportion of spell slots to help the rest of the party, healing, curing, etc. etc.

In 4E, when they were put into the AEDU structure, and their main heals were a thing all "Leader" role characters could do, they became a vastly more dramatic and dynamic class, with a ton of AEDU spells that just don't have close equivalents in 3E or 5E. Even some with the same names worked in much more dramatic ways. There was also far less expectation of holding spells back thanks to them being a Ritual Magic class and/or spells not being Daily.

I feel like we could stand, if making dramatic changes, to make the baseline Cleric a worse caster, maybe 2/3rds caster or some other structure that isn't Full Caster, and give it a lot more in the way of abilities. But I don't think we'll see anything like that. In fact I suspect we'll see no major changes to Cleric, because people who are okay with it, play it, and people who aren't, play Bard or Druid or the like.


----------



## Stalker0 (Aug 24, 2022)

One thing that would be REALLY interesting for the wizard is if they finally get off the spellbook train. The wizard is literally the only class in the game that turns gold into class features, and that is a weird way to balance a class in a modern edition.


----------



## Stalker0 (Aug 24, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> Cleric is a lot like Wizard with even worse issues in some ways.
> 
> It's main thing is knowing like, a huge number of different spells and being able to cast them quite a lot. For reasons of tradition and in order to excuse it having class features, most of those spells not cool stuff for the Cleric to do, but things to help other people.
> 
> ...



I think if nothing else, clerics should get X uses of cure wounds per day beyond their spell slots. Similar to paladin lay on hands, give them healing that doesn't conflict with the more fun aspects of spell casting. Maybe this free ability gets upgraded to eventually do lesser restorations or something.

If spirit guardians is going to remain in the game, than lets just make it a class feature and be done with it. Again free up the spell slots for some actual variety.


----------



## Undrave (Aug 24, 2022)

Stalker0 said:


> Cleric is actually the number 1 class on my list to fix, as I found the class very disappointing in play. It’s just boring as heck, no real flavor, and incredibly dependent on 3 spells: bless, spiritual weapon, spirit guardians.
> 
> Every cleric I have ever seen played is basically just some version of these 3 spells, boring boring boring.



Augh I know! I tried to play a Cleric multiple time and it usually ends up being super boring! It’s even worse out of the PHB where the only attack Cantrip you get is Sacred Flame. I think the only time I’ve had a Cleric be less limited is by being a human and picking up Magic Initiate: Druid as bonus feat. Getting some extra attack option (Produce Flame I really good as both a source of Light and an attack, Thorn Whip is a solid attack, and Druidcraft has some fun RP application, like predicting the weather) and then a Goodberry or a bonus Healing Word out of that lets you flex your spell list a little more. Sadly didn't get to play those more than 1 session so I don't know if I'd grow bored of them or not. 

I loved playing Clerics in 4e, and Leader classes in general, but 5e support classes are way too limp to excite me.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Aug 24, 2022)

Stalker0 said:


> I think if nothing else, clerics should get X uses of cure wounds per day beyond their spell slots. Similar to paladin lay on hands, give them healing that doesn't conflict with the more fun aspects of spell casting. Maybe this free ability gets upgraded to eventually do lesser restorations or something.
> 
> If spirit guardians is going to remain in the game, than lets just make it a class feature and be done with it. Again free up the spell slots for some actual variety.



Absolutely. Honestly they should just straight-up steal the mechanic and give Cleric a "healing pool" like Lay on Hands with X amount costs for things like Lesser Restoration.

Druids could automatically be able to produce X amount of Goodberries (instead of having a weird OP spell) which did similar (again, perhaps you eat X Goodberries to cure Y).

Bards could have a different mechanic, perhaps relating to Inspiration but much boosted, and perhaps strengthening their Short Rest healing (if Short Rests still exist).


----------



## Undrave (Aug 24, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> In 4E, when they were put into the AEDU structure, and their main heals were a thing all "Leader" role characters could do, they became a vastly more dramatic and dynamic class, with a ton of AEDU spells that just don't have close equivalents in 3E or 5E. Even some with the same names worked in much more dramatic ways. There was also far less expectation of holding spells back thanks to them being a Ritual Magic class and/or spells not being Daily.



My favorite was Healing Strike! A level 1 Encounter Power. It was a melee weapon attack (standard 2W+STR damage) that when it landed would allow you or an ally within 25 feet to spend a healing surge AND it marked the target for a turn! Finding the perfect timing to pull that trigger, hoping to hit, was an interesting aspect, and it fed into my character’s story of being an old drill sergeant for a Paladin order that had been decimated in an attack. I even added the Paladin MC feat that gives you Divine Challenge once per encounter, so with 2 marking options I could off-tank pretty well!

Man… I miss that character. It wasn’t even a well-supported build  (Being STR-CHA when the CHA aspect was completely dropped beyond PHB1).


Stalker0 said:


> One thing that would be REALLY interesting for the wizard is if they finally get off the spellbook train. The wizard is literally the only class in the game that turns gold into class features, and that is a weird way to balance a class in a modern edition.



The spellbook is pretty much all they have at this point too. The Wizard’s only narrative is ‘huge nerd’ and ‘has a spellbook’. Cutting out the Spellbook mechanic would force them to actually give the Wizard a real identity.

Though, using books as implement would totally fit the Wizard.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Aug 24, 2022)

Undrave said:


> My favorite was Healing Strike! A level 1 Encounter Power. It was a melee weapon attack (standard 2W+STR damage) that when it landed would allow you or an ally within 25 feet to spend a healing surge AND it marked the target for a turn! Finding the perfect timing to pull that trigger, hoping to hit, was an interesting aspect, and it fed into my character’s story of being an old drill sergeant for a Paladin order that had been decimated in an attack. I even added the Paladin MC feat that gives you Divine Challenge once per encounter, so with 2 marking options I could off-tank pretty well!



Goddamnit dude. Now I want to go back to 4E!

I know it'll disappoint me as we get into level 11+ and the whole world becomes Interrupts, Reactions and Immediate Actions, but wow, like level 1 to like level 9 or so in 4E was just absolutely stellar.

I wonder if anyone has done an RPG that's 4E-derivative but lighter, and not Lancer/Icons (which are super-cool but very tightly focused aesthetically - I would kill a man to play Icons, but I'm not sure that means I can force my players to play it lol).


----------



## Horwath (Aug 24, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> That is a bold definition of "minor improvements".



it's minor as it does not implement no new mechanics.

It just buffs up monk from incompetent to good.


----------



## Henadic Theologian (Aug 24, 2022)

Aldarc said:


> I am somewhat curious whether or not some subclasses, like the Wild Magic Sorcerer for example, will be replaced in favor of a more popular Sorcerer subclass from the past decade.




 i could see Divine Soul, I believe its one of the few preTasha none PHB Subclasses to be more popular then its PHB peers.


----------



## Bluenose (Aug 25, 2022)

TwoSix said:


> They can do it, they just have to be ballsy enough to narrow down the scope of the arcane spell list to around "2014 sorcerer" levels, and then give the wizard a limited feature (like Bard secrets) to expand beyond it.  That mostly preserves backwards compatibility (individual wizard characters might need adjustment, but the subclasses and feats still work) but puts more strict limits on the wizard's main source of power.



I would say they should also take a serious look at the divine and primal lists. Clerics of a deity of water and deception probably shouldn't be making fire fall from the sky or moving the earth around, but certainly need more illusion and 'watery' magic. And it probably wouldn't hurt druids if they had to specialise in one 'Season' or some other term for the limit of the extent of their magic. Something like the Specialty priest from 2e as the default Cleric would go a long way to helping with issues of the excess 'spread' of spellcasters into every niche of other classes. 
But I think that's about as likely as forcing Wizards to be more specialised.


----------



## Vael (Aug 25, 2022)

I think a lot will depend on which underlying systems get changed. Any changes to weapon attacks, like Two-Weapon Fighting or altering how Extra Attack functions will affect the martial classes significantly. I'd like to kill a la carte multiclassing, which would make some significant changes to all classes, as you can front load more features because they're not so cherry-pickable. I'd also be tempted to maybe step away from the unified spell progression (unnecessary to keep if multiclassing were to be changed). I dunno, I like that all full casters have the same progression, not quite so happy for Artificers, having them as half-casters doesn't really work for me.

That said, even if none of those underlying things get changed, everyone knows which are the proud nails. Still, I'd like to see all of the classes get at least a little work done.


----------



## OB1 (Aug 25, 2022)

Given how I was surprised by the first playtest packet, I predict I'll be surprised again by the class packets.  Hopefully just as pleasantly 

That said, I do have one prediction and then a bunch of hopes.

Generic Subclasses - I predict players will be able to forgo choosing a subclass, and instead pick a feat at subclass levels instead.

Sorcerer - I hope metamagic will get split into options that are available to all sorcerers at no sorcery point cost, and another list that you choose from and use sorcery points to power.  OR  Sorcerers get access to all metamagic, and the ones you pick get their sorcery point cost reduced by 1.  The only problem with the Sorcerer, IMO, is that they should be using metamagic almost every turn, and in a variety of ways depending on the situation.

Monk - Regain KI points by spending a Hit Die as an action and rolling to see how many Ki you get back.  Flurry of blows adds an unarmed attack to your attack action (still allowing for a single bonus action unarmed strike).

Ranger - Prepared spells instead of known.  Tasha's options become default.

Fighter - Indominable  adds a +10 instead of a re-roll.  If available, 2 can be used on one save.  Spend 4HD as an action to get a spent Indominable back.

Bard - Spend a spell slot to get that number of Bardic Inspirations back as an action.  Count any 1 on a bardic as a 2.


----------



## Parmandur (Aug 25, 2022)

Oh, here's a prediction: Thieves Cant is now a language choosable as a Background feature. Thst leads me to suspect that Rogue will not give Thieves Cant as a Class Feature. Thst might tell us a lot about what they may be doing with Classes in terms of loosening their themes a little (looking st you again, Monk and Barbarian).


----------



## cbwjm (Aug 25, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> Oh, here's a prediction: Thieves Cant is now a language choosable as a Background feature. Thst leads me to suspect that Rogue will not give Thieves Cant as a Class Feature. Thst might tell us a lot about what they may be doing with Classes in terms of loosening their themes a little (looking st you again, Monk and Barbarian).



I'm hoping that it's something that thieves or assassins get specifically, but other rogue subclasses don't.


----------



## cbwjm (Aug 25, 2022)

I'm actually wondering if they will shuffle around subclass levels. I recall Mike Mearls saying something about how a subclass shouldn't make a big change to the way you play your class and cited the college of valour with its bonus proficiencies. He also mentioned things like how a wizard could probably have gained its subclass at 1st level and have arcane recovery shunted to 2nd. I sort of wonder if any of these comments are held by the current design team. They did have the cool idea of the strixhaven subclasses, if they want something like that to work, then standardising subclasses would be the way to do it.


----------



## Aldarc (Aug 25, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> Oh, here's a prediction: Thieves Cant is now a language choosable as a Background feature. Thst leads me to suspect that Rogue will not give Thieves Cant as a Class Feature. Thst might tell us a lot about what they may be doing with Classes in terms of loosening their themes a little (looking st you again, Monk and Barbarian).



As you pick Class before Origin, then it's possible that Thieves Cant and Druidic may still be granted as part of the class, but that the Origin then offers the language for others.


----------



## Parmandur (Aug 25, 2022)

Aldarc said:


> As you pick Class before Origin, then it's possible that Thieves Cant and Druidic may still be granted as part of the class, but that the Origin then offers the language for others.



Yeah, it could go either way at this point, but thst is my prediction. One if the themes to recent  changes seems to be making flavor less dictated by the game itself. I bet thst they will do what they can to make Classes customizable


----------



## Parmandur (Aug 25, 2022)

cbwjm said:


> I'm actually wondering if they will shuffle around subclass levels. I recall Mike Mearls saying something about how a subclass shouldn't make a big change to the way you play your class and cited the college of valour with its bonus proficiencies. He also mentioned things like how a wizard could probably have gained its subclass at 1st level and have arcane recovery shunted to 2nd. I sort of wonder if any of these comments are held by the current design team. They did have the cool idea of the strixhaven subclasses, if they want something like that to work, then standardising subclasses would be the way to do it.



Yup, the designers have said for a long time that waiting to choose Subclass was a design that failed to work as intended, and only causes headaches at the table and for designing new options.


----------



## James Gasik (Aug 26, 2022)

It always felt strange that only Thieves (and Rogues) could learn Thieve's Cant, since any criminal organization is going to have non-Thieves as part of it.  I understood the reason for trying to keep people from randomly learning Cant or Druidic, of course, but it felt strange being a class feature and moving it to Background makes a lot more sense to me.


----------



## Benjamin Olson (Aug 26, 2022)

I haven't seen a lot of mention of Barbarians, and although I agree with what seems to be the consensus that they basically work pretty well as written, I wouldn't be surprised if there is some tweaking of the rage mechanic. Specifically while the rules about maintaining rage have been very effective in corralling Barbarians into acting like we want an raging Barbarian to while raging in a simple combat, they could certainly use some sort of tweak to avoid a lot of edge cases that cause ludonarrative dissonance. Spending a extra turn dashing to get to my opponent shouldn't make me less angry when I get there, it should make me more angry! I suspect WotC is aware of these sorts of edge cases and might experiment with some tweaks. 

They also might change number of rages per day and/or rage damage to equal proficiency bonus, because of course they would.

Of course what I'd really like to see on the Barbarian front is more non-magical subclass options, but fat chance of that.


----------



## cbwjm (Aug 26, 2022)

Benjamin Olson said:


> They also might change number of rages per day and/or rage damage to equal proficiency bonus, because of course they would.



I wouldn't be surprised regarding the damage bonus, I actually thought this was already the case until someone pointed the actual scaling of the ability


----------



## James Gasik (Aug 26, 2022)

cbwjm said:


> I wouldn't be surprised regarding the damage bonus, I actually thought this was already the case until someone pointed the actual scaling of the ability



What always surprised me about Rage was that it was a static number at all; WotC seems to vastly prefer making players roll more dice.  I'd have made it something like +1d4 on attacks per upgrade level.

Although per tier would make more sense.  And actually, given that it's a daily resource after all, probably at least d6's instead.


----------



## Uni-the-Unicorn! (Aug 27, 2022)

Snarf Zagyg said:


> Do you think your Wu-Tang guitar can defeat me?



Love the movie!


----------



## BlackSeed_Vash (Aug 27, 2022)

FireLance said:


> I predict paladin Divine Smites will either be scaled back damage wise or limited to PB uses per long rest so that paladins will actually cast spells instead of using all their spell slots to power Divine Smites.



With the current rules for critting, there is less reason to hold onto spell slots.


----------



## Henadic Theologian (Aug 28, 2022)

Undrave said:


> If Subclass become standardized we could finally get some class-less subclass!




 That won't happen, it's the one thing they can't change because it'd render Tasha's and Xanathar's subclasses useless.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Aug 28, 2022)

Aldarc said:


> The D&D Beyond data I recall showed the three most popular single-classed Sorcerer subclasses as (1) Draconic (28%); (2) Divine Soul (22%); and (3) Shadow (20%) for those who had everything unlocked.
> 
> The Wild Mage was the second most popular Sorcerer subclass in single-class characters who didn't have everything unlocked (i.e., more than the SRD or PHB), but that changes when looking at the bigger picture. Then it's as above.
> 
> ...



I don’t think that gaining thier power from rigorous training in a particular tradition is especially orientalist, so I’d say that should stay. 

The name is odd once you get away from orientalism, and ki is just a bad name, however. 

I like Mystic, and Focus, but I’m not married to either. 

Tbh the subclasses are fine (other than 4elements), and the base class only needs tweaks beyond the problematic theming.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Aug 28, 2022)

Horwath said:


> monk just need some minor improvement in few areas:
> 
> HD: raised to d10, maybe even d12
> 
> ...



I’d accept that. I’d prefer PB/LR recover half your ki as an action, over +Wis mod ki.


----------



## Parmandur (Aug 28, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> I don’t think that gaining thier power from rigorous training in a particular tradition is especially orientalist, so I’d say that should stay.
> 
> The name is odd once you get away from orientalism, and ki is just a bad name, however.
> 
> ...



Mystic is a nice, more thematically flexible name for the Class...and was the name for the Class, in Basic Dungeons & Dragons!

The big problem with Ki, as expounded by Daniel Kwon of Asians Represent, is that from a Chinese traditional cultural perspective...everything is Ki. A Wizard manipulating reality with magic is Ki, the Cleric appealing to the divine is Ki, the Fighter swinging his sword is Ki, etc. All Human activity is Ki. So having one Class be the "Ki users" is literally alienating. His suggestion, IIRC, was to just call it out as Spell points, same as any other Class.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Aug 28, 2022)

I’d like to see the Archery fighting style get a different benefit. Bonus Action attack, no strings attached, might seem a bit much but +2 attack is wild!


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Aug 28, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> Mystic is a nice, more thematically flexible name for the Class...and was the name for the Class, in Basic Dungeons & Dragons!
> 
> The big problem with Ki, as expounded by Daniel Kwon of Asians Represent, is that from a Chinese traditional cultural perspective...everything is Ki. A Wizard manipulating reality with magic is Ki, the Cleric appealing to the divine is Ki, the Fighter swinging his sword is Ki, etc. All Human activity is Ki. So having one Class be the "Ki users" is literally alienating. His suggestion, IIRC, was to just call it out as Spell points, same as any other Class.



I agree, but I vehemently dislike his solution. 

It’s easy to just call it Focus, perhaps change it to dice rather than points, and move on. Changing it to dice would make stuff that uses the martial arts die less wordy and awkward, but that would require errata to some subclasses.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Aug 28, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> Yup, the designers have said for a long time that waiting to choose Subclass was a design that failed to work as intended, and only causes headaches at the table and for designing new options.



Really hoping they give us L1 subclasses, because virtually every PC I've ever seen in 5E has a specific subclass in mind, but unless they're a Wizard, they have to sit on their hands until 3rd, which can seem like a long damn time. And it's just wacky with like, 70-90% of the subclasses which aren't something you'd just suddenly start being. Obviously you'd need to re-work them a fair bit, but it should be doable.

(I also find it amusing that very few people have pointed out how obviously MMORPG-derived this is. MMORPGs, for a very long time, since at least DAoC in 2001, and probably earlier, have done this thing where you start as a generic base class and then have to pick a "real" class at level 5 or 10. I guess because WoW didn't do it, people forgot or didn't know or something?)


----------



## Parmandur (Aug 28, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> Really hoping they give us L1 subclasses, because virtually every PC I've ever seen in 5E has a specific subclass in mind, but unless they're a Wizard, they have to sit on their hands until 3rd, which can seem like a long damn time. And it's just wacky with like, 70-90% of the subclasses which aren't something you'd just suddenly start being. Obviously you'd need to re-work them a fair bit, but it should be doable.
> 
> (I also find it amusing that very few people have pointed out how obviously MMORPG-derived this is. MMORPGs, for a very long time, since at least DAoC in 2001, and probably earlier, have done this thing where you start as a generic base class and then have to pick a "real" class at level 5 or 10. I guess because WoW didn't do it, people forgot or didn't know or something?)



Cleric, Sorcerer, and Warlock choose at Level 1 right now, Wizard and Druid at 2, then everyone else at 3. But yeah, that's not how anyone plans a character, and the designers have signaled regretting that.


----------



## Parmandur (Aug 28, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> I agree, but I vehemently dislike his solution.
> 
> It’s easy to just call it Focus, perhaps change it to dice rather than points, and move on. Changing it to dice would make stuff that uses the martial arts die less wordy and awkward, but that would require errata to some subclasses.



The die aspect sounds a bit overly fiddle. The "Spell Point" solution is elegant insofar as "Ki Points" are just the spell point variant anyways, amd Ki powers are costed out the same as Spells. Greater rules transparency is valuable for a number of reasons, IMO. But we'll see what they do!


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Aug 28, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> The die aspect sounds a bit overly fiddle. The "Spell Point" solution is elegant insofar as "Ki Points" are just the spell point variant anyways, amd Ki powers are costed out the same as Spells. Greater rules transparency is valuable for a number of reasons, IMO. But we'll see what they do!



Eh I disagree, and dislike spellpoints _and_ making the class that much a spellcaster. 

Using math based on spell slots is one thing, but monks, even renamed mystics, are a martial class. Having a supernatural martial class that doesn’t cast spells is more fun, and using “spell points” on a class with no spells as such is needlessly confusing.


----------



## cbwjm (Aug 29, 2022)

Though I'm not sure how to determine the number, manoeuvre dice might be quite good for the monk, let the number stack with other classes/feats that gain them might be a good solution, sort of like how spellcasters gain more spell slots when multiclassing, martial characters could gain more manoeuvre dice.


----------



## Mistwell (Aug 29, 2022)

I think WOTC wants to remove the short rest mechanic from the Warlock for their spells recharging. But I am not sure how they accomplish that. 

It's possible they will give them a new kind of rest mechanic which reproduces the encounter mechanic from 4e to recharge.

It's possible they double down on Invocations, and move their powers away from spell lists and toward more invocations which are spells castable Proficiency Bonus Times Per Day mechanic?

Are they going to give them a recharge mechanic on spell usage like a dragon might get a recharge on their breath weapon?

Are they going to give them something like the ability to spend a hit die or level of exhaustion to recover spells?

I don't know. But I think they're going to do something to untie them from short rests.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Aug 29, 2022)

Mistwell said:


> I think WOTC wants to remove the short rest mechanic from the Warlock for their spells recharging. But I am not sure how they accomplish that.
> 
> It's possible they will give them a new kind of rest mechanic which reproduces the encounter mechanic from 4e to recharge.
> 
> ...



I doubt they’ll untie them entirely, but they will give an alternate method I think. 

My guesses are: a much shorter but still longer than a round “ritual” that can be done as part of a short rest, or an action. 

If ritual, it will restore all spent slots, and you can do it a few times per day. 

If action, it will restore half your total slots, and you can do it PB/LR, possibly with a time buffer before you can do it again. 


What I’d love, would be soemthing like your recharge idea, but…that would probably require a time buffer between recharge checks. 

Another idea would be to steal from HeroQuest’ expansion characters and other games. The Warlock in HeroQuest regains their “Demon Form” spell when they kill an enemy. The D&D Warlock might regain a single slot this way, X/day.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Aug 29, 2022)

What I hope to see with the warlock is Eldritch Blast as a class feature that lets you make a ranged spell attack. Not a spell, but just a bean of force as a ranged spell attack. That you get additional beams of at the normal levels. 

And then Pact of The Blade let’s you make a melee spell attack with it instead.


----------



## cbwjm (Aug 29, 2022)

Highly doubt this would happen, as in I think the chance is 0, but my hope for the warlock would be for eldritch blast to become essentially a force version of firebolt (only a single bolt no matter the level) and then have all of the invocations that alter eldritch blast apply to all warlock cantrips. Too many people feel pigeon-holed into using eldritch blast, I'd like to see more reason to use other attack cantrips.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Aug 29, 2022)

cbwjm said:


> Highly doubt this would happen, as in I think the chance is 0, but my hope for the warlock would be for eldritch blast to become essentially a force version of firebolt (only a single bolt no matter the level) and then have all of the invocations that alter eldritch blast apply to all warlock cantrips. Too many people feel pigeon-holed into using eldritch blast, I'd like to see more reason to use other attack cantrips.



Re: Eldritch Blast changes, that'd be a pretty big nerf to Warlock DPR (1x stat bonus instead of up to 4x stat bonus, and 1x hex die instead of up to 4x hex die), and nerf to how fun they are to play for sure too (rolling multiple attacks even if some miss feels vastly more rewarding than rolling one big attack that sometimes hits big and sometimes misses totally - it's also better for avoiding overdamage), so I definitely don't think that's likely, especially as it would introduce a pretty serious incompatibility with the PHB Warlock.

I think it's more likely we'll see Invocations expanded out though, and I think as people are more math-savvy now and less knee-jerk-y, you could even do stuff like make Agonizing Blast apply per-die (assuming no Cantrips roll multiple dice at L1, but I don't think they do?), which would make the DPR on stuff like Fire Bolt a lot closer. Back in 2014 people would have been panicking and rioting if you suggested that (even though arguably EB would STILL be better!) but now I don't think you'd have that reaction.


----------



## cbwjm (Aug 30, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> Re: Eldritch Blast changes, that'd be a pretty big nerf to Warlock DPR (1x stat bonus instead of up to 4x stat bonus, and 1x hex die instead of up to 4x hex die), and nerf to how fun they are to play for sure too (rolling multiple attacks even if some miss feels vastly more rewarding than rolling one big attack that sometimes hits big and sometimes misses totally - it's also better for avoiding overdamage), so I definitely don't think that's likely, especially as it would introduce a pretty serious incompatibility with the PHB Warlock.
> 
> I think it's more likely we'll see Invocations expanded out though, and I think as people are more math-savvy now and less knee-jerk-y, you could even do stuff like make Agonizing Blast apply per-die (assuming no Cantrips roll multiple dice at L1, but I don't think they do?), which would make the DPR on stuff like Fire Bolt a lot closer. Back in 2014 people would have been panicking and rioting if you suggested that (even though arguably EB would STILL be better!) but now I don't think you'd have that reaction.



I really don't think it will happen either, it's just how I'd prefer to have warlocks operate. An invocation could be created to allow for splitting cantrips in two once they reach level 5 or something. I've been thinking of making these changes in my own games, really don't like the current eldritch blast set up.


----------

