# 48 subclasses in the 2024 PHB: What are they?



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Oct 2, 2022)

In the video introducing the newest UA, the hosts said there would be 48 subclasses in the 2024 PHB.

Assuming that all of the 2014 subclasses reappear (which I don't think we can necessarily assume), we're a little light.

In the 2014 PHB, we have the following:


Barbarian: Path of the Berserker, Path of the Totem Warrior
Bard: College of Lore, College of Valor
Cleric: Knowledge Domain, Life Domain, Light Domain, Nature Domain, Tempest Domain, Trickery Domain, War Domain
Druid: Circle of the Land, Circle of the Moon
Fighter: Champion, Battle Master, Eldritch Knight
Monk: Way of the Open Hand, Way of Shadow, Way of the Four Elements
Paladin: Oath of Devotion, Oath of the Ancients, Oath of Vengeance
Ranger: Hunter, Beast Master
Rogue: Thief, Assassin, Arcane Trickster
Sorcerer: Draconic Bloodline, Wild Magic
Warlock: The Archfey, The Fiend, The Great Old One
Wizard: School of Abjuration, School of Conjuration, School of Divination, School of Enchantment, School of Evocation, School of Illusion, School of Necromancy, School of Transmutation
That's 41 subclasses. If they all are planned to appear in the 2024 PHB, there are currently seven more waiting to join them. Any guesses?

Assuming some or all of them are from Xanathar's or Tasha's, I'd guess we'll see the following:

Bard: College of Glamour
Druid: Circle of Dreams
Monk: Way of the Drunken Master
Ranger: Gloom Stalker
Rogue: Swashbuckler
Sorcerer: Divine Soul
Warlock: Hexblade
Not only are these some of the most popular subclasses, but the some of the core classes in the 2014 PHB only got two subclasses, which looked weird even at the time, and which would be really strange to see in 2024, after 10 years of iteration and play.

Which do you think we'll see? Will all the 2014 subclasses reappear in the 2024 PHB? Is 48 subclasses too few? Too many?


----------



## FitzTheRuke (Oct 2, 2022)

Well, they said that there'd be 48 subclasses in the 1D&D _playtest_. 

They didn't, AFAICT actually say for sure that they'd all wind up in the 2024 PHB. It's probably the INTENT, but I doubt anyone can be fully sure about that. Even if they wind up with 48, they might not be the _same_ 48 from the playtest.

But... that shouldn't stop us from speculating!

My first comment would be to ask: To be "fair" that ought to be 4 subclasses per class (though 5e is not known for it's symmetry, for good or ill).

So... what Wizard subclasses should we cut to make room?

Or perhaps "School Specialist" should just be _one_ subclass? Then we can actually fit 3 more!


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Oct 2, 2022)

Yeah, clerics and wizards are wildly over-represented in the 2014 PHB. That said, I think a single specialist subclass for wizard would end up being a cheat, and effectively be nine subclasses anyway.


----------



## FarBeyondC (Oct 2, 2022)

It (almost certainly) won't happen, but I think it'd be neat to see each class get at least 2 exclusive subclasses and then have the other subclasses be group subclasses.


----------



## darjr (Oct 2, 2022)

The amount of content they intend to release for free is astonishing.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Oct 2, 2022)

FarBeyondC said:


> It (almost certainly) won't happen, but I think it'd be neat to see each class get at least 2 exclusive subclasses and then have the other subclasses be group subclasses.



People last year blasted WotC for trying that with the Strixhaven UA, so I think that's unlikely. I thought it was a pretty interesting idea, but it was loudly rejected.


----------



## cbwjm (Oct 2, 2022)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Yeah, clerics and wizards are wildly over-represented in the 2014 PHB. That said, I think a single specialist subclass for wizard would end up being a cheat, and effectively be nine subclasses anyway.



Maybe they'll change the way clerics work so that instead of your subclass being a domain, it's something a little more evocative like war priest or avenger or something.


----------



## cbwjm (Oct 2, 2022)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> People last year blasted WotC for trying that with the Strixhaven UA, so I think that's unlikely. I thought it was a pretty interesting idea, but it was loudly rejected.



Not sure the idea was blasted, more the implementation wasn't very good due to everyone having a different subclass schedule. If all of the other classes follow the experts and gain subclass abilities at 3, 6, 10 and 14 then it would work very well and will hopefully make a comeback officially.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan (Oct 2, 2022)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> People last year blasted WotC for trying that with the Strixhaven UA, so I think that's unlikely. I thought it was a pretty interesting idea, but it was loudly rejected.



It might work a bit better now that they're unifying when Subclasses get their features across class. They could try out these "multi-class subclasses" again and they might get better reception due to them being less confusing. However, I doubt that would happen.

Edit: Ninja'ed by @cbwjm!


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Oct 2, 2022)

I hope they merge some subclasses together, College of Valor and College of Swords definitely comes to mind. Especially if it was a subclass that was like a less effective subclass except it's unofficially version 2.0 of it.


----------



## JEB (Oct 2, 2022)

Didn't they also indicate some of these subclasses would be brand-new subclasses?


----------



## Li Shenron (Oct 2, 2022)

From a story/setting perspective, the only character concepts I felt were missing from the PHB were the Swashbuckler Rogue and the Grave Cleric, plus the still missing "generic" Wizard.

From a game balance (of choices) perspective, I think each class needs at least 3 subclasses, which wasn't provided by the PHB but Xanathar covered it for me.

The Sorcerer is perhaps a special case because even the two PHB subclasses are a bit too strong concepts (Draconic) or mechanics (Wild Mage), so I think it needs more than one extra subclass.


----------



## King Babar (Oct 2, 2022)

Ideally, each class will have 4 subclasses available to them during the playtest, with Cleric and Wizard both receiving reworked subclass concepts (they don't really need so many).

I doubt it will happen, though.


----------



## Krachek (Oct 2, 2022)

12 classes X 4 sub classes = 48.
I guess that there will be no more a sub classes for each school of magic, and no more a sub class for every cleric domain we can imagine.

Sub classes may be designed for a concrete function rather than an abstract concept.

if they want to continue into the Group concept, they can make at subclasse oriented toward each group.


----------



## Blue Orange (Oct 2, 2022)

Probably the easiest way to cut down numbers is consolidate some of the 8 schools. They could have 6 and tie them to the ability scores, or 4 and tie them to the elements. 

You have Abjuration (protection), Conjuration (creating or summoning something), Divination (getting info), Enchantment (mind-affecting magic), Evocation (making fireballs) Illusion (making illusions), Necromancy (working with death or the undead), and Transmutation (changing things into things). 

So which ones to collapse? 
2e's Netheril supplement had creating, altering, and mentalism--three might be enough if you want to even things out between the classes as far as number of classes. 

They own the IP for Magic: the Gathering, so you could put Abjuration under White, Divination, Enchantment, and Illusion under Blue, Evocation under Red, Necromancy under Black, and Conjuration under Green (which always had the best monsters if I remember right); Transmutation's a bit of a wildcard.  

If you're going for thematic, the most popular subclasses in the last survey I saw were Bladesinger, War Magic, and Evocation, all of which are offensive in nature. So they'd have to have some kind of war mage who's able to throw fireballs. Necromancy and Illusion were the only ones I know of that were broken out on their own at one point (Necromancy was a 2e splatbook for villains, Illusion was its own class in 1e) and are also richly thematic. I might guess Enchantment might be popular for people wanting to play mind-manipulating mages. The others could be left to a supplement (always make more money with those!).


----------



## Baron Opal II (Oct 2, 2022)

For wizards I would expect some sort of guild. Perhaps Guild of Iconic Wizard, Guild of Necromancers (née Hollowfaust; grim, not evil), Guild of Illusionists, Lone Wolf / Self-Taught Wild Mages? The last one might be better as a sorcerer, now that I think about it.

Iconic Wizards major in Evocation, Conjuration, Alteration
Necromancers major in Necromancy, Divination, Conjuration
Illusionists major in Illusion, Enchantment, Alteration


----------



## Aldarc (Oct 2, 2022)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Yeah, clerics and wizards are wildly over-represented in the 2014 PHB. That said, I think a single specialist subclass for wizard would end up being a cheat, and effectively be nine subclasses anyway.



Maybe, but look at the Genie Warlock. It's basically four different subclasses in one depending on which Genie type you pick.


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 2, 2022)

Reducing a Wizard to four subclasses is remarkable. (And needed.)

I expect Bladesinger to be one of the Wizard subclasses.

With some tweaking of specific spells, the Wizard can lose access to the Abjuration, Divination, and Necromancy schools. Then the Cleric becomes the go-to for these schools.

Evocation is an iconic Wizard school. Illusion too.


----------



## Weiley31 (Oct 2, 2022)

Death Domain and Oathbreaker seem like they would be added to that 41 since they were in the DMG. Unless they plan on having the 2024 DMG have subclasses in it again.


----------



## Tales and Chronicles (Oct 2, 2022)

Barbarian: Berserker, Totemist, Storm, Spirit Guardian
Bard: Lore, Valor, Blade, Eloquence
Cleric: Life, War, Knowledge, Fury
Druid: Moon, Land, Shepherd, Wild Fire
Fighter: Champion, Knight, Psi Warrior, Eldritch Knight
Monk: Open Hand, 4E, Shadow, Sun Soul
Paladin: Conquest, Devotion, Ancient, Glory
Ranger: Hunter, Beast Master, Stalker, Fey Warden
Rogue: Thief, Assassin, Arcane Trickster, Swashbuckler
Sorcerer: Wild, Dragon, Storm, Lunar
Warlock: Fiend, Fey, Undead, Fathomless
Wizard: War Mage, Beguiler, Conjurer, Necromancer


----------



## Baron Opal II (Oct 2, 2022)

Do we need an Eldritch Knight and a Bladesinger? Does a 2/3 - 1/3 balance both ways add enough to take up two subclass "slots?"


----------



## Weiley31 (Oct 2, 2022)

Baron Opal II said:


> Do we need an Eldritch Knight and a Bladesinger? Does a 2/3 - 1/3 balance both ways add enough to take up two subclass "slots?"



Well, I'm not expecting Bladesinger in PHB 2024 since it wasn't in PHB 2014. So Eldritch Knight is probably a shoe-in.


----------



## Bladesinger (Oct 2, 2022)

If they do 4 subclasses for Wizard, I'd prefer something along the lines of how Level Up did it - Specialist ( you choose which ), Generalist, Bladesinger and Elementalist. I think this would cover all the ground necessary.

Also, I don't think Hexblade is necessary for Warlock. Pact of the Blade should be the go to Warrior Warlock and the Hexblade should be folded into the Blade Pact.


----------



## Mephista (Oct 2, 2022)

12 classes x 4 subclasses each = 48.

Barbarian - zealot / berserker, beast / totem, storm / wild, ancestral guardian
Bard  - lore, valor / sword, glamour / eloquence, whispers
Cleric - life, light, knowledge, war
Druid - land, moon, shepherd/fire, healer
Fighter - Samurai/Champion hybrid, Battlemaster, Rune Knight (or otherwise pseudo-blacksmith type), Psi knight/eldritch knight/arcane arrow
Monk - open palm, elemental / dragon, ninja, kensei
Paladin - holy knight, fear-based dark knight, oathbreaker, pacifist/redemption
Ranger - hunter, beastmaster,  fey wanderer / horizon walker, gloomstalker
Rogue - thief, assassin, swashbuckler, arcane trickser/soul knife
Sorcerer - dragon, abberant mind, wild, divine soul
Warlock - fiend, abberation, fae, undead
Wizard - evoker, bladesinger, necromancer, illusionist

No 1/3 classes, use other other methods similar to psi points; more dragon monk than elemental monk.  
"Simple" subclass option listed first. 
I'd love to see a warlord fighter option, but doubt it'll happen, or just get folded into battlemaster again.


----------



## Henadic Theologian (Oct 2, 2022)

FitzTheRuke said:


> Well, they said that there'd be 48 subclasses in the 1D&D _playtest_.
> 
> They didn't, AFAICT actually say for sure that they'd all wind up in the 2024 PHB. It's probably the INTENT, but I doubt anyone can be fully sure about that. Even if they wind up with 48, they might not be the _same_ 48 from the playtest.
> 
> ...




 I think what they could and should and might do with the Wizards PHB is merge them into a single subclass that is designed simularly to the Circle of the Land Druid, doing a subclass for ever School of Magic sucked up soooo much space.

 Anyways I expect Divine Soul because the changes effect that subclass far more then most others and it's one of the most popular subclasses.

 There is also the interesting possibility of adding other Psionic subclasses besides Great Old One like Psionic Soul, Soul Knife, etc...


----------



## Ulorian - Agent of Chaos (Oct 2, 2022)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Yeah, clerics and wizards are wildly over-represented in the 2014 PHB. That said, I think a single specialist subclass for wizard would end up being a cheat, and effectively be nine subclasses anyway.



Wildly over-represented by how many subclasses they have? Why is this a problem? Are you saying having more subclasses lends some sort of advantage?


----------



## Vael (Oct 2, 2022)

I'll agree, consolidating into a single subclass all the specialist schools for the Wizard would be a good idea. So, here's my pitch for the Wizard:
1. School of Specialization
2. School of Hedge Wizardry (This is the Witch subclass. Gains a limited ability to scribe Primal spells and lay down curses)
3. School of Bladesinging
4. School of the Theurge (adds some access to Divine Spells)


----------



## Blue Orange (Oct 2, 2022)

Ulorian - Agent of Chaos said:


> Wildly over-represented by how many subclasses they have? Why is this a problem? Are you saying having more subclasses lends some sort of advantage?



Not really. If anything it divides more abilities among subclasses. Thing is, the 8 schools don't make _that_ much sense--some are by spell effect, like Divination, some are by spell purpose, like Abjuration, and some are by theme, like Necromancy. If I make a rotating fire column that shields me from incoming projectiles, is that Evocation (creating energy) or Abjuration (protection)? D&D players have been arguing this sort of thing for 30 years and I doubt I'm going to make any new points. Also with the larger number of schools there's less space to make each individual school flavorful. Of course, _Warhammer_ has 8 winds of magic, many with the same issues, so it's not that outrageous an idea, though notice they have applications like healing and plants and animals that get assigned to clerics and druids in D&D.


----------



## Neonchameleon (Oct 2, 2022)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Assuming some or all of them are from Xanathar's or Tasha's, I'd guess we'll see the following:
> Bard: College of Glamour



Sounds good


Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Druid: Circle of Dreams



I'm hoping for the Circle of Wildfire - far more evocative and means you don't have to shapeshift


Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Monk: Way of the Drunken Master



Love the theme but you don't _need_ it with refluffing the open hand.


Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Ranger: Gloom Stalker



Horizon Walker. Possibly both if they are going to reach four.


Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Rogue: Swashbuckler



Almost certainly


Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Sorcerer: Divine Soul



Definitely. Also room for a second - I'm hoping they fix Storm.


Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Warlock: Hexblade



Unlikely IMO. The Hexblade is only really a thing because they messed up the Pact of the Blade and is a seriously OP multiclass. Probably Celestial

Also Way of the Beast Barbarian - we need more shapeshifters.


----------



## Kobold Stew (Oct 2, 2022)

FitzTheRuke said:


> Or perhaps "School Specialist" should just be _one_ subclass? Then we can actually fit 3 more!



This would be such a great solution.


----------



## Neonchameleon (Oct 2, 2022)

Kobold Stew said:


> This would be such a great solution.



Ack, no, please. (At least unless we're handling it with ludicrous numbers of options). I for one massively prefer the "You get special abilities that reflect the magic of your school" to the forcibly generic "You get a bonus to learn spells from your school and an extra spell of that school per level per day no matter what that school is".


----------



## Kobold Stew (Oct 2, 2022)

Not ludicrous numbers of options, but eight paths within the single subclass.


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 2, 2022)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> People last year blasted WotC for trying that with the Strixhaven UA, so I think that's unlikely. I thought it was a pretty interesting idea, but it was loudly rejected.



Yes, those were huge messes though interesting. It does seem that standardized Subclass progression and the Group tech might change the scene here, though: a "Skillmaster" that's available to Bards, Rangers and Rogues, or a "Weapon .aster" for Barbarian, Fighter, and Monk, or so on, seem doable. Wouldn't be surprised if they tested again with these new design structures in place.

I am pretty sure they will test revisions for all 41 2014 Subclasses, and see one more each for Bard, Barbarian, Druid, Ranger, or Sorcerer.


----------



## Charlaquin (Oct 2, 2022)

Unless the way bards and rangers prepare spells in this UA polls poorly, I’m guessing wizards will do the same, and their spellbook will contain the list of spells that are always prepared. Then you’ll have the option to specialize in a school, which will somehow make it easier to add spells of that school to your spellbook.

Actually, considering that they seem to be standardizing subclass progression and they start at 3rd level in this packet, I wouldn’t be surprised if the 2nd level feature every Wizard subclass had that lets you copy spells of your chosen school into your spellbook in half the time and for half the cost just becomes a universal wizard feature. Choose which school you gain that benefit for when you gain the feature.


----------



## Marandahir (Oct 2, 2022)

45 subclasses would mean every class but Cleric and Wizard get 3, while those two get 7 and 8 respectively. 48 means that Death Domain, Oathbreaker, and one other subclass make it in.

What is that final subclass that breaks the bank? That's about as mysterious to me as the 5 subclasses they'd be adding to round out the Barbarian, Bard, Druid, Ranger, and Sorcerer. I sort of feel like these 6 questionmark subclasses will be something entirely new - remember that they said they wanted the _Rules Expansion_ Gift Set to be as meaningfully expanding the 2024 Core Rules as it is to the 2014 Core Rules.

That would mean that Xanathar's and Tasha's subclasses would be off-limits. I GUESS they could add in outstanding things like the Path of the Battlerager, but I sort of feel like if they haven't revived a subclass from SCAG yet, they don't intend to. Narratively, The Undead replaces The Undying, for example.

I also feel like this could be a chance to reboot some of the early subclass trap options, or else options that step on each other's toes. Death and Grave Domains are a great example - in an ideal game, we'd have one domain that could handle both concepts, given that they're both talking about the Gods of Death.


----------



## JEB (Oct 2, 2022)

Keep in mind that we don't know yet if four subclass slots at 3, 6, 10, and 14 will be standard across all four class groups. We only know that it's the case for Experts.

Likewise, 48 / 12 = 4 doesn't mean four subclasses per class. They could achieve the same total number of subclasses simply by keeping the current spread, and giving one more each to seven of the classes.


----------



## JEB (Oct 2, 2022)

Marandahir said:


> That would mean that Xanathar's and Tasha's subclasses would be off-limits.



You make a compelling argument, but worth noting that some will already need revision to work optimally with the 1D&D Expert structures, and I imagine more will in the other categories as well. Certainly provides an excuse for moving some into core. It's possible they may hold off on those options for a non-core update book post 2024, though.


----------



## Sorcerers Apprentice (Oct 2, 2022)

darjr said:


> The amount of content they intend to release for free is astonishing.



Even more astonishing is the amount of quality assurance labor the D&D community is willing to do for free!


----------



## Blue (Oct 2, 2022)

Each class has 3 subclasses, and the rest are variations on wizard and cleric.  

Honestly though, I'm ready to move away from each Wizard school is a subclass.  They could make it a bit like warlock where there's a pick that gives a few adjustments for school, and then a bunch of flavorful actual subclasses.


----------



## Marandahir (Oct 2, 2022)

JEB said:


> Keep in mind that we don't know yet if four subclass slots at 3, 6, 10, and 14 will be standard across all four class groups. We only know that it's the case for Experts.
> 
> Likewise, 48 / 12 = 4 doesn't mean four subclasses per class. They could achieve the same total number of subclasses simply by keeping the current spread, and giving one more each to seven of the classes.



That's what I assume will happen... Barbarians, Bards, Clerics, Druids, Paladins, Rangers, Sorcerers, and one other would each get an extra subclass. Cleric & Paladin bc of 2014 DMG subclasses. The others because they only had 2 in 2014. The last is a wild card.

FYI, there were only 40 subclasses in the 2014 PHB, not 41.


----------



## Marandahir (Oct 2, 2022)

JEB said:


> You make a compelling argument, but worth noting that some will already need revision to work optimally with the 1D&D Expert structures, and I imagine more will in the other categories as well. Certainly provides an excuse for moving some into core. It's possible they may hold off on those options for a non-core update book post 2024, though.



Absolutely; I expect the gorgeous special edition white box Rules Expansion I bought this year (despite having the special covers of XGtE and TCoE) will be obsolete in 2025 when they publish errata and republish the books in a brand new gift set.


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 2, 2022)

JEB said:


> Keep in mind that we don't know yet if four subclass slots at 3, 6, 10, and 14 will be standard across all four class groups. We only know that it's the case for Experts.
> 
> Likewise, 48 / 12 = 4 doesn't mean four subclasses per class. They could achieve the same total number of subclasses simply by keeping the current spread, and giving one more each to seven of the classes.



Crawford basically said the bew Sybclass progression was an across the board thing in the videos.


----------



## Marandahir (Oct 2, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> Crawford basically said the bew Sybclass progression was an across the board thing in the videos.



Not just basically. He outright said that was the intention.

I wonder if they want to see if they can do something akin to the Strixhaven UA subclasses in the future, where the fundamental argument against it was the lack of parity between classes.


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 2, 2022)

JEB said:


> You make a compelling argument, but worth noting that some will already need revision to work optimally with the 1D&D Expert structures, and I imagine more will in the other categories as well. Certainly provides an excuse for moving some into core. It's possible they may hold off on those options for a non-core update book post 2024, though.



Not really: looking over the Rogue, Ranger, and Bar Subclasses...theybshould still all work fine. Particularly once they refine the numbers in playtest. 2014 Subclasses will remain viable for the new base Classes.


----------



## JEB (Oct 2, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> Crawford basically said the bew Sybclass progression was an across the board thing in the videos.



If the progression for Experts is intended to be universal, that means clerics won't get their subclass until level 3 now, and both they and fighters lose a subclass slot, which would both impact 5E subclass compatibility. (As is, 5E bard/ranger/rogue subclasses have a dead level compared to their 1D&D counterparts.) Universal standards may indeed be the intention, but I wouldn't be sure of anything until we see the packets.



Marandahir said:


> I wonder if they want to see if they can do something akin to the Strixhaven UA subclasses in the future, where the fundamental argument against it was the lack of parity between classes.



Would certainly like to see them try again! Though I'm not sure they'd have any more luck this time.


----------



## Neonchameleon (Oct 2, 2022)

I'm very much in the camp that things should be symmetric and simplified where it adds benefit and not where it doesn't.

I therefore think that there should be two separate subclass progressions - one that goes 1, 6, 10, 14 and the other that goes 3, 6, 10, 14. The difference is whether the subclass represents something irrevocable and that is required to enter the class in the first place and that you'd basically need a quest to change (e.g. warlock patrons) or whether the subclass represents specialisation within the class (e.g. rogue subclasses). But I see no real reason different classes shouldn't all get subclass features at 6, 10, and 14 (and possibly 18 or 19); I just don't see any thematic advantage in varying the subclass levels here.


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 2, 2022)

JEB said:


> If the progression for Experts is intended to be universal, that means clerics won't get their subclass until level 3 now, and both they and fighters lose a subclass slot, which would both impact 5E subclass compatibility. (As is, 5E bard/ranger/rogue subclasses have a dead level compared to their 1D&D counterparts.) Universal standards may indeed be the intention, but I wouldn't be sure of anything until we see the packets.
> 
> 
> Would certainly like to see them try again! Though I'm not sure they'd have any more luck this time.



Yes, they are certainly a work in progress: but that was what Crawford said, so look for Clerics and Sorcerer to get their Subclass at 3 now, and we will see further guidance on how to adapt 5E Subclasses to 2024 Classes in the future, I'm sure.


----------



## Haplo781 (Oct 2, 2022)

I'm pretty sure one of the videos said it's 4 per class. And I'm guessing they'll try to go with broad archetypes that lean into one aspect of the class, leaving "expands the class in a new direction" for splatbooks.


----------



## UngainlyTitan (Oct 2, 2022)

Sorcerers Apprentice said:


> Even more astonishing is the amount of quality assurance labor the D&D community is willing to do for free!



The D&D community has been doing quality assurance work for free for 50 years. At least we are not paying for early access.


----------



## JEB (Oct 2, 2022)

Neonchameleon said:


> I therefore think that there should be two separate subclass progressions - one that goes 1, 6, 10, 14 and the other that goes 3, 6, 10, 14. The difference is whether the subclass represents something irrevocable and that is required to enter the class in the first place and that you'd basically need a quest to change (e.g. warlock patrons) or whether the subclass represents specialisation within the class (e.g. rogue subclasses).



Occurs to me that if class groups all get the same subclass progression, and they keep a level 1 slot for cleric theming in the Priest category, and the Priest category also includes druids and paladins, that would mean 1D&D druids and paladins also get their subclass starting at level 1. In the latter case, that would make a lot more sense than what we have now.


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 2, 2022)

JEB said:


> Occurs to me that if class groups all get the same subclass progression, and they keep a level 1 slot for cleric theming in the Priest category, and the Priest category also includes druids and paladins, that would mean 1D&D druids and paladins also get their subclass starting at level 1. In the latter case, that would make a lot more sense than what we have now.



It seems more likely that all 3 get their start delayed to Level 3, and match what we just saw for Experts. Crawford said they are standardizing Subclass progression.. and that means across the board.


----------



## UngainlyTitan (Oct 2, 2022)

I am not convinced that all grouping will have the same subclass progression some cognisance of the existing subclass has to be taken.


----------



## Zaukrie (Oct 2, 2022)

I don't think wizards need one for every class, so I hope they don't do that.


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 2, 2022)

UngainlyTitan said:


> I am not convinced that all grouping will have the same subclass progression some cognisance of the existing subclass has to be taken.



They already basically broke that with Experts, and they will probably provide a "Here's how to adjust Subclass levels for older options" after they nail down the rules some more.


----------



## FitzTheRuke (Oct 2, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> I am pretty sure they will test revisions for all 41 2014 Subclasses, and see one more each for Bard, Barbarian, Druid, Ranger, or Sorcerer.




That's "only" 46!


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 2, 2022)

FitzTheRuke said:


> That's "only" 46!



Room for some variation! I'm just laying out the minimum expecatog what I think will get covered.


----------



## FitzTheRuke (Oct 3, 2022)

JEB said:


> If the progression for Experts is intended to be universal, that means clerics won't get their subclass until level 3 now.



That would work if the subclasses are separated from Domain choice. Which would be cool, IMO. It's like how Pact and Patron are different choices for the Warlock.



JEB said:


> and both they and fighters lose a subclass slot, which would both impact 5E subclass compatibility.



Yeah, I think we're gonna see revised version of all the 5E subclasses so that "compatibility" is going to mean, "You can play a 5e character or a 50e character at the same table, but you can't mix-n-match".



Baron Opal II said:


> Do we need an Eldritch Knight and a Bladesinger? Does a 2/3 - 1/3 balance both ways add enough to take up two subclass "slots?"



Yes, I think we do. They make for interesting options and are very much not the same thing as each other.



Kobold Stew said:


> Not ludicrous numbers of options, but eight paths within the single subclass.




Another approach (I saw someone suggest something like somewhere around here, but I can't find again to give credit) is to use the most popular specialist archetypes and give them specialty more than one school (and skip the not as popular ones).

Evoker (Abjuration, Evocation, Transmutation)
Necromancer (Conjuration, Necromancy)
Illusionist (Divination, Illusion, Enchantment)

Or whatever makes more sense than those examples (I'm no Wizard expert).


----------



## Lycurgon (Oct 3, 2022)

I suspect they will be standardising Subclasses across Class Groups rather than across the board. The Expert Group all have their subclasses start at 3rd like they do now. If they standardise per Group I suspect Warrior Subclasses will start at 3rd and progress like Expert, but the other groups would not.

Warlocks and Sorcerers get theirs at 1st and their concepts really need that. How can you be a Warlock without a Patron? How can you be a Sorcerer without a source for your power? So I suspect that Wizards will get their subclass at first to match them.
Clerics need their subclass at 1st too. There shouldn't be Priests that haven't chosen a God yet. So I also expect Druids and Paladins to get their Subclasses at 1st too. For Paladins I think it makes more sense to make their defining Oath at first rather than later. For Druid they don't need to be at 1st but I do think they need to be at or before the level that they get Wildshape because a lot of the Subclasses are about how they modify how they use that power. So 1st works better for them than 3rd.

The benefit to this is they can make subclasses that work across Class Groups. A skill master class for all Expert Classes. An Arcane Scholar available for all Mage Classes.
But I don't really see them doing subclasses that fit all of the Classes, it would be too broad a scope. So I don't see a good benefit to standardise across the board, it doesn't serve the story of the classes or add anything useful except game symmetry.

I also think if they try to have all classes gain their subclasses at 3rd level, it will get a huge amount of negative feedback that they will change it to by group anyway. Some class concepts need to have their source of power defined at the beginning of their career.


----------



## Haplo781 (Oct 3, 2022)

Barbarian: Ancestral Guardian, Beast, Berserker, Totem Warrior

Bard: Creation, Eloquence, Lore, Valor

Cleric: Death, Light, Tempest, War

Druid: Dreams, Moon, Shepherd, Wildfire

Fighter: Battle Master, Cavalier, Eldritch Knight, Rune Knight 

Monk: Shadow, 4E, Kensai, Sun Soul

Paladin: Devotion, Glory, Ancients, Vengeance 

Ranger: Beast Master, Fey Wanderer, Gloom Stalker, Hunter

Rogue: Assassin, Scout, Swashbuckler, Thief

Sorcerer: Dragon, Shadow, Storm, Wild

Warlock: Archfey, Fiend, Great Old One, Undead

Wizard: Bladesinger, Scribes, Specialist, War


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 3, 2022)

FitzTheRuke said:


> Yeah, I think we're gonna see revised version of all the 5E subclasses so that "compatibility" is going to mean, "You can play a 5e character or a 50e character at the same table, but you can't mix-n-match".



But on the contrary, we have two packets now where they go out of their way to ensure old options still function (old Races still work, and old Bard, Ranger and Rogue Subclasses, too). I suspect this will only get stringer over time, as they want to keep selling the older books. If they get that to work, that means that basically every 5E books is still filled with usable game material for OneD&D.


----------



## FitzTheRuke (Oct 3, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> But on the contrary, we have two packets now where they go out of their way to ensure old options still function (old Raves still work, and old Bard, Ranger and Rogue Subclasses, too). I suspect this will only get stringer over time, as they want to keep selling the older books. If they get that to work, that means that basically every 5E books is still filled with usable game material for OneD&D.



Sorry, Raves? What's that? And don't the subclasses get stuff at different levels? Doesn't that cause problems?


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Oct 3, 2022)

cbwjm said:


> Maybe they'll change the way clerics work so that instead of your subclass being a domain, it's something a little more evocative like war priest or avenger or something.



Type of priest is so much better. Leave domain at level 1, but make it much smaller, and your Order is what actually defines you. 

Most domains are extremely boring.


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 3, 2022)

FitzTheRuke said:


> Sorry, Raves? What's that? And don't the subclasses get stuff at different levels? Doesn't that cause problems?



Sorry, my autocorrect likes to party, Races. Not really big problems, frankly, which is why the rules here say to just go with it in playtesting. And I suspect that after they nail down the Core Classes they will provide more exact guidance to make them fit (move this feature to this Level, take a Feat here etc.).


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Oct 3, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> But on the contrary, we have two packets now where they go out of their way to ensure old options still function (old Raves still work, and old Bard, Ranger and Rogue Subclasses, too). I suspect this will only get stringer over time, as they want to keep selling the older books. If they get that to work, that means that basically every 5E books is still filled with usable game material for OneD&D.



Yeah at this point I think they’re goal is to have all supplements be fully usable, mix and match, with the 2024 revised PHB. 

Ya know, like they said when they announced 1DND.


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 3, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Yeah at this point I think they’re goal is to have all supplements be fully usable, mix and match, with the 2024 revised PHB.
> 
> Ya know, like they said when they announced 1DND.



I, for one, didn't expect SCAG material from 2015 to still be usable with the 2024 PHB...but my goodness, it looks like they are pulling it off.


----------



## Marandahir (Oct 3, 2022)

FitzTheRuke said:


> That's "only" 46!



Plus Paladin and Cleric DMG options. And it's 40 PHB subclasses. Cleric only has 7 in the PHB.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Oct 3, 2022)

Bladesinger said:


> Also, I don't think Hexblade is necessary for Warlock. Pact of the Blade should be the go to Warrior Warlock and the Hexblade should be folded into the Blade Pact.



I think I’d actually rather see at least one patron tied to the concept of each pact boon. 

But as for Pact of the Blade, all that is needed is to make Eldritch Blast a spell attack you make with the attack action and that gains more attacks as you level, and pact of the blade makes it a melee attack and has some rules for gaining weapon properties by binding a specific weapon to your power.


----------



## Marandahir (Oct 3, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> I think I’d actually rather see at least one patron tied to the concept of each pact boon.
> 
> But as for Pact of the Blade, all that is needed is to make Eldritch Blast a spell attack you make with the attack action and that gains more attacks as you level, and pact of the blade makes it a melee attack and has some rules for gaining weapon properties by binding a specific weapon to your power.



On the other hand, I feel like the Pact of Chains and Pact of the Tome and Pact of the Talisman are all much more closely aligned concepts for castery magey Warlocks (and similar to the 3e and 4e Binder class as well). Meanwhile, Pact of the Blade almost feels like a different animal. I wonder if they couldn't pull a 3e and make Hexblade an entirely separate class - a true arcane gish - that uses Pact Magic instead of the Spellcasting feature. Then there wouldn't be worries about trying to make room for both melee and castery Warlocks…


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Oct 3, 2022)

I think we will see each iconic subclass, 1-2 new subclasses per class, and 1 high-satisfaction subclass. 

Rogue might have Thief and either Arcane Trickster or Swashbuckler, and two new archetypes, for instance. 

So, Thief, Hunter, Champion, College of Lore, Oath of Devotion, Way of The Open Hand, Circle of The Moon, Path of The Berserker, Fiendish Patron, Draconic Origin,  Life Domain, and Evocation Wizard. 

Beyond that, I don’t think they’ll put things like Bladesinger or Gloomstalker, that are very popular options in one of the major expansions (Tasha’s, Xanathar’s, the ones coming next year), in the new PHB.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Oct 3, 2022)

Marandahir said:


> On the other hand, I feel like the Pact of Chains and Pact of the Tome and Pact of the Talisman are all much more closely aligned concepts for castery magey Warlocks (and similar to the 3e and 4e Binder class as well). Meanwhile, Pact of the Blade almost feels like a different animal. I wonder if they couldn't pull a 3e and make Hexblade an entirely separate class - a true arcane gish - that uses Pact Magic instead of the Spellcasting feature. Then there wouldn't be worries about trying to make room for both melee and castery Warlocks…



I’d rather they just streamline melee warlocks as I suggested above, by streamlining EB. Then Invocations can just make you tougher or more agile or whatever, because EB cantrips already improve your Blade Pact weapon attacks.


----------



## bedir than (Oct 3, 2022)

Marandahir said:


> Plus Paladin and Cleric DMG options



I wouldn't expect to see these in a player facing book. D&D is themed around playing heroes.


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 3, 2022)

bedir than said:


> I wouldn't expect to see these in a player facing book. D&D is themed around playing heroes.



I mean, has anyone ever seen those used in 8 years...?


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan (Oct 3, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> I think I’d actually rather see at least one patron tied to the concept of each pact boon.



Ugh. I'd absolutely hate that. Warlocks are the best-designed class in 5e because of how they can mix and match subclasses, pact boons, and eldritch invocations.


----------



## Marandahir (Oct 3, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> I mean, has anyone ever seen those used in 8 years...?



Honestly, I think Grave should kill Death and take its stuff. And I’ve needed a more ”Greyguard” or “Ronin” version of Oathbreaker for many of my games. Oathbreaker is totally a player option that should be seen, as are clerics of death gods - at least as much as Necromancers should be - but it need not be so clearly demonic…


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan (Oct 3, 2022)

Marandahir said:


> Honestly, I think Grave should kill Death and take its stuff.



"Death" is a misnomer. It's more "Undeath". But I would approve of Grave being moved to the PHB.


----------



## Horwath (Oct 3, 2022)

48 seems to little, there are good subclasses in XGTE/Tasha.
some should be in by default.

Barbarian: Totem, Zealot, Beast, reworked berserker and battlerager
bard: Lore, Valor and swords should combine into one subclass, Creation, Eloquence
Cleric: All except twilight
Druid: moon, stars, wildfire, shepard
Fighter: Battlemaster, Champion and samurai should combine somehow, EK and Arcane archer combined also, Rune knight, Banneret combined with cavalier.
Monk: Mercy, Shadow, Kensai. Others are so bad that they need major overhaul or dont bother.
Paladin: all oaths are fine: give 5 most popular
Ranger: Gloomstalker, Feywanderer, Beast and Hunter need a rework
Rogue: assassin, scout, thief, Arcane trickster, swashbuckler
Sorcerer: aberrant mind, clockwork soul, rest need an overhaul looking at 1st two here.
Warlock: hexblade, and 3 others
Wizard: chronurgy, graviturgy, warmagic, bladesinging, School wizards could become some kind of generalist/metamagic or merged into order of Scribes


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Oct 3, 2022)

Levistus's_Leviathan said:


> Ugh. I'd absolutely hate that. Warlocks are the best-designed class in 5e because of how they can mix and match subclasses, pact boons, and eldritch invocations.



Which would only be enhanced by what I proposed.


----------



## Zaukrie (Oct 3, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Type of priest is so much better. Leave domain at level 1, but make it much smaller, and your Order is what actually defines you.
> 
> Most domains are extremely boring.



I wish the Deity they worshipped defined them more. I get the specific one is hard, but Priest of War God should have very different powers than Priest of Fertility God (like, for me, turn undead should be a choice of like 20 different powers, or something). Then have the subclasses be different also.


----------



## Clint_L (Oct 3, 2022)

Artificer: Artificer, Artillerist, Battle Smith, Armourer
Barbarian: Berserker, Totem Warrior, Ancestral Guardian, Storm Herald
Cleric: Life, Trickery, War, Grave
Druid: Dreams, Stars, Moon, Land
Fighter: Champion, Psi Warrior, Battle Master, Eldritch Knight
Monk: Mercy, Open Hand, Shadow, Elemental
Paladin: Vengeance, Conquest, Devotion, Redemption
Ranger: Beastmaster, Gloomstalker, Hunter, Monster Slayer
Rogue: Arcane Trickster, Assassin, Thief, Mastermind
Sorcerer: Wild Magic, Draconic Bloodline, Aberrant Mind, Shadow Magic 
Warlock: Great Old One, Hexblade, Fiend, Archfey
Wizard: Enchantment, Evocation, Illusion, Conjuration

I think it's important to keep basic, vanilla versions of each class for new players, so subclasses like Champion, Thief, and Berserker play an important role. Some classes were hard to cut down to four (Cleric and Wizard!) while others didn't need more than 2-3 (Sorcerer, Monk, Artificer), so I could see a case being made against there being a flat 4 subclasses for each class. 

Also, currently, some classes are so dominated by a single subclass that the rest, though cool, are almost superfluous. I would not be shocked to learn that more than 75% of experienced players pick Moon Druids, Mercy Monks, Hexblade Warlocks, etc. So I really hope that 1D&D is able to achieve better balance.


----------



## OB1 (Oct 3, 2022)

I'm going in a bit of a different direction here.  Given the 4 PC groupings, I'm guessing that the 4 subclasses for each class will end up representing the 4 Class groupings for each class.  You'll have the 'classic' class for each that is the 'pure' version of the class, with the others dipping into the other three groupings.  Don't know if that will stick, but I think they may want to test it.  While I've used traditional class names for the below, I think there will be significant changes (including name changes) to fit the below.

Barbarian:  Berserker (Warrior), Totem (Expert), Ancestral Guardian (Priest), Storm Herald (Mage)
Cleric:  Life (Priest), Forge (Expert), War (Warrior), Arcana (Mage)
Druid:  Land (Priest), Moon (Warrior), Dreams (Expert), Wildfire (Mage)
Fighter: Champion (Warrior), Battle Master (Expert), Eldritch Knight (Mage), Warlord (Priest)
Monk: Open Hand (Warrior), Shadow (Expert), 4 Elements (Mage), Long Death (Priest)
Paladin: Devotion (Priest), Conquest(Warrior), Vengeance (Expert), Ancients (Mage)
Ranger: Hunter (Expert), Monster Slayer (Warrior), Beast Master (Priest), Horizon Walker (Mage)
Rogue: Thief (Expert), Swashbuckler (Warrior), Arcane Trickster (Mage), Assassin (Priest)
Sorcerer: Storm (Mage), Shadow (Expert), Divine (Priest), Dragon (Warrior)
Warlock: Tome (Mage), Blade (Warrior), Chain (Priest), Genie (Expert)
Wizard: School (Mage), Bladesinging (Warrior), War (Priest), Scribes (expert


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 3, 2022)

Horwath said:


> 48 seems to little, there are good subclasses in XGTE/Tasha.
> some should be in by default.



The issue there is that WotC has signaled they intend to jeep selling both Xanathar's and Tasha's past 2024, and allow the Subclasses there to be viable. So I don't expect many, if any, repeats.


----------



## Marandahir (Oct 3, 2022)

bedir than said:


> I wouldn't expect to see these in a player facing book. D&D is themed around playing heroes.



They said playtest 48 subclasses; they didn’t say 48 in the PHB. These two could still be locked to the DMG (and honestly, so could the 1 wildcard, leaving 45 subclasses in the PHB and the only additions there being the third subclass options for the 5 classes that had just two choices).


----------



## Marandahir (Oct 3, 2022)

Zaukrie said:


> I wish the Deity they worshipped defined them more. I get the specific one is hard, but Priest of War God should have very different powers than Priest of Fertility God (like, for me, turn undead should be a choice of like 20 different powers, or something). Then have the subclasses be different also.



That’s literally what Domain choice is. 

War Domain makes you a heavy front line tank of a church militant; Nature Domain makes you a Druid-lite.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan (Oct 3, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Which would only be enhanced by what I proposed.



No. If every patron favors a pact boon, that will be the pact boon that most people will choose. It's bad enough with Hexblade.


----------



## Twiggly the Gnome (Oct 3, 2022)

FitzTheRuke said:


> That would work if the subclasses are separated from Domain choice. Which would be cool, IMO. It's like how Pact and Patron are different choices for the Warlock.



I'd love if they made domains a lot thinner, something with a mechanical heft somewhere in-between patrons and invocations, so you could start with a couple and maybe pick up a couple more along the way. Have the actual subclass be something more broad based, the Cleric meta-types of "Divine Striker" and "Potent Spellcaster" would be a good start.


----------



## darjr (Oct 3, 2022)

Marandahir said:


> They said playtest 48 subclasses; they didn’t say 48 in the PHB. These two could still be locked to the DMG (and honestly, so could the 1 wildcard, leaving 45 subclasses in the PHB and the only additions there being the third subclass options for the 5 classes that had just two choices).



Wait, didn’t they? In one of the videos? I could be misremembering.

Anyway who said lists are bad? This thread is, like, a big chunk of lists.


----------



## Clint_L (Oct 3, 2022)

That is really clever, sorting them by the new PC groupings. I would quibble and put Mercy monk as the obvious Priest corollary (and also as one of the few currently good monk subclasses, but hopefully the new update addresses that). Overall, though, you make a strong case.


----------



## FitzTheRuke (Oct 3, 2022)

OB1 said:


> I'm going in a bit of a different direction here.  Given the 4 PC groupings, I'm guessing that the 4 subclasses for each class will end up representing the 4 Class groupings for each class.  You'll have the 'classic' class for each that is the 'pure' version of the class, with the others dipping into the other three groupings.  Don't know if that will stick, but I think they may want to test it.  While I've used traditional class names for the below, I think there will be significant changes (including name changes) to fit the below.
> 
> Barbarian:  Berserker (Warrior), Totem (Expert), Ancestral Guardian (Priest), Storm Herald (Mage)
> Cleric:  Life (Priest), Forge (Expert), War (Warrior), Arcana (Mage)
> ...




This is a neat idea, but you missed Bard, which we can guess would be something like:

Bard: Lore (Expert); Swords/Valor (Warrior); Creation (Priest); Whispers (Mage), 

Though I think that they probably won't step on any of Xanathar's or Tasha's toes when it comes to subclasses (to keep those books as viable sellers as possible), but you never know.

Also, I'd like to see Domain removed from Subclass (as discussed above), and to a lesser extent Wizard School (though I think the _names_ Evoker, Conjurer, Illusionist, and Necromancer are good. Well, not so much Evoker, but it has history. Still, if they make the connection not quite so direct (they can specialize in the school, but have there more to it than that, like make the Evoker and the War Mage the same thing).

Lots to think about.


----------



## OB1 (Oct 3, 2022)

FitzTheRuke said:


> This is a neat idea, but you missed Bard, which we can guess would be something like:
> 
> Bard: Lore (Expert); Swords/Valor (Warrior); Creation (Priest); Whispers (Mage),
> 
> ...



Can't believe I forgot Bard!  Those are good choices.  I agree they won't step on Xanthar's or Tasha's toes, the examples I was giving was more for flavor.  But I think it makes sense to help guide which class you want.  Can't decide between an Expert and a Warrior?  Choose which is most important and then pick a sub-class that gives you a little bit of the other.

I think Domains and Schools will remain a first level choice that defines some abilities for your class, with the subclass for Clerics and Wizards where more of the specific features for your character come from.  Again, by choosing what other group you want to mix your main class with, you can focus more on what you want.

And I still think Monks should be priests with a bit of warrior and Paladins warriors with a bit of priest, rather than the other way around, but will wait to see what those groups actually are.  I get the feeling they did it that way because Warriors are going to get access to 4 extra feat choices between 1st and 10th level (chosen from the warrior list), and Priests extra Channel Divinity uses and options.  The Monk would especially benefit from extra feats (helps counter how MAD they are) and Paladins would benefit from additional CD options.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Oct 3, 2022)

Levistus's_Leviathan said:


> No. If every patron favors a pact boon, that will be the pact boon that most people will choose. It's bad enough with Hexblade.



I didn’t say that I’d like every patron to “favor” a pact boon. I said I’d like there to be a patron like the Hexblade for each pact boon.


----------



## Zaukrie (Oct 3, 2022)

Marandahir said:


> That’s literally what Domain choice is.
> 
> War Domain makes you a heavy front line tank of a church militant; Nature Domain makes you a Druid-lite.



Yes and no. Though maybe what I need more of is domains?


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan (Oct 3, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> I didn’t say that I’d like every patron to “favor” a pact boon. I said I’d like there to be a patron like the Hexblade for each pact boon.



I misread you then. But I still think that would be a bad idea. The buffs to Pact of the Blade from Hexblade and other possible boon buffs from subclasses should be granted to all Warlocks, not just ones of specific subclasses.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Oct 3, 2022)

Levistus's_Leviathan said:


> I misread you then. But I still think that would be a bad idea. The buffs to Pact of the Blade from Hexblade and other possible boon buffs from subclasses should be granted to all Warlocks, not just ones of specific subclasses.



That leads to less options, though. It’s good that I can play a chain pact Hexblade or a blade pact genie warlock.

Even better if I could also play blade or chain with a ritualist-focused patron that leans into the concept of the Tome Pact.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan (Oct 3, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> That leads to less options, though. It’s good that I can play a chain pact Hexblade or a blade pact genie warlock.
> 
> Even better if I could also play blade or chain with a ritualist-focused patron that leans into the concept of the Tome Pact.



If I were designing the Warlock subclasses, all of them would synergize with all of the Pact Boons. Fiend Warlocks with Pact of the Blade would deal extra fire damage with their Pact Weapon, Archfey Warlocks with Pact of the Talisman could have their Fey Prescence emanate from themselves or the ally that's wearing the talisman, Undead Warlocks with Pact of the Chain would get an undead familiar, and so on. It would be a bit complicated, but make it feel like your minor customization choices matter more.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Oct 4, 2022)

Levistus's_Leviathan said:


> If I were designing the Warlock subclasses, all of them would synergize with all of the Pact Boons. Fiend Warlocks with Pact of the Blade would deal extra fire damage with their Pact Weapon, Archfey Warlocks with Pact of the Talisman could have their Fey Prescence emanate from themselves or the ally that's wearing the talisman, Undead Warlocks with Pact of the Chain would get an undead familiar, and so on. It would be a bit complicated, but make it feel like your minor customization choices matter more.



I’d buy that on the DMsGuild. I definitely have players who like the warlock who would be overwhelmed by that, though.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan (Oct 4, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> I’d buy that on the DMsGuild. I definitely have players who like the warlock who would be overwhelmed by that, though.



I already have basically the whole system done. It's effectively just another Warlock subclass feature at level 3 that says "If you have the X Pact Boon, you gain the following additional benefit". Not overly complex, but it was a bit difficult coming up with something unique for every subclass and pact boon combination.


----------



## Lycurgon (Oct 4, 2022)

OB1 said:


> I'm going in a bit of a different direction here.  Given the 4 PC groupings, I'm guessing that the 4 subclasses for each class will end up representing the 4 Class groupings for each class.  You'll have the 'classic' class for each that is the 'pure' version of the class, with the others dipping into the other three groupings.  Don't know if that will stick, but I think they may want to test it.  While I've used traditional class names for the below, I think there will be significant changes (including name changes) to fit the below.
> 
> Barbarian:  Berserker (Warrior), Totem (Expert), Ancestral Guardian (Priest), Storm Herald (Mage)
> Cleric:  Life (Priest), Forge (Expert), War (Warrior), Arcana (Mage)
> ...



I don't think this is likely at all. The reason being is that the Expert Group is define as "Polymaths who have the Expertise feature and elements of other Classes" JC talked about how the Experts, being Polymaths, take abilities from other groups/classes.

If one of the defining characteristics of the Expert is that they dip into other Classes or Class Groups for a little of their shtick, then it can't be something that the other groups all do. 

So, while this is an interesting idea, it is against their stated Class Group definitions.


----------



## CleverNickName (Oct 4, 2022)

I'd be really surprised if Hexblade doesn't make it into the new PHB; it's one of the most popular non-PHB subclasses out there.  I think we will also see the Twilight Domain in there as well, for the same reason, but with hopefully some careful revisions to rebalance it.

But that's about as far as I would guess.


----------



## OB1 (Oct 4, 2022)

Lycurgon said:


> I don't think this is likely at all. The reason being is that the Expert Group is define as "Polymaths who have the Expertise feature and elements of other Classes" JC talked about how the Experts, being Polymaths, take abilities from other groups/classes.
> 
> If one of the defining characteristics of the Expert is that they dip into other Classes or Class Groups for a little of their shtick, then it can't be something that the other groups all do.
> 
> So, while this is an interesting idea, it is against their stated Class Group definitions.



Clearly an Eldritch Knight or an Arcane Trickster will steal from other classes, so I'm not sure it's that cut and dry.  It's not the whole class that's Polymath, it's a particular subclass.  That subclass only steals from one other grouping, unlike, say the Ranger which steals from Warrior and Priest, or the Bard stealing from Warrior, Priest and Mage.

So really, what I'm suggesting is that the subclasses in the PHB (other than the 'iconic version of each' are sort of a pre-built multi-class option for the PC.  An Arcane Trickster is basically 70% Rogue 30% Mage.  A Swordmage would be 70% Mage 30% Warrior.  And so on.


----------



## Blue Orange (Oct 4, 2022)

OB1 said:


> Clearly an Eldritch Knight or an Arcane Trickster will steal from other classes, so I'm not sure it's that cut and dry.  It's not the whole class that's Polymath, it's a particular subclass.  That subclass only steals from one other grouping, unlike, say the Ranger which steals from Warrior and Priest, or the Bard stealing from Warrior, Priest and Mage.
> 
> So really, what I'm suggesting is that the subclasses in the PHB (other than the 'iconic version of each' are sort of a pre-built multi-class option for the PC.  An Arcane Trickster is basically 70% Rogue 30% Mage.  A Swordmage would be 70% Mage 30% Warrior.  And so on.



Nifty idea. I actually liked the old fighter/cleric/mage options from 1e and 2e, and no reason you couldn't go 70-30. I guess after a while it goes into a skills system.


----------



## Baron Opal II (Oct 4, 2022)

Twiggly the Gnome said:


> I'd love if they made domains a lot thinner, something with a mechanical heft somewhere in-between patrons and invocations, so you could start with a couple and maybe pick up a couple more along the way.



Yes- I would prefer that clerics have their "subclass" be their temple / deity. One thing that I liked about 3e (?) was that you chose two out of three domains (I think). That allowed for a "standard" sun priest but still some variation within the religion itself. I've been fiddling with making custom subclasses that are often a mix of other published subclasses.

Similarly, I would like the wizard subclasses to be guilds. This would provide a template for DMs and players to craft their own guilds. Also, one subclass should be the renegade, a wizard trained outside the guilds.


----------



## FitzTheRuke (Oct 4, 2022)

Baron Opal II said:


> Similarly, I would like the wizard subclasses to be guilds. This would provide a template for DMs and players to craft their own guilds. Also, one subclass should be the renegade, a wizard trained outside the guilds.




That's a great idea that allows them to keep the concept of Necromancers & Illusionists, etc, without having to make spell-school specialty the main thrust of what makes a Wizard Subclass.


----------



## Blue Orange (Oct 4, 2022)

FitzTheRuke said:


> That's a great idea that allows them to keep the concept of Necromancers & Illusionists, etc, without having to make spell-school specialty the main thrust of what makes a Wizard Subclass.



As the most 'culture-bound' of the magic classes, I'd love to see different guilds for different areas/nations/regions, but that turns into way too many rules way too quickly.


----------



## steeldragons (Oct 4, 2022)

Shooting for 48...divide by 12 classes...4 subclasses per class. Needing to divvy up the classes into thematic categories, that's 3 classes per major group... Soooo...

*Warriors - Str. classes
Fighters* - Str., Combat Mastery.
--Base/default: "Champion" (needs a better name)
--Battlemaster - the smart/tactician fighter
--Duelist - the fast/dexterity fighter
--Eldritch Knight/Arcane Warrior/"Magus" - half-caster fighter
*Barbarians* - Str + Con., Rage Mastery.
--Base/default: "Berserker"
--Totem Warrior - the "invoking nature spirits" (to do more than rage) barbarian
--Ancestral Guardian - "invoking ancestral spirits" (to do more than just rage) barbarian
--Storm Herald - "I am going to be Thor" barbarian
*Paladins* - Str + Cha., Oath Mastery.
--Base/default: "Devotion Oath," traditional LG Paladin
--Justiciar (Oath of the Crown)- Law & Order, but not necessarily Good, paladins
--Cavalier (Oath of Glory) - non-"divine magic" paladins, oath to themselves/rely on their own egos
--Greenknight (Oath of Ancients) - not "Law & Order" but "Nature/Natural Order/Old ways" (nature magic) paladin  

*Mystics - Wis. classes
Clerics* - Wis., Channel Divine.
--Base/default: Life/Light Cleric - healing, protecting, supporting traditional cleric
--Balance/Neutral Cleric - could be Justice, Nature, Knowledge, Judgement of Souls/Death, etc...
--Chaos/Wild Cleric - could be Storms, Trickery, Battle, etc...
--Darkness/Void Cleric - not the good guys
*Druids *- Wis. + Con., Channel Nature.
--Base/default: "Land Circle" druid
--Circle of the Claw - the animal summoning, shapeshifter druids
--Circle of the Stone - the geomancer/earth-bender druids
--Circle of the Cauldron - potion brewer, spore snorter, "trancy" powers druids.
*Monks* - Wis + Cha., Channel Spirit (Chi).
--Base/default: "Open Hand" monk, traditional martial artist, xiaolin types
--Shadow Monk - the ninjas, shadow powers
--Dragon Monk - the glowy hands, chi-channellers for "magic" effects: undead destroying, psychic powers, healing (self and others), nerve pinches/paralysis, etc...
--Kensei - chi-channeling through/into weapon-use/combat perfection

*Rogues - Dex. classes*
*Thieves* (ne Rogues) - Dex., Skill Expertise.
--Base/default: The Burglar - traditional stealthy sneak thief.
--Acrobat - flippy, speed/movement gymnast/entertainer/combatant
--Assassin - disguise, spy, killer-for-hire 
--Trickster - magic-using thief
*Rangers* - Dex + Con., Wilderness Expertise.
--Base/default: The Hunter/Monster Slayer
--Beastmaster - the animal companion ranger
--Seeker - the initiated to magic-use, "arcane archer," half-caster ranger
--Shifter - shapeshifting "I am going to be Wolverine" ranger
*Bards* - Dex. + Cha., Inspirational Expertise.
--Base/default: The Loremaster - chronicler, diverse jack-of-all-trades bards
--College of Glamour - illusionist, jester, courtesan/courtier entertainer bards
--College of Valor -skald, battle bards
--College of Whispers - spies, knowledge-mongers, not-so-nice bards

*Wizards - Int. classes*
*Mages* (ne Wizards) - Int., Arcane Magic-use
--Base/default: The Generalist/Universalist Mage
--Illusionist (Enchanter) Mage
--Conjurer (Evoker) Mage
--Abjurist (Protector) Mage
*Warlocks* - Int. + Con., Occult Magic-use - an arcane half-caster with innate magic powers
--Base/default: Pact Warlock - bound to Patron for occult knowledge (spells) and powers
--Binder - summoner of minions warlock
--Hexblade - "warrior" warlock that utilizes shadow magic predominantly through/for combat 
--Blood Warlock (nee Sorcerer) - the magic's in your blood, grow to immense power while the magic within slowly corrupts and destroys you.
*Psychics* (ne Psion) - Int. + Cha., Mental Magic-use
--Base/default: "Disciple" - as in the user/holder of a "discipline," able to focus in all/various mental powers
--Seer - predominantly clairvoyant and telepath
--Oracle - mental powers with a divine magic slant/edge, "Akashic record" readers/any knowledge available.
--Psi-Warrior (needs a better name) - predominantly telekinetic and metabolic powers


----------



## Baron Opal II (Oct 5, 2022)

Blue Orange said:


> As the most 'culture-bound' of the magic classes, I'd love to see different guilds for different areas/nations/regions, but that turns into way too many rules way too quickly.



How many do you need, really? And can druids or clerics fill in, too.

Right now I have three guilds, four temples, and two druidic enclaves. One guild, temple, and enclave are foe-focused, which leaves 6 magical "styles" to choose from.


----------



## Marandahir (Oct 5, 2022)

OB1 said:


> An Arcane Trickster is basically 70% Rogue 30% Mage.  A Swordmage would be 70% Mage 30% Warrior.  And so on.



That's not a Swordmage, that's a Bladesinging Magic Wizard.

Swordmage - or at least what people have argued for - is 50% Warrior and 50% Mage, being able to cast at the same time as being able to fight. Basically, the Battle Smith and Armourer subclasses of Artificer, but created as a singular base class with its own subclasses.

I don't think it needs to exist as a class - I think the different dials of X% Warrior / X% Mage is best represent as a series of subclasses that share the common concept of warrior and mage but manifest that in different ways (pact magic warriors, bards and artificers that dabble in warrior stuff, traditional wizard vancian that knows how to cast spells while hitting stuff with a sword, fighters with some spells, bow fighters with trick/magic arrows, etc).


----------



## Edwin Suijkerbuijk (Oct 7, 2022)

lets put in a wild card.
There will be 4 or 8 subclasses that are group subclasses.
These can be picked by all classes in the class group.


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 7, 2022)

Marandahir said:


> Swordmage - or at least what people have argued for - is 50% Warrior and 50% Mage, being able to cast at the same time as being able to fight. Basically, the Battle Smith and Armourer subclasses of Artificer, but created as a singular base class with its own subclasses.



I am familiar with the 4e Swordmage.

In 5e, I argue for a 100% Mage who spellcasts in melee combat. Any weapon attack is actually a spell, using the spellcasting ability, and inflicting a spell effect on the hit. Compare Paladin smite but with more spell effects.


----------



## cbwjm (Oct 7, 2022)

Edwin Suijkerbuijk said:


> lets put in a wild card.
> There will be 4 or 8 subclasses that are group subclasses.
> These can be picked by all classes in the class group.



I'd be happy with that. If each group has the same subclass structure, I'd also like to see a couple able to be picked by any class. I already have some ideas from 4e themes that I'd like to implement. I was thinking of making them a feat chain, but if the subclasses all line up then I'll be able to expand it out to a subclass.


----------



## Kobold Stew (Oct 8, 2022)

Shadow of the Demon Lord does exactly this, with their paths: It's a ten level system, where 
the main class (novice paths) give ability boosts at levels 1, 2, 5, and 8
race gives you a boost at 1 and 4
expert paths at 3, 5, and 9
and  master paths at 7 and 10 (which can be the first two steps of a second expert path).

6 races, 4 novice paths, 16 expert paths, 64 master paths -- it's literally mix-and-match. Some synergize well, but you can make some really fun characters by thinking outside the box. 

.


----------



## Marandahir (Oct 10, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> I am familiar with the 4e Swordmage.
> 
> In 5e, I argue for a 100% Mage who spellcasts in melee combat. Any weapon attack is actually a spell, using the spellcasting ability, and inflicting a spell effect on the hit. Compare Paladin smite but with more spell effects.



So, the Bladesinger?


----------

