D&D 5E What classes do you want to come out next?

[DarkKestral]

I'd like to see the psion, psiwarrior, wilder, artificer, swashbuckler (though I wouldn't mind it if the swash was integrated into the rogue and warrior classes instead), and most of the OA classes.

I would like to see the specialist wizards maybe get some play, but I didn't vote for 'em. I'm not sure if they shouldn't just be wizard options or full base classes, which is why.

I would like to see the soulknife get beaten up and mugged by the psiwarrior, though I like the idea of the class. It's just that the current mechanics are weak, and would be a cool addition to the psiwarrior mechanics to give them something really unique to them, as opposed to cribbing off weaker versions of other class's special tricks like they do now. Same with Scout to Ranger, Healer to Cleric, Knight to Fighter and Paladin, Wu Jen to Wizard, Hexblade and Spellthief to Warlock, (with some of the stuff from the spellthief going to rogues) Marshal to Warlord and Paladin, and all of the ToB classes to their PH counterparts.

That would knock off half the list. Most of the other half, I'd do without. Until I know if the Sorc's roughly what it's likely to look like if/when it comes back, and how the wizards will be, I'm going to be somewhat loose as to what should go to the wizards.

 

[Irda Ranger]

I honestly hope that none of these classes are necessary. The 3.5ed base class bloat got insane after a while, I hope that players can get the right flavor by using talent trees, feats or somesuch and by having better multiclassing rules.

QFT.

Also, until we see how flexible the base classes are, there's no way to know if any of these classes are remotely necessary.

I voted Psion and Swordsage though, as (1) I like those classes, and (2) we already know they can't be implemented using the Core rules. As a comparison, we know that the Knight got split up between the Fighter and the Paladin, so either of those classes (or a m/c of them) would do that just just fine. No need for a base class.

My criteria for a new class is that it must embody an entirely new concept. A Druid is entirely different from a "Cleric of Obah-Hai." A Psion is not a Wizard with different spells. A Swordsage is not remotely a Fighter-Mage. Those classes are cool and new, and expand the game.

A Hexblade or Spell Thief or Mystic Theurge are just patches on a broken system.

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

The Sha'ir definately needs a better translation. Pretty much every instance of it has been grossly underpowered. In a fight you're a commoner more or less. Most battles are over by the time your gen gets back with a single spell. We gave them 3/4 BAB, 6 skill points and a kind of elemntal blast attack to let them be somewhat useful.

Since Bards, Druids, Monks and Sorcerers werent on the poll, I picked Psion, Psychic Warrior and the excellently flavored Binder.

Yeah, I was deeply dissapointed that the Dragon translation kept the percentage roll. That only sort of made sense in 2E who on earth could possibly justify that it made sense in 3E?

I always thought the Sha'ir's abilities should be balanced between powers fueled through your familair, including spell retrieval, and then the ability to port in varying sizes of genies as your heavy guns.

Plus planar travel at the higher levels.

There was a class in MEG's Desert Sands supplement that did some of this, but that really missed most of the actual genie summoning power that I think is the dominant flavor of the class.

 

[Gloombunny]

I picked beguiler, swordsage, and totemist. I believe they've already mentioned some sort of illusionist class as well as regular wizards, but I hope it's like the beguiler and not just a wizard variation with a few exclusive illusion spells. Similarly, I'm sure 4e will have something akin to the monk and swordsage that takes elements of both, but I hope that it's much closer to the latter, and isn't named "monk". Finally, totemist is just an awesome concept to me, and I'd love to see it mechanically implemented in grand 4e style, since the 3e version was a bit lackluster in the rules department.

 

[Snapdragyn]

OP stated that the core classes not in PHB I are slated to be redone in future PHBs. So he specificly excluded them.

True, but the poll is 'which do you want next' (emphasis mine), & those are the ones I want next (actually in PHB1, but I'm pretty darned sure that isn't happening at this point).

 

[TerraDave]

Yeah, you really should have "none of the above".

 

[drothgery]

Voted for Artificer, Beguiler, and Warmage; would have voted for Dread Necromancer and Archivist, too.

I like specialists (or semi-specialists) as standalone classes better than as wizard variants; a set of four or eight that covered most of the ground here would be great. They seem to be a lot more flavorful -- and in 3.x, they were a lot easier to play. A complete set seems like a good way to start that arcane books that's supposed to be coming pretty early.

Artificer is an Eberron staple, and cool in its own right. Since it's been years since I played a tabletop D&D game set outside of Eberron, I want all the tools to be up and running in 4e Eberron ASAP.

And I think D&D needs the Archivist or the Cloistered Cleric or some other non-heavily armored, more intellectual divine class. It may be possible to cover this with the core cleric, but I don't think it'll work out that way. Besides, the Archivist is just cool.

 

[Jhaelen]

*sigh* And the Factotum.

Am I missing any other base classes besdies the Factotum, Archivist and Dread Necromancer? Should I redo the poll?

Dragonfire Adept, Ardent, Divine Mind, Lurk, Erudite. No need to redo the poll, though.

It's pretty difficult to say, what I'd like to see next, since I cannote tell yet which of the old classes have been subsumed by the new PHB1 classes. Take the scout for example:
It's a class I'd like to see in 4E, but I guess it's the new ranger (or at least one ranger path).

So, I guess what I'd most like to see are classes that use a different power source from the first three. That would be the psionic classes then. Mostly the psychic warrior and the wilder, less so the psion/erudite unless they manage to bring the old flavour back and the 4E psion is no longer just a sorcerer with different game mechanics.

The soulknife might warrant a 4E base class if it was combined with the lurk.
Ditto for the ardent/divine mind - those should never have become two separate classes AND the 4E class shouldn't have any divine flavour. Probably better to just ditch it/them.

Edit: I also voted for the shadowcaster and the swordsage as representatives for the 3E ToM and ToB classes which I liked a lot, as well. I don't think they'll really use different power sources in 4E, though.

 

[TwinBahamut]

Since a lot of the stuff I wanted seems to have been killed and looted by the Fighter and Warlord, as well as the rumored Swordmage, I voted Ninja, Totemist, and Psion.

 

[Andor]

The swashbuckler bugs me. The system shouldn't need an entire class for the concept of "Fighter who wears light armour." And even in 3.x where the AC systems means that you do need a class for that, they didn't actually give us one. A Fighter/Rogue will wipe the tavern floor with some poor fool who took the swashbuckler class any day of the week and twice on friday nights. Or these days evem better a fighter/swordsage.