The "Expert Classes" UA introduced to us the idea of class groups. With twelve classes in the PHB (again, I'm sad that Artificers are not going to be published in it) they can fairly neatly put them into four categories of three classes each. Bards, Rogues, and Rangers are all Experts, which is reflected mechanically as their having the Expertise feature.
And I do think it helps, a bit, to carve out an identity for what those classes bring to the table. The Ranger, make no mistake, is much more powerful than it had been in 2014, but I still think you could make the argument that purely in terms of combat capabilities, it still might not outperform a Dex-based fighter with a ranged weapon.
But, what the new version of the Ranger emphasizes is that, even if they aren't keeping up in pure damage (and honestly, they're probably not that far behind) they have far more tools than the Fighter to help the party deal with myriad situations, particularly out in the wilderness. Their mobility is super-charged, and at higher levels they are better than anyone at sniffing out hidden foes (something that used to belong to the Rogue, but I think makes a lot more sense as a Ranger thing (as master hunters and trackers, Rangers feel like they should be the scissors to the Rogue's paper).
The other three groups are Mage, Priest, and Warrior.
Mage is, I think, the most obvious. The Sorcerer, Warlock, and Wizard have always felt like they fill somewhat similar archetypes (indeed, I don't think any two fantasy franchises can agree on what the difference between a Sorcerer and a Wizard is - in the MCU, for instance, the "Sorcerer Supreme" is 100% a Wizard by D&D terms, and the Scarlet Witch is definitely a Sorcerer).
But all three of these classes are arcane spellcasters, and I suspect will be far less limited in the schools of magic they can use. I do wonder, though, what will explicitly tie them together. One possibility I could imagine is that they might still simply learn certain spells, rather than preparing them, with Wizards having the hybrid system of preparing from among the spells they've learned in their spellbook.
Still, a drawback feels like a less fun way to tie a bunch of classes together. (Admittedly, the Arcane spell list is the most expansive, so it's more like a balancing handicap). Naturally, the Wizard and Sorcerer have historically had very similar spell lists, and can play similar roles in a group, if perhaps allowing the Wizard to have more utility while the Sorcerer has more in-combat flexibility. The Warlock, on the other hand, plays very differently from the other two thanks to Pact Magic.
So, I don't really have a great sense of what we might see with them (this could be a theme).
Priests are a little funny - Clerics and Druids make a lot of sense here, as they're both kind of spiritual spellcasters with a lot of healing spells. I assume that each will have full access to its spell list, with Clerics getting all Divine Spells and Druids getting all Primal Spells. Clerics still, I think, have a slight leg up on healing.
Now, of course, we should look at the Expert classes and recognize that within their category, there are some very different emphases. They are all experts at something, but not really the same thing - Bards are experts as social encounters, Rangers experts at exploration, and Rogues are experts in... well, they have less of a specific focus, but stuff like lockpicking and sneaking are classic choices.
The odd duck in the Priest category is the Paladin. While spiritual/divine in nature, the Paladin tends to emphasize its martial skills, and the Divine Smite mechanic (which I hope does not get changed too much) even encourages them to forgo traditional spellcasting and instead fuel their melee strikes.
If, for instance, you were to suggest that the Priest in your group could be the primary healer, I could buy that with the Cleric and the Druid, but even with things like Lay on Hands, I don't really see the Paladin as being able to play that role (there's even a better half-caster to do that, which is the Alchemist Artificer).
Paladins and Clerics, of course, share the Channel Divinity feature. I wonder, actually, if Druids might get a "Channel Nature" feature that works similarly. The default use (like a Cleric's Turn Undead) could be Wild Shape. We've seen newer Druid subclasses use the Wild Shape feature in different ways - Spores' Symbiotic Entity, Stars' Starry From, and Wildfire's Wildfire Spirit. Perhaps "Channel Nature" could make it clearer that not all Druids are going to benefit as much (at least in combat) from Wild Shape, and subclasses like Circle of the Land or whatever others they add to the PHB could use this for other things.
Finally, Warriors. Warriors are Barbarians, Fighters, and Monks. These are all fairly combat-focused classes, though of course a number of other classes fit in that category as well. I'd be tempted to say that the Extra Attack feature could be their signature thing, but of course Paladins and Rangers get that too.
What I'm curious about is if they bake in any way to significantly buff Warriors' resilience. Barbarians have Rage already. Fighters generally rely on having high AC (if they're built for melee). Monks, on the other hand, have always struggled a bit, because it feels like they want to be front-line fighters, but their AC is more in the Barbarian range, and their HP is no better than a Bard's. I'd like to see some buffs to a Monk's defensive capabilities. I'd suggested earlier that they could automatically subtract physical damage they take - like, they reduce incoming bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage by an amount equal to their proficiency bonus - to give them a niche as best to fight a mob of weaker enemies, while a Barbarian is better built for taking on the massive boss that is going to be hitting for a lot every time.
Of course, while it's certainly up for debate, there are arguments to be made that it's actually the Paladin who most effectively works as a front-line "tank." But we'll see what Warriors look like moving forward.
Ultimately, the real thing that's going to tie these together are things like magic items and other features that care about those tags. Right now, our best examples are the Epic Boons - something that, if current 5E is anything to judge by, very few people will see anyway.
This UA came out on September 29th, and the previous came out on August 18th. If we assume a similar pace, we might expect to see the next come out in early November. I suspect we're going to get all the classes first, as those are going to be needed to playtest subsequent content.
No comments:
Post a Comment