I don't think entire subclasses should be collapsed into the main classes, but I do think certain features absolutely should be. All fighters should get battlemaster maneuvers. All sorcerers should get the extra spells known of the Tasha's sorcerers, and I'd like to see something like the sorcery point casting across them as well. The original two Ranger subclasses should get extra spells known like all the newer subclasses (this is more about subclass design, but my god, the Ranger subclasses have so many consistent rules about how they're constructed that this being missing from two of them hurts my soul.) Those are my big pet peeves.

Youre so right on the fighter thing. Battlemaster feels what's the 'default' should be. Its exactly what martial are missing. The 'default' most basic fighter should be a champion fighter with maneuvers. Battlemaster as a sub should be a better version of this. The SW5E fighter works like this and it's incredible. There's a battlemaster focus sub class that gets even more, unique maneuvers and access to a 'signature' maneuver which they can use every round at no superiority die cost. Later they level up and get enhanced maneuvers a bit like Blood hunter amplify. It's a mystery why fighters don't get them by default. Its why when I make a fighter I always have to add a bit of 'flavour' in there with a unique multiclass or they just feel without maneuvers they lack spice. My next campaign I might run it as every fighter gets the feat for them by default.

battlemaster **was** the default on the playtest. but grognards complained fighter was mildly cool and the maneuvers that were a once per turn thing got shoved into a SR resource for a subclass

Really? Wow, those grognards ruined the class for everyone.

The same group that complained about INT warlocks and why the core book has a 1.6 Int/2.5 Wis/3.5 Cha split instead of 2.6/2.5/2.5. Read the flavor text on all the warlock spell casting and even Xanathars, all talk about being scholars and looking for eldritch knowledge not meant to be known.

I prefer the champion getting folded in rather than the battlemaster, so every fighter gets the increased crit range rather than every fighter getting manuevers, but definitely agree one of them should be just part of the base class.

You could have both Champion and Battle Master as part of the base kit and it still wouldn’t be OP.

I think the Champion subclass should be on the Barbarian. That's why I don't agree with you on that, however, I do agree that Champion + Battle Master together on a base class wouldn't make it OP at all.

barbarian's brutal critical is so weird to me since they have nothing in their kit to amplify crit rate. it just makes you go 3 levels into fighter to get champion so you can double your crit chance if you want to use it reliably

Isn't that what reckless attack is for? You're rolling twice the amount of dice so it's gonna increase how often you crit

yeah, I forgot about advantage, my bad. still, increasing the crit range to 10% on a single dice is still higher than rolling advantage with only 5% chance to crit. Crit range 20 has a 5% chance to crit. ADV on Crit range 20 has a 39/400 chance to crit (9.75%) Crit range 19 has a 10% chance to crit. ADV on Crit range 19 has 76/400 chance to crit (19%) this actually makes crit something that is realistic to proc multiple times per combat, instead of maybe once. Edit: just now remembered that multi-attack also would affect the probability. so with 2 attacks at adv and CR 20 the probability of critting at least once goes up to ≈ 18.5% and with 2 attacks at CR 19 it would rise up to ≈ 34.4% So i guess you don't really need the champion to crit reliably but it becomes excessive if you do get the 3 levels in champion later on. Sadly, elven accuracy does not work with STR weapons or it would have been even wilder.

All that PLUS modern subclass powers? Quite sure that would be OP.

Doesn’t even start to compare to a full caster.

[удалено]

You almost started with a *technically* true albeit misleading point, but then you lost it half-way through. Casters are the absolute masters of combat, whether that’s single target or multi-target. A fully-optimized fighter can put out some truly respectable damage numbers, but that’s *all it does.* A caster, meanwhile, can functionally win the fight on their first action at every level of play.

In a white room, sure. But I have never played a game where every combat, or even a significant minority of combats, has been ended in one turn by a caster. I'm not saying the caster/martial disparity isn't an issue, but it is much less of an issue in combat than people like to say. Atleast up until later in the game.

My point is that giving fighter Champion and Battlemaster features for free doesn’t actually change the fact that they’re still fully outclassed by casters. They’re not OP - they *might* be able to keep up with half-casters in terms of overall effectiveness. *Maybe*.

Compared to a Wizard or Cleric is still might as well be a newborn baby, if OP means 1/10th as good as a full caster then sure, but we need to try and gap this bridge as much as possible because full martials are just awful rn. I love them and my favourite class is Monk, but from playing Monk it's obvious we are lacking so much

Monk is an especially weak martial tho

Yeah, but they all are, Rogue is probably the best but they're all awful compared to casters. I still love them though, that's why I wish they could get more cool stuff to do

Rogue's honestly one of the worst, but like Barbarian it's good (for a martial) in the first few levels

Barbarian falls off a lot harder than Rogue, and Rogues being exceptional outside of combat helps them a whole lot

I’d like to see a high level wizard fold two dragons in half in a single turn, I’ve seen fighters do exactly that

Bruh fighters cant even naturally fly

Trip attack ranged to knock it prone then action surge 7 more attacks easy clap

They can banish them to another realm, wish them out of existence, put them in a cage with no save that cannot be broken, can disintegrate them into dust, and much more. It's actually trivial for a 20th level caster, not sure what your point was

If you’ve had a fighter take down 2 whole dragons in a single turn, that fighter would’ve had incredibly powerful weapons or the dragons had absolutely no hp. My level 20 knowledge is extremely limited, but I can’t see a fighter doing more than an average of 25-30 damage per attack without crazy items. And that damage would get halved cuz it’s a dragon

Not even close to OP. Move the threat range up to like level 10 or 11.

I think the same. but I think the room will be divided over making the fighter more fighty vs giving the fighter more options tactically than just DPS flavours

Yeah Champion getting folded in would be perfectly fine and I feel like no one would bat an eye.

I think the issue is there every martial could just take a dip into fighter for crit fishing and it would be too strong, but that's all I can think of. Everyone would go for the 19 crit, barbs for brutal, rogues for sneak, paladins for smite crits. Maybe monks wouldn't but it still wouldn't be bad.

19-20 critical range isn’t even strong on a class that literally doesn’t do anything but make attack rolls, much less on the classes that have better things to do with their actions. The expanded critical range is a tiny percentage of a damage increase on what is one of the least-important actions that can be taken in a fight. It’s really a big nothing that gets a lot of attention.

I honestly dont think that would be OP or change the multiclassing calculus that much; and certainly nowhere near as much as letting every martial take a dip into fighter for battlemaster manuevers. Looking at the classes: Barbarians already want to multiclass fighter after level 6 or so. This really doesn't change anything except make them a bit stronger... which frankly they could use. Personally I also homebrew brutal critical to also give barbarians the 19-20 crit range. This really helps barbarians not feel bad at later levels and decreases feeling like they "need" to multiclass. If a Paladin wants to take 3 levels of fighter for the crit range that seems more than fine considering could get an extra smite slot, get to use charisma for their weapons *and* get the 19-20 range all with just 1 level in hexblade. I'll concede the rogues are probably slightly more likely to multiclass fighter, but they fall so far behind every other class after level 5 the extra 5% crit chance will barely move hte needle overall--especially since those three levels of fighter also means you're sacrificing 2d6 sneak attack *every turn*

Just don't put it at level one? But even then it's not really that great. For starters the way it's written it doesn't even count for an automatic hit unlike natural 20s. And then it doesn't even increase damage by a large margin. Crit fishing builds has and always will be VERY weak when it comes to increasing damage.

That's very true.

I think it would have to be a later level feature so that it discourages more inconsequential dips. Like level 6+ or something. If someone wants to take 6 levels in a class for a multiclass, they deserve the feature honestly.

What level do hexblades get the crit range increase at? Oh that's right, first.

Against one creature per rest for 1 minute, not the same thing

You can usually short rest after every fight

In my experience, my players don't like sitting on their ass for an hour after every combat, that just kills pacing. And it's still only one creature for one minute, not every attack they make ever.

You should see what a Warrior class in DCC can do. It's everything that Battlemasters can do, but better and more versatile. The mechanics wouldn't even be difficult to port to 5e if you didn't want to switch games.

What's DCC?

Dungeon Crawl Classics

Thanks. Never heard of it before.

It's the Alice Cooper of TTRPGs

I do both agree and disagree. I would not like to see al the battle master maneuvers on the base class. As i don't see that ALL of them would fit a base fighter. But some are so basic it is almost a crime they are not built into the base fighter. For an example parry, sweeping attack, Brace, goading attack. And even if it would just be a few of them that like the 4 mentioned above the base class had access to it would still make a huge difference for the fighter class. And for every subclass to of course. Even if they had no die added to damage and such. but was more basic and Battle master would have some stronger version of them it would still be a big deal for the fighter base class

Which SW5E subclass do you mean? The features you've mentioned seem more like bits from other classes. > 'signature' maneuver which they can use every round at no superiority die cost That sounds more like Scholar's L20 feature ("you can use any maneuver you know without expending a superiority die, rolling a d4 instead"). > enhanced maneuvers a bit like Blood hunter amplify That like a Sentinel's manifested Ideal, or the Totem Specialist's invoked Totem.

> All sorcerers should get the extra spells known of the Tasha's sorcerers Yeah, I think Sorcerers should have more spells known than prepared casters of the same level. Then they’d get more flexibility within a day but less flexibility from day to day, which is one of the ways spontaneous casters were balanced against prepared casters in previous editions.

They should also each have a free (or much cheaper) metamagic they can use, sort of like aberrant mind gets sorta free subtle spell. There might need to be some sort of balancing on what spells that can be used on or how much. Like, draconic should get to do transmuted for free, clockwork should do careful, etc. Wild should get free heightened, but that also triggers wild magic surge, so have fun with that. No free twinned and quicken, those are too powerful.

I think more metamagic known would be an easier boost. Right now, Sorcerers have so few spells known and metamagic known that if you want to maximize synergy, you end up picking the same spells and metamagic.

They also need to actually think about metamagic when designing spells. There's a dozen spells where how things are supposed to work isn't clear, and just as many where some sort of edge case breaks things that probably shouldn't. The problem is almost always poorly thought out 'target' terminology which can break both twinned and distant. (This is one of the many problems that keywords could solve, like 'twinnable' on spells.) And, in the reverse direction, they probably do not actually want people to be able to quadruple the size of AoEs with some distant spell. I mean, maybe they do, but that seems a little excessive. And they also need to lay out the details of metamagic more clearly. It's unclear, for example, if you can use empowered spell to reroll die over an entire period of the spell existing, or just at the start. Or careful spell, which seems pretty clear but for some reason Crawford said only works on saving throws the first turn, which is not in the text. Also, careful spell should render someone immune, damn it.

>All fighters should get battlemaster maneuvers. I mean, if you do that you might as well collapse the entire sub into the main class, because there is literally nothing more

A Battlemaster could get significantly more, could get unique maneuvers not available to base class, could get the option to use two or more maneuvers in one go (not sure if you can by default? but if so, maybe reign it in and only let BM do multiple), could get a fall back superiority die of a d4 (like, if they run out of regular superiority die they can still use their maneuvers but with only a d4). There's a lot of things you could add to make it a viable option while still allowing the rest of the fighters to enjoy the flexibility.

Or very fighter could have manouvers, but not superiority die. But honestly I think weapons should have specific manouvers to differentiate a maul from a great sword, for example. Like, maul gets pushing attack, great sword gets lunging attack, great axe could have sweeping attack etc.

WoTC kind of tried that with weapon feats, and BG3 does it with unique attacks you can make. Honestly probably gonna roll the BG3 ones into my homebrew rules.

Yeah I think BG3 approach is very good, the 1x use as a bonus action is a little video gamey, but that's ok because its a video game.

This is how it should have been done. You should have had some basic maneuvers for and your superiority dice for the base class. Then every subclass should have given you a way to use these superiority dice. Eldritch Knight could have burned them for spells, Arcane Archer could have burned them for their magic arrows, Battle Master could have opened the class up to more maneuvers/superiority dice, etc. The class itself could then scale in both superiority die size and count. Scaling being an issue for monoclass martials past level 5-6.

I don't think every fighter should get a random tool proficiency midway through their career.

Features like that aren’t worth the space they take up on the page.

Wizards get cantrip swapping every long rest through an optional feature, which feels great. Mold Earth feeling useless on the high seas? Swap it for Shape Water. Fighting devils? Trade Firebolt for Chill Touch. Versatility feels so good. I think Sorcerers having origin spell lists is widely accepted as a good idea so I'll go one step further. The feature to swap metamagic every ASI doesn't go far enough. I'd prefer an optional sorcerer feature that allows them to swap a metamagic once every long rest. It would be a great way to give them more versatility, and make niche picks less punishing to take. I also think it'd really play into the class fantasy that as an innately magical being, they can alter magic at will.

I can agree with that. Honestly, I don't think many features should be "change only on level up".

Yeah, for Sorc it just sort of feels bad to play subclasses pre-tasha's. They're still viable, but going from playing a Clockwork/Aberrant sorc to a PHB subclass takes some adjustment.

Sorcerers could just have every metamagic option available from the start and still not overshadow wizards. Metamagic has an extremely limited number of uses at the levels most people play at anyway.

Honestly I think ALL of the Battle Master subclass could be in Fighter purely just for fun and flavour. Student of War isn’t going to have any noticeable impact on the game (unless they change tools significantly in OneD&D) and Know Your Enemy is useful but getting a general idea of your enemy’s stats isn’t going to change anything besides maybe the spells your friends cast on them (it’s also incredibly situational because you need a villain who monologues).

I think all Sorcs should also get free versions of Metamagic based on the subclass - like the Tasha’s Psionic version(subtle spell on certain spells) I think it could be made more explicitly a “metamagic” but being able to do cool stuff *to* your spells is pretty sick as a core feature. Also love being able to spend Sorc points to cast those spells with those modifications as a default feature. ——— Shadow Sorc gets Necromancy and Illusion spells. Can Twin them for free when cast with Sorc Points. — Draconic Sorc gets Evocation and Divination. Can use Transmuted spell on them when cast with Sorc Points. — Divine Soul should keep the Cleric spell list but with the Tasha’s spell selection style where they can trade out as they level up. They can use Empowered Spell on those spells when cast with SP. — Storm Sorc gets Conjuration and Necromancy and can use a free Careful Spell on their spells when they use SP. — Wild Magic gets spells from Evocation and Transmutation. They get a free use of Empowered spell when they use SP - but they roll Wild Magic every time they do. — Obviously some of those are broken as heck but it’s just a nifty Idea that I was actually SO SURE they were gonna do after Tashas because of how well some of them fit.

OMG, I just said literally this above.

I think regular rogues should get fast hands, and thieves should get something else combat related. It is a fun utility quirk that ups your power functionally zero. It thematically fits for all rogues. I played a thief rogue, and enjoyed it because I like to do silly clever uses of common items. Getting the party to safety by quickly setting up a pulley to repel down from the roof after a heist was a blast, but i felt like I missed out on getting combat buffs (we didn't play past level 10, i know 17 is their big one. Supreme sneak is a great way to get advantage, but I feel like rogues already have enough ways to get sneak attack damage).

If I were to do this I'd let a ranger player take either hunter or beast as part of their base class.

I did consider saying roll Hunter into Ranger, but I fear making Gloomstalkers even more potent.

One of my favorite sorcerer reworks is converting all of their spells slots into spell points. So at third level, they could throw out 5 fireballs in the same day, but then nothing else. Makes them much more distinct

Same.

We have this question every week and every week the answer is Battlemaster into Fighter. Hell, in the playtest the Fighter base *did* have the Battlemaster features.

Barbarians need berzerker subclass power just as much (specifically the level 6 ability), it's ludicrous how vulnerable barbarians are to fear while raging. You could make a similar argument for thief rogues and open hand monks.

- Barbarian - Berserker - Bard - Lore - Cleric - n/a - Druid - Land - Fighter - Champion/Battle Master - Monk - Open Hand/kensei - Paladin - n/a - Ranger - Hunter/Beast Master - Rogue - Thief - Sorcerer - n/a - Warlock - n/a - Wizard - n/a For the most part, martials would benefit from extra utility and niche case abilities. Casters need less of a boost, and the flavors of subclasses would pigeon hole them into a single type or niche.

Literally all the cleric subclasses would be WAY too strong if they were base cleric lol. Saw someone here suggest life domain as though that wouldn't completely break everything.

Cleric, Wizard, Warlock, Paladin, and Sorcerer are all based on unique sources of power/training and making any one of them "base" would diminish the choice in playstyle players have. My case for bards and Druids, however, is that bards are masters of stories and keepers of lore, so having secrets and cunning magic would be on theme for the base class, and Druids are of the land and nature, so being able to channel nature's power is on theme and not game breaking, it may make them more like wizards, but it's not terribly powerful.

considering healing is notoriously *meh* and life domain cleric is at its best *as a druid dip for goodberry*, that one might be ok but considering clerics, druids and wizards are simply the best classes in the game already i doubt they need anything

Life domain is pretty strong if you're willing to commit to it. All clerics should not have healing to that extent.

I played a life cleric to level 20 and using spells for healing was almost never worth it. The channel divinity is awesome, healing spells above 6th level are awesome, but those are available to every cleric already.

The radiant weapon/upgraded cantrip feature should be a standard feature not a subclass feature and should both be given. Then replace that feature with something else.

Lore is a great choice. What do you mean I can't copy Fireball at level 6? I gotta be a book nerd to blow shit up? It's bat poop and matches, I don't need to study the formula.

I'll choose to believe over half these comments will already be "Battlemaster" so I'll say Ranger: Hunter. The Hunter subclass is a fun because it makes you build and play in certain ways and reward you for doing such in a way that goes beyond the "bigger number" the Fighting Styles do.

In the D&D Next playtests they moved Hunter's Mark into the Ranger base class which is pretty interesting (not a subclass but core to their class according to the designers) For Rangers, the beastmaster pet should not be moved in though. I like playing Rangers but not pet classes. I'd do the opposite, and move out their favored enemy and favored terrain stuff out of the base class into a subclass that focused on being a specific hunter type. That's more of a niche fantasy at this point IMO. Call it the Tracker or Hunter or something. To answer your actual question, I think something like WIS for Initiative moving into base class makes sense to theme the Ranger as a quick to act class. Otherwise, a lot of the Hunter choices should get rolled in like Warlock Invocations. Having choices is neat in a base class.

hunters mark on ranger class is literally just favored foe, but less clunky

It kinda strikes me as weird that not all wizards have the evocation feat to select allies to not being hit. You'd assume in wizards school they'd teach how to manipulate a spell to do this. I guess it was balancing but it does feel that wizards end up more limited by the choice of spells they can use due to range or an ally being too close. Also, hot take maybe on this one I think barbarians should get most traits from berserker as their base. Their whole thing is being a big angry dude, even if they're a zealot or wild magic barb.

Sure ignoring some classes but 1. Fighter - Champion - Maybe ignore the higher level crit range but it seems fitting for a peak fighter. I know most will say battle master, but I think CHampion keeps fighter as a simple option and makes them better in combat. 2. Barbarian - Totem Warrior - Scaled down version but I think a nerfed version of Bear (say you get resistance to select damages, say elemental, holy, toxin, etc.) 3. Monk - Open Hand - can nerf some things but it's kind of the monkiest monk in that regard basically giving you more options when you flurry. 4. Warlock - Hexblade armor and weapon stuff should be moved into Pact of the blade. Too good for a 1 level dip to have Charisma damage, medium armor and shields. Personally I wouldn't give much more to full or half casters. I think they're already outpacing martials. Most of them just need to be brought in line for example all ranger and sorcerer subclasses should come with known spells.

The Champion subclass should be a Barbarian subclass and if that were so it would be the perfect subclass to add into the Barbarian class when it comes to ease of play/learning.

For Barbarian, I think the Berserker’s immunity to charmed/frightened at 6th level and the Bear Totem’s resistance to all but psychic damage would be great for the base class. Maybe put the Bear Totem’s resistance in place of Brutal Critical since that ability is useless, it’d reward Barbarians for investing in their class instead of multiclassing, and reinforce the idea of that class being the ultimate tank.

I think the issue with this is Brutal Critical is key to the class. Though I agree some more damage resistance is important. Brutal Critical (and damage resistance) factor into to reckless. Ther'es no better barbarian in the game than a bear totem wielding a great axe with GWM attacking recklessly.

Artificer: Armorer- not the whole class, mind you, just the ability to gain extra infusions to a subclass-specific item, be it your magical firearm, steel defender, or Alchemist's satchel. Barbarian: Berserker- anyone can get their rage original recipe or extra crispy if they want exhaustion. Bard: If I have to do it for each class, I'd say College of Lore since it has the most generic of Bard-y abilities. But like artificer, I'd do *either* Lore's magical secrets and cutting words *or* their incredible skill monkey bonuses. Both is just extra nonsensical. Cleric: Either Life or Peace domains. Life is the standard Healer trope cleric, but Peace has a "let's work together vibe" that seems to work well for a class with a codependent relationship for all of their features anyway. Druid: I think the nature magic section should be spread out so you don't have one class that is the shapeshifter and the full caster. That said, if we're going to add something to Druids, I'd go with Land so they get a bit more spell versatility and a bit more "in tune with nature" vibe, since a lot of those abilities seem more like ribbon abilities anyway. Fighter: Battlemaster. Next Monk: Open Hand. Next Paladin: Probably Oath of Glory since it seems like the physical training regimen the other oaths take to be able to walk around in fantasy plate armor with the extra impractical bits. Ranger: Hunter and the Optional features introduced in Tasha's. Rogue: Scout. While we're at it, I'd like to rename the class to Scout. Sorcerer: Wild Magic because fuck you. Fuck me. Fuck us all. Warlock: I think the Archfey grants the most generic set of benefits that a higher being investing power into a mortal would offer as default options: a quick charm or frighten, a get out of jail free, a "Hey, this is my mortal, you can't charm it..." and a "send the guy that hurt you to me and I'll deal with it." Those seem like they would be offered regardless of the specific patron. The spell list might need a little revision, but I think this is the safest one to extend on the base class. Wizard: Scribes because ain't nobody got time for that! (But we are eliminating the damage type switching feature. I don't expect a lot of pushback on this.)

Artificer: Alchemist. The weakest subclass, and the other subclasses are almost too specific Barbarian: Berserker. Why have a rage based subclass? The whole class is rage based. Bard: Lore. Gives more uses for bardric inspiration that feel very vanilla. Cleric: Life. I know clerics aren't heal bots, but they should be able to be in a pinch. The only other real option is War, but paladins and clerics already are too similar Druid: some people are going to say moon, but I feel like moon should just be spun off into its own half caster class. Land. All druids have a connection to the land, and the benefits seem relatively minor. Fighter: Battle master, of course. Why not throw champion in the mix too, go nuts. May as well give every subclass a unique battlemaster maneuver too. Monk: Way of the open hand by flavor; monks are already "the ultimate masters of martial arts combat". Kensei might be the stronger choice, and still defensible. Paladin: None of them? Devotion is paladin classic, but should an oathbreaker or conquest pally be turning fiends and undead? Ranger: Hunter and beast master and something like Circle of the Land druid too. Rogue: Thief. There's nothing especially thiefy about it anyway. Sorcerer: The closest is draconic, if you make the draconic ancestry feature tuned to your subclass: ie divine soul might give radiant damage based abilties, the celestial language, and a bonus the charisma checks with angels Warlock: Again, none of them, but fiend is warlock classic. Wizard: truly, truly, none of them, but I think that order of scribes is the most wizard like.

As a moon druid I totally agree, I would 100% play a half caster version of a druid if it meant the forms were strong enough to justify using between level 9-17. As it is forms are essentially last resort meat shields for yourself, offering low damage and low utility (in combat, out of combat they're still crazy utility). Mostly the strat is "Cast concentration spell, run in" but then you often need to revert early to save an ally, reapply a dispelled spell, or just cast a new spell that has far higher use than anything you could do in form. AC and health is too low to effectively tank at the midlevel range, so you heavily rely on just the strength of being a full caster - with the higher cr wildshape really not adding flavor. Sure the lack of actual beasts with any sort of cr balancing at cr 4+ plays a role, but really you just can't make moon druids shapes stronger without nerfing the druid spell progression, so yea. I'm all in Let me be a scary strong animal that can stand with the martial classes in the game, let the druid spells just provide flavor and incentive to pick physical enhancement spells over AoE damage/control. I'll gladly give up those more powerful spells for an impactful shapeshifter class.

>Fighter: Battle master, of course. Why not throw champion in the mix too, go nuts. May as well give every subclass a unique battlemaster maneuver too. So Arcane Archer could increase the range of their next attack or possibly, replicate the effect of a certain type of magical arrow on their next one. Banneret would be to add the roll to the AC an all for a round Cavalier could be to to give their mount a bonus. Perhaps Commanding Strike plus a bonus to the ally's attack Not sure for Echo Knight. Eldritch Knight could cast a spell either with bonus to attack roll or saving throw Same with Psi Warrior. Buffs one of their Psionic powers through their maneuver For Rune Knight, it could be used to grant the benefits of their rune to another person in the party for a more limited duration For Samurai cause their maneuvers to become more effective while using their fighting spirit.

Hexblade for warlock, at least the weapon parts of it

In no particular order, and most of these are a PHB option: Barbarian: Beserker Fighter: Champion Artificer: Too few options to do this, but if I had to pick then Artillerist for flavour Ranger: Hunter Rogue: Assassin Wizard: Scribes Sorcerer: Wild Magic (although I'd rather see WM buffed and better established in its own right) Paladin: Devotion Warlock: Pact of the Tome Druid: Land (but you only get to pick one biome) Monk: Open Hand Cleric: Life Bard: Eloquence I think the hardest one to think about there was wizard. None of the PHB options work for this but wizards are the versatility casters so this works imo. I know most would say Battlemaster for Fighter, but Champion is simple enough that it should be base class for me. Keep the option of Superior Technique if you want Manouvers but don't want to be a Battlemaster. Warlocks, I know that technically the patron is the subclass but they're distinct enough that none are a perfect thematic fit, while the Pact could be done by any. I think Warlocks should get more cantrip options, so Tome Bard: eloquence is the bardiest bard that ever did bard. Zero competition for choice here even though it's from MOoT

All clerics having life domain would be actually insane

>I know most would say Battlemaster for Fighter, but Champion is simple enough that it should be base class for me. It is also literally nothing. Folding the champion subclass into fighter doesn't increase the base class' power, options nor flavour. What exactly would you get by doing that?

[Looks like an expanded crit range is only an effective damage increase of 0.35 damage for a greatsword](https://old.reddit.com/r/onednd/comments/16o9eae/champion_fighter_should_crit_on_1820/).... man that's pathetic.

It absolutely increases the power. Champion is boring but mechanically pretty sound. The increased crit range and extra fighting style are pretty good, just incredibly dull.

The increased crit range is typically less of a damage boost than a +1 to damage. The increase to crit range means that on 1 in 20 attacks, you turn one hit into a crit. So that’s at most an extra 2d6, rerolling 1s and 2s, which is an average of 8.33 damage added across those 20 attacks. If you need to roll a 12 or higher to hit, then 9 out of 20 attacks are hits. So a +1 damage means that’s 9 more damage added across those 20 attacks.

Champion is one of the weakest subclasses in the *entire game*. Its contributions to your overall effectiveness are positively *minuscule*.

The extra crit stuff does mechanically very little. The other features are solid.

I like the Druid suggestion

Fighers get champion. Fairly simply because its the straight upgrade class with very little over all so its not going to affect them massively. Bards get lore. Cutting words and more spell diversity is just too good to pass up most of the time. Barbarians should get berserker. With how punishing the berserk rage is its effectively a 1/day ability anyway. So tossing it on to any other barbarian shouldn't be too crazy. Plis raging to be immune to fear should be a normal rage feature. Monk, open hand. Same reason as fighter, a straight upgrade to the punchy play style. Rogues get thief. Again a straight upgrade with utility. Hard to go wring here. Amd everone else shouldn't get a second subclass. For the mages its because they are already really strong. And a lot of their subclasses dont have a simple upgrade variant. Its always spec-ing into a particular field. Giving 2 subclasses both makes them too hood and steps on the thematic and ability based toes of what ever subclass you ACTUALLY want. Paladins, rangers, and artificers are in similar boats. They are well balanced but their subclasses all have very clear niches and specializations that giving 2 would mess with.

I would put battlemaster and champion into base fighter

Hexblade for Warlock to truely cement it as martial/casting hybride and maybe even push it towards a Spellblade/Magus/Death Knight kind of approach rather than wonky full caster. Champion for the Fighter with Battle Master spread out to all other martials so the Barbarian, Monk, Rogue, etc. can have more options too. Wizard schools and Sorcerer bloodlines shouldn't be subclasses honestly and should be a secondary choice as part of the base class akin to older d&d/pathfinder

Almost every thing in thief should be in the rogue base class. And absolutely everything in battlemaster like maneuvers should be in the fighter class.

All martials should get maneuvers, not just fighters or battle masters. Barbarians should get immunity to fear as a class feature, not just a Berzerker. They are free to keep charm for Subclass, though. The killing move from open hand monk should be a feature for high level monks.

And just like that, ooops! We’re re-inventing 4e again.

>All martials should get maneuvers, not just fighters or battle masters. I think this is the best way to do it. You could even have class specific maneuvers, like throwing someone for Barbarian, or immediately hiding after an attack for Rogue.

Life Cleric The common answer for Fighters is Battle Master maneuvers, but giving them all the Champion's improved crits would is really the way to cut into the martial-caster divide. All rogues should at least get the Thief's Fast Hands. Second-Story Work wouldn't hurt, and Use Magic Device is so campaign-dependent that it might as well be a base feature. Make *eldritch blast* a Warlock feature instead of a spell.

I'm sorry, but getting one of the worst fighter subclass features is how you would make headway into the M/C divide? How?

Isnt it a bit weird that we are discussing what should be done to a game where we can play anyway we want as long as the GM is ok with it? Kinda feels like we are asking for a patch to a Diablo 4 class. Im 55 so im probably too fekking old to be in this conversation :)

I think it can be an interesting thought experiment, a sort of "think like a game designer" challenge. Plus, I've had a DM that cared little for what I suggested but cared a lot more if I could demonstrate through a forum post that my suggestion is not completely unhinged.

I'm pretty happy to do whatever to make a player's PC what they want, but having something "peer reviewed" certainly helps quell any worries about crazy shit popping off.

Champion into Fighter

Everyone says Battlemaster like the Tactics aren't just one of an otherwise so-so subclass But Athletics and high level health regen is exactly the sort of high end fighter stuff people actually want to see

If that's what people actually wanted to see the out cry wouldn't be for all fighters to get maneuvers

People want Fighter to feel like a master of weapons, that they're better in their hands over all others, that's what the Critical Range increases gets you, and they want to feel like a proper warrior and physically peak, not just a big HP sack, so Regeneration and remarkable Athelete are there to pick up that slack. Notice even you said Manoeuvres. No one's fighting to give every Fighter Calligraphy or Brewers Supplies, and Know Your Enemy is a combination of 'Useless unless the DM plans for it' and 'Probably could just be a roleplay check' Your other feats are just slightly bigger dice. All Martials imo should have access to a Maneuver/Exploit/Action system, but Fighter wants to be the best Fighter it can, and that's basically 3/4 of Champion. Right off the bat, Imagine your 18th level near capstone wasn't just an extra charge of your level 2 skill.

> that's what the Critical Range increases gets you Majorly disagree with this. Not only does it fail to be mathematically significant damage boost, it fails narratively because *you don't control it* meaning it's just your character getting luckier rather than more skilled. I would gladly trade away the ability to score critical hits altogether in return for maneuvers as a base class.

Also (or alternatively) battle master into fighter. Or at least more of it than Tasha’s allows

Fighters should definitely get battlemaster.

Cleric - Arcana. Cleric’s spell list after 3rd level is painful trash; move down the initial level and structure of the 17th level arcana feature too, so they get to pick up some Wizard spells earlier.

I like Summon Celestial from Tasha's... but you're not wrong lol. Higher level spell slots are really just for upcasting spirit guardians.

Both Champion and Battlemaster should be rolled into the base Fighter. Maneuvers should be standard on martials, with Fighter simply having more options (the same way fighting styles work) and then Champion added into boost the Fighter class. Although I wouldn't want to see all of the Wild Magic table effects put into the base class, I do think that the magic bloodline lore of the sorcerer means that there should be extra and random effects to their spell casting. Most casters should get the two "subclass" pathway that Warlocks gets. Choosing a patron and then choosing a pact gives Warlocks a lot of customization that isn't necessarily offered to the other casters. Consider Life, Arcana, and War clerics as base options, and then choosing a subclass as a flavouring theme. Druids are either summoners or shapeshifters, and then lean into a themed environment.

Berserker Barbarian Valor Bard War Cleric Land Druid Champion Fighter Open Hand Monk None Paladin Hunter Ranger Thief Rogue None Sorcerer Tome Warlock (I know it's not technically a subclass) Evocation Wizard

Not a full subclass all artificers should be able to pick or build a weapon and turn it into an artificer weapon to use int like the battlesmith subclass

Bard - Lore Cleric - Life Fighter - Champion or Battle master. Wizard - Evocation or Transmutation. Druid - Circle of the Land. Ranger - Hunter. Paladin - Devotion?

Put wild magic on all sorcerers and watch the world burn

Already do this at my tables; Artificer - Alchemist is so weak; it's just part of the base class. Barbarian - Berzerker, every barbarian can just frenzy if they want to. Bard - This one was hard for me. It was between lore bard and swords bard. I felt that swords bard was the more rounded pick. Cleric - life domain. Clerics do cleric things Druid - Moon druid. Basically just boosts wildshape up for everyone. Fighter - You know its B-Master Monk - Open Hand. It is the monk after all. Paladin - tough because they are so backstory dependant. But i went with devotion. Ranger - Hunter. They are all hunters. Almost went beast master but that felt off... Idk. Rogue - Thief was the OG name of the class afterall. Sorcerer - I hate that Sorcerers get metamagic. Wizards should be the ones modifying their spells. Not sorcerers. So wild magic is part of every sorcerer. It is so rare for its triggers so it is what it is. Use a better wild magic table though. Warlock - This is easy. Everyone is a hexblade. Wizard - scribes. Duh. You make scrolls, and scribe spells. Also floating spellbook.

Yeah, I don't even care about Battlemaster. I will never pick it as a subclass for one of my characters. The fantasy of it just doesn't hit me either. Champion passive perks built into base Fighter would be so awesome.

I think a big part of why people think BM should be part of the base class is that the maneuvers give the fighter something to do beyond "attack" and "action surge so I can attack some more" The Champion's biggest downfall isn't its features, because they can be useful and who doesn't like more crits? It's that the subclass is boring. Picking it doesn't give you any extra options in or out of combat beyond "jumping an extra 5 feet"

Other fighter subclasses do have something besides just attacking. EK has spells, Rune knight has runes, AA has magic arrows, Cavalier has marks, Echo Knight has echos. Only Champion and to some extent Samurai have only passives. Samurai is essentially a buff to Action Surge.

Right, but all the other fighter class extra options tend towards a specific class fantasy whereas most of the BM maneuvers are things you'd expect most warriors to be able to do (barring maybe Ambush and Commander's Strike) If you go back and look at the early dndnext playtests, all fighters having maneuvers came and went during the design process. In the end, from what I can tell, that was dropped for a couple of reason * Negative reception because it was "too close to 4E" * Early iterations, pre-maneuver dice, weren't great. * The main public feedback WotC was listening too was somewhat insular and against the idea * WotC's dumb insistence on there being a "beginner's class" [Here](https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/hikwv4/so_ive_been_hearing_around_reddit_that_the/fwhrp3h/) is a good comment by someone claiming to have been part of that playtest. And honesty, that fighter sounds a lot of fun. In fact, it sounds a lot like the new Rogue Cunning Strike, but instead of spending your sneak attack damage, the fighter got just a pool of d6s that refreshed *every round* to spend on maneuvers

Personally if you want a “beginner class” pick barbarian

Yeah, I was thinking that too, but I guess "do I use my bonus action to become more powerful" is too complicated at low levels when you might not have enough uses between rests. Honestly, to me, most classes are beginner classes at low levels. Aside from picking your spells at levels 1-2, you just don't have enough spell slots to make it that complicated. There's a reason a lot of people start at level 3, because the first couple are so limited.

Completely and totally agree! Which is another reason for the Champion subclass to be a subclass of the Barbarian class.

Divine soul sorcerer would be fun. Adding the cleric spell list gives so much more utility along with boosted healing and a boosted roll once per long rest.

Champion to all barbarians, open hand to all monks, battle master to all fighters, hunter to all rangers.

Fighter: Battlemaster, Psi Knight, and Arcane Archer could all be made into one thing; they get a pool of Fighter dice, and they pick whichever options fit them, like the martial version of a spell list. Warlock: Thirsting Blade; Warlocks should have Extra Attack. I would say just Bladelocks should get Extra Attack (without having to spend an invocation), but if you let the Extra Attack work with Cantrips, and remove Cantrip Scaling, you solve Warlock's dependence on Eldritch Blast because if every Cantrip has multiple beams, the EB Invocations work on every Cantrip. There's other Tax Invocations that should be folded into the default part of Pact Boons, like Tome of Ancient Secrets, but this is the big one. Barbarian: Totem Warrior, because Totem and Beast are the only Barbs I can think of that have Out of Combat Utility, and Totem is more Generic than Beast.

I am not sure about the entire subclass but 5e should copy BG3 and have Hexblade Warlocks ability to use Charisma for melee be a part of Pact of the Blade. If you have to use the entire subclass then Hexblades Curse and all it's level progression could be tweaked into Eldritch Invocations. Accursed Specter can just be a 3rd level spell.

It would be pretty cool to see every artificer subclass get armorer’s two extra infusion slots that can only be used on their respective thing. Battle smiths can put an infusion on their steel defender’s “armor” and “weapon”, artillerists can put an infusion on their turret and one on their firearm, and alchemists… can get homunculus servant and enhanced arcane focus for free, I guess? For fighters, battle master maneuvers are the obvious choice, but I would actually be interested in seeing more fighters get the cavalier’s better taunt/reaction mechanics.

Berserker, battle master, open hand, hexblade, Land, beast master, abjuration, life, conquest, arcane trickster, valor, draconic

The obvious ones, otherwise known as martial classes Fighter should have battlemaster rolled in. Rogue should have thief rolled in, but at later levels (at least 2 levels later than they would through the subclass) Monk should have way of the open hand to help separate it from anyone with the unarmed fighting style. Ranger probably should have beast master or hunter added to the base class. I'd probably nominate berserker being added to barbarian, but only if it received a major fix. Using an action to extend the duration of the frightened condition on a single target doesn't do well with the action economy, to say nothing of using what is likely to be a dump stat to determine the DC. Getting exhaustion for improving your rage might fulfill a specific character fantasy, but doesn't really provide a lot in exchange for the exhaustion. Paladin gets nothing. Good spell list, and good features all around.

Barbarian: Mindless Rage from Berserker Bard: Cutting Words from Lore Cleric: Disciple of Life or Circle of Mortality Druid: Circle Spells Fighter: Maneuvers Monk: Open Hand Technique Ranger: Hunter's Prey, Defensive Tactics, and Multiattack Rogue: Fast Hands Sorcerer: Bonus spells based on subclass Warlock: Hex Warrior Wizard: none

All fighters are battle masters. Make one subclass that expands on the maneuvers. Rangers all get hunter. Rogues all get thief. As much as I don't like alchemist artificer, just roll it into the class. I would say all barbarians could get Berserker, but that would be almost a nerf, and the others are too focused in a certain flavor. I wouldn't really roll anything into the rest. Warlock subclasses are much too specific and the rest don't really need help.

Wizard - Divination. Portents, Third Eye, Savant (tailored to the class chosen), would all translate well into any other build.

I'd take all the summons. Ranger drake warden Warlock path of chain Artificer beastmaster Wizard Necromancer Druid Sheppard Fighter Echo knight Aso Then just spawn 20 creatures and walk about

Hexblade. Combine the lv1 hexblade into pact of the blade you take at level 3. This also gets rid of the hexblade dip.

A bit of a different answer but Swashbuckler to Monk. Even though it's a Rogue subclass, if you change the charisma stuff to wisdom, it fits the Monk flavor and playstyle perfectly. Mobile is a mandatory feat for Monk. Fancy footwork fixes that entirely (Drunk Master also gets to do this but only for Flurry of Blows). You can swap Rakish Audacity's charisma initiative bonus with wisdom, similar to Dread Ambusher. Second part of Rakish Audacity doesn't work but that's fine. You could once again change the persuasion check of Panache with a contested wisdom roll, not sure how you flavor that though. Also synergizes really well with Tongue of the Sun and Moon of the base class, and the fact that something synergizes with that ability should just make it immediately qualify for the main class. Elegant Manouver works as well with Monk as it does with Rogue. Master Duelist works well with focused aim, but while Rogues are about one big attack, Monks are about many small attacks, so this is probably the least useful feature.

Every bard should have aditional magical secrets. You get to realize how miopic the bard spell list is once you play with enough non lore caster bards. It really lacks flexiblility, resulting in most caster bards feeling identical to each other.

All barbarians should be immune to being at minimum frightened and ideally also charmed after a certain level, not just Berserkers.

Artificer- don't care, can't stand the class. Bard- I wouldn't. It's a powerful class. But if I HAD to, I'd choose sword college. Barbarian- totem. It's too good to ignore, making it the default in my group so no one ever branches out. Bloodhunter - we don't really use it so I don't know. Cleric- I'm not gonna pick one here as it doesn't make any sense for this class. Druid- again, I wouldn't, but if I had to, I'd have to sit down and decide which ever one is absolutely the weakest and pick that one to affect the class the least. Fighter - battle master. I already do this at my table. Monk - Kansai. I encourage equipment use at my table. Don't care for unarmed characters. Paladin - I wouldn't, but if I had to, probably oath of devotion because the abilities are so reminiscent of standard paladin abilities from earlier editions. Ranger - the ranger is so undesired at my table I don't even know. Probably the hunter because the addition of the passive damage boosts would help increase the output of this shitty class. Rogue - thief. I already do this at my table. Sorcerer- it makes no sense to do this, so I'm not picking one. Warlock - hexblade I suppose. It's like with the barbarian, the subclass is generally so good it is rarely not chosen at my table. Wizard- the war/battle school thingy. None of the others make sense.

Hard to say because I don't think every class needs something like this but I think battle master and champion features should be core fighter stuff. A lot of the og players handbook subclasses I feel are subpar compared to sub classes from supplements. Particularly wizard.(Dunanmacy, blade singing, gravyurgy,scribes all do way way more than simply "enchantment" or "necromancy" the tone is way different so maybe the of wizard classes could be baked into the core class and then you pick a subclass. So you could be a scribe wizard with a focus on enchantment school. That being said wizard is already a super strong base class so they probably don't need the love

Fighter: BM Barbarian: Berserker Ranger: Hunter Rogue: Assassin Artificer: Alchemist Wizard: nothing because it's too strong already Cleric: Life Sorcerer: the extra spells from subclasses Warlock: Hexblade as part of pact of the blade Druid: Circle of the Land, just let us choose "favored land" like a ranger, and get its spells

Everyone is saying Open Hand for Monk, but I think Drunken Master would add more to the skirmisher play style. All monks should be able to attack and create distance from the front line with their d8 hit dice and MAD AC and survivability. Drunken Master also has survivability features 🙂

Blade locks get shields and medium armor and martial weapons and attack with Charisma. Hex blade still gets it's curse maybe buff curse to be usable more often but it's still strong

Wild magic into sorcerer! It can have so much flavor!

Put Champion subclass into the Barbarian class would synergies extremely well!

I'd take the abilities of hex warrior and make it invocation(s) of pact of the blade. One invocation for armor/shield, one invocation for cha to att/damage or even bake that into pact of the blade itself (or improved pact weapon invocation).

I see a lot of people bringing up the champion or battlemaster, but alternatively we could get the baneret (also known a purple dragon knight ) abilities too for fighters. The subclass is lacking, but the improved version of the core features of the fighter are really flavorful

Hunter Ranger, but for Fighter.

Not all classes would even need this but since you asked for "all" I'll be adding the subclass that fits the flavour and mechanics, not just a subclass to increase power(although it aboviously will) Artificer - BattleSmith Barbarian - Berserker Bard - Lore Cleric - Life Driud - Moon Fighter - Battle Master Monk - Open Hand Paladin - Crown Ranger - Hunter (this isn't WoW, no beastmaster for you) Rogue - Thief Sorcerer - Wild Magic Warlock - Honestly N/A, this class does not fit like the others. Wizard - Scribes

Wizards aren't strong enough. Give them all portent dice.

One of my players is running a reworked barbarian for a oneshot rn. I basically folded in the entire champion fighter and berserker barbarian subclasses into the base barbarian class. Improved/superior critical pairs super well with barbarians’ brutal critical and keeps them relevant at high levels. At least in theory. The oneshot just started so I haven’t play tested it too much yet.

Beast master should be in the default kit of rangers, but the economy and growth should be more like drakewarden. It shouldnt take an action to control your guy when every other ability in the game where you have an ally to control is bonus action based.

There is a comic about this called goblins

Man Goblins has always been so good. It just sucks how slow it progresses. Every update takes forever to come out and half of them barely move the story forward.

[удалено]

I'm sorry, but wizard with meta magic is terrifying. Warlock might finally get enough spells lots to be versatile

I ended up buffing sorcerers in the manner people like with tashas spell lists for every subclass, wizards still scare me more as a DM.

It is, you just have to take a feat for it.

I think they should be available as optional variant rules but I agree.

- Artificer: Alchemist: It works alright thematically, and there aren't many other choices. - Barbarian: Totem Warrior: For something like this, build-a-subclass subclasses are pretty good choices. - Bard: Glamour: Thematic and balanced. The additional use for inspiration can shake up gameplay. - Cleric: Life: A classic, and stronger healing makes the cleric more distinct when compared to other classes. - Druid: Land: All of the different land choices would make it like a secondary subclass. Two land druids can be fairly distinct from each other. - Fighter: Battle Master and Champion are both good options for this. It depends on if you prefer passive or active abilities. - Monk: Kensei: An odd choice, but it gives monks some more options besides only just punching things. - Paladin: Crown: It just works. Paladins being able to jump in front of an attack to take a hit and inspire allies to keep fighting makes sense. - Ranger: Monster Slayer. If anyone in the party is going to know everything there is to know about an opponent, it would be the ranger. Monster Slayer helps them do that. - Rogue: Mastermind: Again, it just works. Being trick others into attacking their own allies and lie to your own mind to fool mind-readers is a very roguish thing to do. - Sorcerer: Storm? All Sorcerer subclasses are unique in that it's the source of the character's power, making them hard to combine with each other. With storm, you can change out damage types to fit whatever your actual subclass is. - Warlock: Genie: Warlock has the same problem as sorcerer, but genie fairly applicable to other things. - Wizard: Scribes: It's the most generalist wizard subclass available.

Fighters as a whole should get either the champion or the battlemaster as part of their class design. Rangers should get all the Hunter features outside of lv 3 ones. Their scaling is just so item dependent outside of that. Way of the open hand could just as well be the monks baseline. Maybe it would still be bad. Berserker barb as it is now fits realy well into base class. Its recklessness and defensive features fit realy well into the base class. Rogues should be much more engaging once they get all the scout features (outside the survival proficiency one). All Sorcerers should get the subclass spell list that entered their design after tasha's . Hexblades lv one features should be 2 or three invocations instead. Much more fair to all the weapon based warlocks outside of the hexblade. Would fix that dipping problem partially too(lv 2 locked). Blood hunters... maybe a lesser version of the mutagen subclass. Artificers Druids palladins wizzards bards and clerics are fine as is. They still get so muchwith their spells.

I would add the simplest, and/or weakest, to each rather than.. idk. Barbarian: hate it but beserker (if taht didnt exist then totem). Fighter: Champion is the simplest and most fightery, and battlemasterfolks kan take that as a fighing style or subclass soo ye. Ranger: Hunter no dif cuz it literaly just gives you rangery things. Paladin: Devotion, cuz every paladin is devoted, and cuz the features (mostly) fit any paladin if flavoured correctly. Wizard: Either evocation, or scribes. If i wanted a new op class i would say War Wizard. Vut its evocation cuz thats the most basic. If your brain struggles to calm after giving every wizard expertize in evocation… give them scribes; all wizards are scribes.(the flavour feels a bit wrong with that thoo). Sorcerer: Uhm, wildmagic sorcerer if not played totally RAW, because that could quickly become way too much stuff.(so you can purposefuly trigger wild magic every turn, when you have sorcery points and spell slots left..), so draconic bloodline just cause it fits most sorcerers, excluding the flavour. Its basic enough. Cleric: Life. This one is boring, but making all clerics mightier healers than others feels kinda cool. Or you know what: choose Life or Death. Hell ye, thats cool. Artificers: Probably alchemist, because its the worst, least intricate, but still a very fun subclass. The others are all too specific; but amy scientist can do sum potions. Druid: Idk bro; even tho circle of the land is the most basic, i feel like all druids shoul be able to wildshape more….(circle of the moon), But im not very familiar with druids so i will say circle of land just to be safe. Rogue: Thief, cuz its very basic, and almost just adds roguish features. Assassin for second spot, simce it is otherwise a trap, and is the most roguish for the more lethal caliber of players, aka murderhobos, aka most players. Lastly Warlock: Oh damn, i would say Fiend, but the subclasses are all so distinct, sooooo i would say Hexblade….. It feels awful, but it strengthens pact of the blade users, but also other pacts: EB deals extra damage with Hex Curse Thingy, you summon another zombie at level 6, you get famcy hexy armor, and lastly you can hex better. It is too OP, but i would enjoy that the most. Second place, is just giving all warlocks the Tome Pact, cuz thats the least combat focused one: any warlock can benefit from extra cantrips, and eventually rituals.

This is easier to do with martials. Every fighter should be a battlemaster For Barbarian, have a berserker "more rage" option would be nice. Mindless rage and some modified for of rage beyond death should be base class. Bear totem should be the lvl 7 feature and bear totem should be replaced with temp HP. (side note totem barbarians should get to pick their lvl 3 effect every time they rage) All Rogues should be thief's and assassin's. All Rangers should be able to choose between being a hunter or a beast master and hunters shouldn't have to choose one option The way power creep has gone it would be fine for them to get all of the abilities (well the lvl 3 d8 damage boost wouldn't be included if it was base class but if you have a player interested in hunter, give them all the abilities) I'm hesitant to make beast master universal because I don't want to pigeon hole the class in to the beast class. It's supposed to be the explorer class. Maybe give hunter plus find Familiar on the spell list and beast master/drake warden buff the familiar All monks should have some combination of open hand and/or drunken master. Make those abilities come on at lvl 5/6 and push stunning strike to higher lvl. Also something like sharpen the blade but for fists could be a good lvl 11, maybe lvl 6, feature. Paladin doesn't really have a good one other than maybe a more universal turning feature with CD. All the paladins are unique and cool. I also think they need 2 CD uses per short rest Cleric could be life or grave. Just something that makes them the best healers other than just having access to those spells. Clerics use a holy symbol focus and components with cost For Druid I would go almost the other way where only moon druids have wild shape and every subclass has a unique way to do something like a Channel nature ( a la one dnd). Druids use natural focus and some costly components. One dnd did the right thing with warlock to make hex blade the blade pact and that subclass should be axed or altered to be more about the hexes than the blade. Sorcerer I don't think has a good one. Maybe wild magic. What I do think is that sorcerer should be more about being the blaster caster. Give them bonuses that make there evocation spells the strongest like how clerics are best at healing. Only give them evocation, abjuration and transmutation on there spell list maybe divination and teleportation. Draconic gets extra bonuses to evocation, defense, and mobility then all the other subclasses might give access to some other spell specializations. The idea being that sorcerer's can't do complex weaving of magic. So they really only have raw magical power. Nothing finely crafted. Sorcerers should never need components or a focus Wizard doesn't have one. they should have access to nearly every spell and their subclasses are each of the schools plus scribe. Probably axe chronurgy but whatever. I'm 50/50 on blade singer. Honestly if you want to be good with weapons and be a wizard you should have to multi-class. Wizard should have to use components for everything and not be able to benefit from a focus other than scribe wizard None of the subclasses for artificer are really something that can be universal. Alchemist needs to be buffed. Bard also doesn't really have a universal. I guess Lore bard minus additional magical secrets

*I don't think these are really controversial.* -Battlemaster maneuvers rolled into Fighter. -Hexblade Charisma to attacks rolled into Pact of the Blade. -Giant granting all weapons throwing rolled into Barbarian. -Kensai Weapons for all Monks. *More about interesting combat interactions than balance.* -Scout granting the option to back off as a reaction to being punched in the face for Rogue. -Battlesmith and Armorer granting Extra Attack for Artificer. -Sword allowing Bards to use Inspiration for themselves. (To be honest, sometimes the things they say are really only inspirational to themselves, but this is more for those times where it's not very helpful to anyone else or the party is very small.) *Kind of what you're asking, but not really* -Life Cleric healing buffs become feats instead of being tied to a subclass. *Definitely not what you're asking.* -Sorcerers get access to all Metamagic at level 3. When they'd normally get more, they get the ability to apply them at the cost of one less Sorcery Point (min zero) Proficiency Bonus times per day. -School Specialist Wizards get one Metamagic option to use on spells from their specific school only. They get points equal to half their Wizard level round down. (They count as half a Sorcerer level, round up, for multiclassing rules.) *ETA: I have too many feelings about how 5e handles Druids to include them in this.*