Introduction

Table of Contents
Introduction 1 Dos and Don'ts 9
1
Outline ..........................................................................................................................
The Pillars
1
Balance, What is it? ..........................................................................................................................
Bounded Accuracy and AC
5e Systems
Definitions 1 Saving Throws
1
Action Economy ..........................................................................................................................
Bonuses and Modifiers
1
"Weak" and "Strong" Saving Throws ..........................................................................................................................
Tiers of Play
1 Thematic Narrative
Full/half/thirdcaster ..........................................................................................................................
1 Feats
"Dead" Levels ..........................................................................................................................
2 Damage Reduction
MAD/SAD ..........................................................................................................................
Features at each Class Level
Fundamentals of 5e Design 2 Overall
2
The Three Pillars ..........................................................................................................................
The Good, the Bad... 10
2
Bounded Accuracy and AC ..........................................................................................................................
...and the Critique
2
Advantage/Disadvantage System .......................................................................................................................... 10
The Good .......................................................................................................
3 The Request for
Proficiency Bonus .......................................................................................................................... Clarification .......................................................................
10
The Direct Comparison ..................................................................................
Attacks and Damage ..........................................................................................................................
3 10
The Compensation Comparison ..................................................................
Skill Checks ..........................................................................................................................
3 10
The Synergy, or Lack thereof .......................................................................
Saving Throws ..........................................................................................................................
4 10
4 11
The Bad .............................................................................................................
Small, Temporary, Conditional... ..........................................................................................................................
...Static, Stacking Modifiers Stepping on Toes ..............................................................................................
11
4 The Drive-by Critique ......................................................................................
12
Tiers of Play ..........................................................................................................................
No Other Class Grants X ...............................................................................
12
4 Argument From Tradition ..............................................................................
Strong Thematic Narrative .......................................................................................................................... 12
Awareness and Assumption of Feats .......................................................................................................................... 13
5 The Distant Multiclass ....................................................................................
5
Resistance vs Damage Reduction ..........................................................................................................................
Concluding Statements 14
Not Quite Fundamentals 6 14
Processing ....................................................................................................
6
Number of Features ..........................................................................................................................
14
Class Design 101 ....................................................................................
6
"Dead" Levels Are Not Absolute ..........................................................................................................................
Innovative Class Design 15
6
Understanding Unarmored Defense ..........................................................................................................................
Work in Progress
7
Primary Features ..........................................................................................................................
Credits
7
Bookkeeping ..........................................................................................................................
Changelog
8
Resource Recovery Mechanics ..........................................................................................................................
"Bag of Rats" Problem ..........................................................................................................................
8
Infinite Hit Points and Spellcasting ..........................................................................................................................
8
8
Class "Starter Kits" ..........................................................................................................................

GUIDE TO HOMEBREWING CLASSES |

CREATED BY /u/LEUKU
Introduction
Hi, I’m Leuku “Mcclure”. You may remember me from such
hits like, “Encounter Design Philosophy”, "Goal Oriented
Encounters", “Mechanics of the Big Bad”, “Big Boss Solo
Inserts”, the “Tinkerer” homebrew class, and my latest
“Vanguard” homebrew class (in progress).
Today I am here to explain and clarify the multiple
processes by which I understand, develop, and judge the
balance of homebrew classes.
Outline
In the following, I will:
Define what “balance” is and means, as well as provide
some other definitions
Detail the Fundamentals of 5e Design Philosophy
Summarize the Fundamentals of 5e Design Philosopher
into a Dos and Don'ts List, and lastly
Explain what is and isn’t good balancing advice, and in
which scenarios some balancing advice is more
appropriate than others
And so without further ado,
Balance, What Is It?
Put simply, it is ”Relative Comparative Compensation”.
What was that?
Relative Comparative Compensation
Relative Comparative Compensation can be broken down
into its component words and the question that arises from
each:
Relation
“How does feature A relate to and interact with features B
and C?
Comparison
“How does this feature or group of features at X level
compare to a similar feature or group of features of an official
class at approximately X level?” and
Compensation
“What strengths compensate for what weaknesses in my
class, and how do they compare to the compensations of
official classes?”
Mechanical Balance is having your
class’ strengths and weaknesses be
compensated for in ways that are on
comparably even terms with official
classes.
Understanding balance means understanding what makes
each official class tick. What are their strengths, their
weaknesses? How do the strengths and weaknesses of their
features interact? How are they compensated for? How do
these compensations compare to the compensations in other
classes?
If you read WOTC’s article Modifying Classes, you will see
that when they are doing their class breakdowns they are
essentially answering the above questions. How this essay
will differ from theirs is that instead of merely examining
homebrew subclasses and feature replacement in an existing
class, it will dive deeper into full class design.
Definitions
Action Economy
The number of actions, bonus actions, reactions, movement,
and more available to any given creature. Encounters are
destroyed or are made overwhelming based on the amount of
action economy made available to each side of the conflict. It
is why Solo Boss fights are difficult to execute.
“Weak” and “Strong” saving throws
Strong saving throws are Dexterity, Constitution, and
Wisdom. They are called "strong" because they come up
much more frequently in official published material
compared to the "weak". Weak saving throws are Strength,
Intelligence, and Charisma. This definition will be repeated
later in the document.
“Fullcaster”, “halfcaster”, and
“thirdcaster/quartercaster”
A fullcaster has a spell slot level progression like the Bard,
Wizard, Sorcerer, Druid, and Cleric. The Warlock is an outlier
with its own unique spell slot progression, which at the end
of the day is intended to just about meet the potency of
normal fullcasting.
A halfcaster has a spell slot level progression like the
Ranger and Paladin, and are called "half" because they have
half the rate of spellcasting progression as a fullcaster.
A thirdcaster/quartercaster has a spell slot level
progression like the Eldritch Knight Fighter subclass and the
Arcane Trickster Rogue subclass - thirdcasters typically don’t
warrant “dead” levels. “Third”-caster is technically more
accurate than “Quarter”-caster, as the spell slot progression
rate is approximately 1/3rd a Fullcaster’s, but quartercaster
sounds better off the tongue.
“Dead” levels
A dead level is a level in which there appears to be no
distinctly named feature. Dead levels appear on full and
halfcasters. They appear whenever a class gains access to a
higher level spell slot of 3rd or greater. They appear because
gaining access to a higher level spell slot is a powerful
“feature” in its own right.
GUIDE TO HOMEBREWING CLASSES |
CREATED BY /u/LEUKU 1
 MAD and SAD
MAD is Multiple Ability score Dependent and SAD is
Single Ability score Dependent. If a class is MAD, then it
relies on at least 3 or more of the 6 available ability scores for
its core abilities and needs. If a class is SAD, then it relies on
just 1 ability score to cover the majority of its abilities and
needs. The Barbarian, who generally requires minimum
investments in STR, CON, and DEX, is MAD. There really
isn’t a SAD class in 5e, as casters will often still need DEX for
AC, STR or DEX for weapon attacks, and CON for health. An
example of a SAD class would be a CON-based spellcasting
class who can use a single score for all of spell
attack/damage/save DC and health, especially so if it also
gets a feature that allows using CON for AC.
Class Level Scaling
Class Level Scaling means that some aspect of a feature
scales in power according to class level, as opposed to, say, a
feature that scales according to total level (cantrips), a feature
that scales according to subclass level (Battlemaster
maneuvers), or a feature that does not scale at all. The
Rogue’s Sneak Attack scales according to class level. In
contrast, the Hunter Ranger’s Hunter’s Prey feature does not
scale with class level.
The Fundamentals of 5e
Design Philosophy:
This section covers what I believe to be the fundamental
aspects of 5e design that inform much of the class design
direction within the PHB. This section is dense and riddled
with examples, so if you don’t want to read so much, then
skip past it to the much shorter Dos and Don’ts summary
section.
The 3 Pillars: Combat,
Exploration, Interaction
The foundation of 5e DnD is supported atop the three
aforementioned pillars. What are these pillars?
Combat is fighting against enemy forces or elements.
Exploration is navigating the world around you - any
feature that enables and encourages you to better explore the
world (like Champion Fighter’s Remarkable Athlete’s
improved jumping ability).
Interaction is any kind of feature that enables and
encourages you to interact with creatures and objects outside
of a combat setting, such as the Battlemaster Fighter’s Know
Your Enemy. It’s the kind of feature that helps reduce
Murder-hoboing.
While features for combat are the easiest to design for due
to being largely numbers oriented, the two other pillars are no
less important. Your class must live in this world as much as
they fight in it.
There is a spectrum of how much Exploration and
Interaction-based features any given class would warrant.
The Fighter has the least. The Monk has the most. There’s a
litany of arguments and explanations for why this is the case,
but for now let us just think about ensuring that there are
some features, at least 2 in the base class and maybe at least
1 in each subclass, that are relegated to those pillars.
GUIDE TO HOMEBREWING CLASSES |
2 CREATED BY /u/LEUKU
Ultimately, what really determines how much of these your
class must support depends on exactly what you put into the
class.
Spellcasting can actually provide much of a class’
exploration/interaction needs as much as it provides its
combat needs. If you’re making a spellcaster, you have to
carefully handpick what spells go on the spell list. If the spells
are mostly combat, then that likely warrants the base class
having more Exploration/Interaction features.
Bounded Accuracy and AC
Unlike in 4e, DCs do not scale with class level. A DC20 at 1st
level is still a DC 20 at 20th level. DCs will never exceed a
certain point, nor will accuracy bonuses and or, for the most
part, AC. Avoid features that break the expectations of these
things.
For much of the game, ACs tend to not exceed 21 and can
be as low as 8 even for high CR monsters. PC Accuracy tends
to reach +11 at 17th level (+13 for Archery Fighting Style),
but typically no further except in temporary, conditional
circumstances. More specific cases will be expanded upon in
the Proficiency Bonus section. Also see "Magic Item
Bonus" green box at the bottom of this page.
Advantage/Disadvantage system
Perhaps the most central defining mechanic of 5e. It
streamlines play like no other. Take advantage of
advantage/disadvantage. However, there are some places
where you should avoid it.
Attacks: Avoid granting too easy a source of advantage on
attacks. Either it must be limited or come at some cost. For
example, the Barbarian’s Reckless Attack grants advantage
at the significant cost of granting advantage to enemies
attacking it
Skills: Avoid granting advantage flatly to skill checks,
especially at early levels. WOTC tried with an early version of
the elves race where they got advantage on all Perception
checks that proved too powerful. If you are going to grant
advantage to skills, either a) limit the number of uses, or b)
restrict it to specific uses. For example, having advantage on
all Charisma (Intimidation) checks related to haggling the
price of an object.
Saving Throws: Similar as above, either limit it or gate it
at high levels. For example, the Abjuration Wizard grants
advantage on saving throws against spell effects, but at 14th
level.
Magic Item Bonuses: Unlike in 4e, bonuses from
magic items are not required to maintain PC
combat competency at higher levels. Thus they
could be entirely absent in a campaign. That doesn’t
mean there won’t be magic items; I like to flood my
worlds with +0 magic items. When designing your
class, be aware that magic items and their bonuses
will probably exist in most games, but don’t assume
that a player using your class will have access to any
specific magic item or any specific magic item
bonus.
Proficiency Bonus
The proficiency bonus is an elegant mechanic that makes
granting benefits and scaling easy. But like
Advantage/Disadvantage, there are certain forms you should
avoid.
Attacks and Damage
Do not double proficiency on accuracy rolls and in most
cases do not add proficiency bonus to damage. The former
breaks Bounded Accuracy/AC dynamic, and the latter does
some funky things depending on when the feature is granted.
At early levels, you get a character-wide scaling mechanic that
functions independently of leveling your class, thus opening
you up to multiclassing abuse. At later levels, it grants your
class a massive damage boost seemingly out of nowhere.
The only official example of Proficiency bonus to damage is
in the PHB Ranger/Revised Ranger’s animal companion. I
play a beastmaster, so let me tell you that my animal hits like
a truck. The imagined compensation is that the animal’s
starting stats aren’t that good, if you lose your animal you lose
access to virtually all of your subclass abilities, and your
animal has less health than you as well as fewer survival
options. Still, it hits like a truck and can be quite jarring to a
DM. So generally avoid it.
Skill Checks
Due to the Rogue’s Expertise feature, there is a great
temptation to simply double one’s bonus to skill checks. If
that’s something you want to do, then simply grant your class
the Expertise feature and compensate for it properly.
What you should not do is "grant proficiency in a skill and if
the PC is already proficiency in that skill, double that
proficiency". There is precedence for this in UA articles, but I
am making the argument that this is a bad idea. To me, it’s a
kind of punishment to players who chose the “wrong” skill
proficiency at character creation. Double proficiency in one
skill is better than proficiency in two skills, because the
former ultimately ensures that you will almost always pass
your check, especially if it’s a skill you will use frequently
(Perception, Insight, Stealth, Athletics). What to do instead?
Either
a) grant proficiency in a skill and if they are already
proficient grant proficiency in another skill from the class
skill list. Or
b) regardless of whether you are proficient in a skill, grant
double proficiency on that skill when used in a specific way.
For example, the Dwarf race’s Stonecunning grants
double proficiency on Intelligence (History) checks related to
the origin of stonework. This helps avoid the abuse of skills
that can be used broadly or frequently.
P.S. If you do grant your class the Expertise feature,
absolutely do not say “You have expertise in X
skill”. Expertise is the name of a class feature, not a
mechanic. If you could have advantage on a
Wisdom saving throw once per long rest, you
would not say you have Indomitable in Wisdom
saving throws.
GUIDE TO HOMEBREWING CLASSES |
CREATED BY /u/LEUKU 3
 Saving Throws
All official classes are proficient in one “weak” and one
“strong” saving throw. The “weak” are so called because they
appear infrequently in published material, making them less
useful to PCs for much of any game.
“Weak”: Strength, Intelligence, Charisma
“Strong”: Dexterity, Constitution, and Wisdom
Do not grant two strong or two weak saving throws. Do
grant one weak and one strong.
Do not double proficiency bonus on saving throws. Saving
throw DCs only go as high as 19 for PCs and a few points
higher from high CR monsters who have spellcasting ability
scores that exceed 20. Also be wary not to grant proficiency in
a saving throw too soon. The earliest example I think we get
is one at 7th level for a UA Ranger subclass or some other.
Small, Temporary, Conditional,
Static, Stacking Modifiers: Avoid
like the plague!
Bounded Accuracy/AC, Advantage/Disadvantage, and
Proficiency Bonus were all designed to avoid this artifact of
4e. In 4e, you could get +1s and +2s from so many different
sources that you’d often forget half of them were even there!
ACs and DCs scaled with your level so that the same tasks
always had the same difficulty at 15th level as it did at 1st
level, which you would use a million +1s and +2s to
circumvent.
In 5e, such things come in very limited forms. Fighting
Styles are probably the closest examples of small, conditional,
static, stacking modifiers. Fortunately, they are designed to
encompass multiple weapons within a broad category rather
than ultra-specific weapons. They don’t change depending on
circumstances and the conditions of when they apply are easy
to remember.
The Barbarian also provides a conditional, class-scaling,
stacking modifier in the form of Rage bonus damage.
Fortunately, the conditions for triggering it are hard to miss
and the bonus does not change depending on round-to-round
circumstances.
Lastly, the Great Weapon Master and Sharpshooter feats
provide temporary, conditional, static, stacking modifiers. But
unlike in 4e, these modifiers are so large that you cannot
forget them! Similarly, the War Cleric’s Channel Divinity:
Guided Strike provides a massive +10 temporary bonus. If
you’re going to provide a temporary flat bonus, make it
unforgettable.
A different kind of risk to consider is the nature of
"multistacking modifiers". In 5e, some mechanics stack
whereas others do not. Temporary Hit Points do not stack.
Proficiency in a single thing from multiple sources do not
stack. New calculations for AC do not stack.
Static modifiers to AC do stack. Static and dice-based
modifiers to damage do stack. It is not uncommon for players
to find the most efficient means by which to stack modifiers
from multiple sources. Try googling "Highest Achievable AC
in 5e". Another reason then to avoid inventing these kinds of
modifiers is to reduce the gaming of multistacking.
So if you’re planning on providing stacking modifiers,
consider using Advantage/Disadvantage or additional dice
instead. Reduce the total number of static modifiers from
different sources as much as possible.
GUIDE TO HOMEBREWING CLASSES |
4 CREATED BY /u/LEUKU
Small Temporary Conditional Static
Stacking Modifiers gone wrong
“If you’re wielding a hammer and the target
creature is a demon who has taken a dodge action
since the end of your last turn, you gain a +1 bonus
to grapple checks against that creature, plus an
additional bonus equal to the hammer’s magic item
bonus if it has any and the number of beard hairs
you sacrificed at the last dawn up to a maximum of
3 (5 if you’re a dwarf).”
Tiers of Play: Respect Them!
The tiers of play are 1st through 4th level, 5th through 10th,
11th through 16th, and 17th through 20th. In each instance
any given class needs a significant bump to its potency.
Martials get Extra Attack or similar, spellcasters get cantrip
boosts and 3rd/6th/9th level spells.
Respecting the tiers of play means ensuring you fulfill
minimum average damage expectations, among other
things.
Classes that buck this trend have their own means of
fulfilling these expectations. The Rogue’s Sneak Attack
scales through the entire class rather than at each tier level.
Barbarian has class scaling Rage damage. Martial Arts
bonus action unarmed strike, unarmed strike damage class-
level-scaling, Flurry of Blows, and class-level-scaling Ki
points ensure that the Monk keeps up, even as it does not
wow you with its damage output. The half-weapons-focused
Cleric does a strange thing with weapon damage scaling at
8th/14th level - it’s complicated and I can give an explanation
for it, but that’s a conversation for a later time.
Ultimately, respecting the tiers of play is a semi-hard rule,
in that you can absolutely play with when class-wide average
damage boosts appear. I did precisely that with my homebrew
Tinkerer class. But what I learned is that balancing such a
thing can be ridiculously difficult. I had to compare and
contrast so many different kinds of damage output mechanics
to help me get the Tinkerer to where it is today. If you can,
avoid that.
Strong Thematic Narrative
A strong thematic narrative is an understanding of the
conditions and circumstances by which your class has
emerged into their world. It has nothing to do with
mechanics, but instead everything to do with the causes and
pressures in the world that give rise to and necessitate the
emergence of your class.
Fighters exist because raw fighting ability is valuable in a
violent world like DnD and a rare few will rise above the rest.
Wizards exist because magic suffuses the world and careful
study can reveal and grant access to its powers. Rangers exist
because there is a line between nature and civilization and
there is a need for people to straddle it. Clerics exist because
gods exist, and a select few who worship them are granted
their power. So on and so forth.
Filling in flavor text is not the only point to a strong thematic
narrative. Homebrewing an entire class warrants creating
new unique features.
If you have a strong thematic narrative, then coming up
with ideas for new features, especially at higher levels,
becomes much easier. One of the things that will halt a class’
development and prevent it from ever being finished is a
weak thematic narrative. It will also be one of the first things
criticized in reviews.
Awareness and Assumption of
Feats
To quote the UA: Feats article
“To begin with, since using feats is an optional rule, it’s
important to never assume that a particular feat will be a part
of the game. For instance, a class can’t refer to a feat, and
feats should never be granted as class features.”
This means three things:
a) Never include a feat as a class feature,
b) Never refer to a feat in your class, and
c) Never assume that any given feat will be made available
to any given player. Your class should not rely on feats to
function.
However, you should absolutely be aware of how feats
interact with your class’ features and what abuses may arise.
For example, if there was a feature that gave you unlimited
reactions, there’s obvious abuse when combined with the
Polearm Master feat.
And there is at least some room for taking a bullet point
from a feat. For feats with multiple bullet points, determine
which bullets are the most significant aspect of the feat.
For example, the -5/+10 from Sharpshooter is clearly its
primary benefit. Once you determine which bullet point(s) is
the most important, don't use them. If you must take
something from a feat, take the less significant bullet points,
such as Sharpshooter’s ignoring of cover. Provide enough
room where feats you pull bullet points from can still be
valuable investments for players.
Resistance vs. Damage Reduction:
Favor Resistance!
5e utilizes the mechanics of Resistance and Immunity, which
instead of reducing damage by a certain value simply lets you
halve or reduce to zero damage. Damage Reduction (DR)
appears in 1 form (or 2? UA Stone Sorcerer I think?) in the
Heavy Armor Master feat.
In a general sense, the fewer calculations you have to make
the better. Halving is more elegant than subtracting. In a
specific sense, the potency of Heavy Armor Master is I argue
understated. The fact that it does not scale with class level is
often seen as a detriment, as well as its limitation to non-
magical weapon damage. However, enemy magical attacks
tend to be far and few inbetween, and the overall long term
benefits of 3 DR are considerable. Whether you’re taking 5
damage at lower levels or 21 at higher levels, reducing
incoming damage by 3 over the course of a day can save you
as much as half your hit dice expenditure on self-healing.
Consider especially that at higher levels monsters tend to
get more attacks as much as they increase their base damage.
So be wary of the understated potency of DR and favor
Resistance as a more elegant solution wherever you can. And
don’t forget about Temporary Hit Points.
GUIDE TO HOMEBREWING CLASSES |
CREATED BY /u/LEUKU 5

Not Quite Fundamentals
The following are things that do not quite fit into the
"fundamentals" of 5e, due to being even more abstract or
observational. This does not mean they are any less
important. Rather, these are just "softer" "rules" of class
homebrew.
Number of Features
Be wary not to plug too many features into a single level. You
may want all your goodies as soon as possible, but you must
restrain yourself. Just choose and keep the most essential.
Most classes have 1, maybe 2, and at the worst 3 distinct
features/abilities within a level. For example, Paladin has
Spellcasting, Smites, and Fighting Styles at 2nd level, but
Smites is like an offshoot of spellcasting since it uses the
same resource, so it’s more like 2.5.
Do not try to pass off a feature with multiple bullet points
as merely being a single feature. Whether that feature counts
as having the equivalent power of 1 or multiple features is
dependent on what the bullet points contain. For example,
the PHB Ranger’s Natural Explorer features 6 bullet points
+ double proficiency skill check boost on specific uses, but
they are all limited to mechanics regarding navigating terrain
largely outside of combat. Despite their number, each
individual bullet point's power is small, so their combined
effective power is ultimately moderate.
But if you have a stealth feature that says something like
the following:
Sneaky Stealth Feature for Stealth
You can take the Hide action in dim light and lightly
obscured areas as if it were heavily obscured
You can take the Hide action as a bonus action
Whenever you hit a creature you are hidden from with an
attack, the attack deals an additional 10 damage.
Those are all clearly three significant, distinct abilities,
especially the last one. They may have a common theme, but
each is potent to different degrees in their own right. If I were
to balance this, I’d probably cut off the 3rd bullet point, and
even though the 1st bullet point is from the Skulker feat, I’d
probably let it slide.
”Dead” Levels are not absolute
What is a “Dead” level? It’s a level where there aren’t any
distinctly named features. They are found on fullcasters and
halfcasters and at levels typically occupied by access to a new
spell slot level, as well as potentially some other class scaling
thing, e.g. number of Invocations known.
“Dead” levels appear wherever spellcasting is core to the
class, which means the Barbarian, Fighter, Monk, and Rogue
are excluded. But not all casters are equal. The Wizard has
the greatest number of “Dead” levels at 8. The Bard has the
fewest at 2. Why the difference? Well, we have to look at what
the class offers.
GUIDE TO HOMEBREWING CLASSES |
6 CREATED BY /u/LEUKU
The Wizard has the greatest number of spells knowable in
the game, technically capable of learning all of the spells on
its spell list, which I think numbers 200+? In terms of sheer
volume of options, it is the best, and that is a wizard’s primary
strength. By 20th level, a wizard will have at minimum 44
spells in its spellbook. Suffice to say, a wizard does not rely
on unique class-specific features as much for its potency.
In contrast, a Bard will know at most 22 spells, half the
Wizard’s minimum, and their spell list is significantly smaller,
even bearing in mind Magical Secrets. Further, in the PHB,
the Bard is limited to a single damaging cantrip: vicious
mockery. In terms of the basic spellcasting toolkit, there is a
lot left to be desired in the Bard’s arsenal as compared to the
Wizard’s.
So the Bard gets more unique features. But note the nature
of these features. Song of Rest and Bardic Inspiration. All
of these “dead” levels filled with slight improvements to core
class features. They are not individually distinct new features
with potency in their own right. They are mild improvements
to already established features. The Bard’s comparative limit
on spells and spells known as compared to the Wizard gives
the Bard enough room to fit these mild improvements at what
are traditionally “Dead” levels.
Use “dead” levels wherever you gain a new spell slot level.
Then look at how your class compares to the wizard, or the
bard, or the sorcerer, and so on. Whichever comparison(s) is
most appropriate. If you feel like your spell list/spells
known/unique core features aren’t strong enough to
compensate for these “dead” levels, then perhaps consider
squeezing in a mild improvement to a core feature
somewhere.
Understanding Unarmored Defense
A frequent addition to most any homebrew class is the
maleable Unarmored Defense feature. Both the Monk and
the Barbarian have it with significant differences, and there
are further variants of it elsewhere, such as the Draconic
Sorcerer’s Draconic Resilience. Unarmored Defense is
appealing for both its mechanical flexibility and its cosmetic
appearance, as it’s not uncommon for popular media to
portray fantastically evasive and enduring fighters wearing no
or practically useless armor.
Why bring this up? Employing either the Monk’s or the
Barbarian’s Unarmored Defense is not as simple as it looks.
They differ in significant respects, and it’s important to
understand why they differ. The Monk’s Unarmored Defense
uses 10 + Dexterity Modifier + Wisdom Modifier and does
not allow the use of a shield. The Barbarian’s Unarmored
Defense uses 10 + Dexterity Modifier + Constitution Modifier
and does allow the use of a shield.
Why does the Barbarian get a shield while the Monk does
not? Earlier we already broke down how the Barbarian’s
many features compensate for each’s strengths and
weaknesses. The Barbarian’s Unarmored Defense is a
product of that. By requiring Constitution and Dexterity for
AC, a Barbarian has to make a choice between improving
their attack and damage stat, Strength, versus their AC stat
Dexterity or their AC and Hit Point stat Constitution.
Because of this, the Barbarian class is MAD - Multiple Ability
score Dependent.
The end result is that players who emphasize attack and
damage will have comparatively low AC and players who
emphasize AC will have comparatively low attack and
damage.
In comparison, the Monk’s Martial Arts class feature
allows the Monk to use Dexterity for its attack and damage.
With Unarmored Defense, this means that a Monk that
improves Dexterity is improving all of their Attack, Damage,
and AC. The Monk’s secondary score Wisdom improves both
the Monk’s Ki based abilities and AC. Effectively, a Monk
player does not have to choose between attack/damage and
AC. The Monk is less MAD. While a Barbarian can achieve an
extraordinarilty high attack, damage, and AC at 20th level
through its 20th level capstone feature **, the Monk can and
will achieve its maximum levels far sooner. Recall that earlier
levels are more important to balance than later levels.
Consequently, we can conclude that as an extra bit of
compensation the Monk is deprived of the use of a shield due
to it being less MAD (and due to unarmed strikes not
requiring an empty hand but rather letting you use any part of
your body, such as your head, hip, or legs) while the
Barbarian is granted the use of a shield (especially
considering that Barbarian features tend to emphasize two-
handed weaponry, further asserting the compensations made
between attack/damage and AC).
So when planning to grant your class an Unarmored
Defense-type feature, be aware of the compensations that
need to be made. How MAD is your class? The better your
Unarmored Defense-type feature is for your class, the more
significant the compensation between attack/damage and AC
needs to be.
Primary Features
"Primary Features" are the features that define your class
mechanically within its first 3 levels. They form the core of
your class, upon which many of your subsequent features will
augment or supplement.
In the PHB, some primary features are more subtle than
others. The Fighter has Action Surge and the Wizard has
Fullcasting + Arcane Recovery + Spellbook, i.e. most
number of spells known. Bear in mind, there is some wiggle
room for poaching significant features. For example, the
Land Druid poaches the wizard's Arcane Recovery in the
form of Natural Recovery. One can make the argument that
this does not step on the Wizard's toes too deeply due to the
fact that the Druid's spell list is significantly different from
the Wizard's, and thus no matter how many spells you
recovery you still feel and play differently from the wizard.
Suffice to say, Arcane Recovery is not entirely what makes
Wizard a Wizard.
What does this mean? It means you can poach features
from existing classes. This is discussed in more detail under
The Good, the Bad, and the Critique, specifically beneath
the This is Stepping on the Toes of X Class section
presented later. However, you have to be careful. Any
homebrew class must stand distinct from existing classes.
Any homebrew class must not be approximately creatable
through multiclassing.
Because at the end of the day, if you are presenting your
homebrew class for public consumption, you must be able to
convince the general public that your class is worth existing,
and that means being able to justify why it has any given
feature. The more you poach from other classes, the more
you must demonstrate that your class stands sufficiently
apart. The more arguments you have to make. And who likes
making arguments besides me?
PHB Classes and their Primary Features
Class Primary Features
Barbarian Rage, Reckless Attack, Unarmored Defense
Bard Fullcasting, Bardic Inspiration, Song of Rest
Druid Fullcasting, Wildshape
Fighter Action Surge, Second Wind
Monk Martial Arts, Ki, Unarmored Defense
Paladin Halfcasting, Divine Smite, Lay On Hands
Ranger Halfcasting, Favored Enemy, Natural Explorer
Rogue Sneak Attack, Cunning Action, Expertise
Sorcerer Fullcasting, Font of Magic, Metamagic
Warlock Pact Magic, Eldritch Invocation, Pact Boon
Wizard Fullcasting, Spellbook, Arcane Recovery
Bookkeeping
Bookkeeping refers to resources and numbers you have to
keep track of. These include but are not limited to: A) Spell
slots, B) Rest-based abilities, C) Hit Points and Hit Dice, D)
Material Components with gold costs, E) Consumables, e.g.
ammunition or potions, F) wealth, and G) weight.
People tend to ignore encumbrance because keeping track
of weight tends to take away from being in the moment.
Nothing wrong with it; just depends on the group. But in
general, the fewer the amount of resources you have to keep
track of, the better. Be aware of the amount and frequency of
bookkeeping features you are employing throughout your
class. Abilities that can be used once per short or long rest
are the easiest to keep track of.
Barbarians have to keep track of rage, which has a handful
of uses per long rest. Many of the Barbarian's other features
activate when rage is activated, so the Barbarian has very
little bookkeeping. The Druid has short-rest based wildshape
and long-rest based Fullcasting, so it has significantly more
bookkeeping than the Barbarian. Even then, it's still not too
much to keep track of.
Be wary of features that require minute tracking of gold or
weight of objects. Be aware of how many rest-based unique
features you are piling into a single class and subclass.
GUIDE TO HOMEBREWING CLASSES |
CREATED BY /u/LEUKU 7
 Resource Recovery Mechanics
Resource Recovery Mechanics are features that allows a PC
to regain limited resources outside of conventional means.
The Wizard's Arcane Recovery allows spell slot recovery
outside of long rests. The Fighter's Second Wind enables hit
point recovery outside of short rests, healing spells, and
healing potions. There is a high temptation to create new
resource recoveyr mechanics because A) there is precedence,
and B) it's an easy way to make something powerful. But you
must be careful as it is easily abused. The following are
common abuses I have seen.
Easy Abuse #1: "The Bag of Rats" Problem
"Whenever you drop a creature to 0 hit points, you regain X
Hit Points/Spell Slots."
Precedence: Fiend Warlock's Dark One's Blessing.
If you have a mechanic that rewards dropping creatures to
0 hit points, then there is a high temptation to acquire access
to low HP creatures, e.g. a bag of rats or a cage of chickens.
Dark One's Blessing is fine the way it is because it grants
Temporary Hit Points (THP), and THP by definition do not
stack, so any abuse is limited.
But if you grant hit points, or spell slots, or any other
resource that is normally difficult to come by, then you're
setting up a lot of small creatures up for slaughter. Or, worse,
civilians.
Notice how the Wizard's Arcane Recovery can only be
used once per day at the end of a short rest. How the
Fighter's Second Wind can only be used once between short
rests. How Dark One's Blessing's THP cannot stack.
There are some ways to mitigate the "bag of rats" problem.
You can set a CR requirement on the killed creature, thus
disqualifying low CR creatures like rats. But I am of the
opinion that a DM should not be required to tell you what a
creature's CR is, as that is a bit of a metagame issue.
You can limit the frequency of uses, e.g. "once per short or
long rest". That is in fact a pretty effective solution, but if you
use that, you might as well drop the "drop a creature to 0 hit
points" caveat completely, as then you'd just be mimicking
Arcane Recovery or Second Wind.
Easy Abuse #2: Infinite Hit Points and
Spellcasting
A common homebrew class/subclass is the "Bloodmage".
Such a thing generally involves consuming hit points for
spellcasting. If such a thing has the ability to gain access to
healing spells, either through multiclassing, the magic initiate
feat, or its own spell list, then the door to "infinite healing and
spell slots" is opened.
Imagine that there is a feature that lets me consume 6 hit
points to cast a 1st level spell. Sounds like a lot of hit points,
especially at 1st level. But what happens if we gain access to
spells like cure wounds or goodberry? Let's look at goodberry
because it does not depend on your Wisdom modifier. If you
spend 6 hit points to cast goodberry at 1st level, you gain 10
berries that grant 1 hit point each. You can eat all 10
goodberries over a period of 1 minute. By spending 6 hit
points, you can recover 10. Meaning outside of combat, you
can infinitely regain hit points at a rate of 4 hit points per
minute.
GUIDE TO HOMEBREWING CLASSES |
8 CREATED BY /u/LEUKU
Be especially wary of resource conversions like these.
There are a few solutions. One is to reduce Hit Point
Maximum (HPM) in addition to consuming Hit Points. This
means spending Hit Points to cast spells has an absolute cost
on your long-term longevity, as you can never have more Hit
Points than your maximum. Typically you'd have HPM
restored after a long rest, but you should be wary of spells
that have durations that last into the next day. For example,
imagine you have 51 HPM and you could reduce your HPM
by 5 to cast a 1st level spell. If you have goodberry, then you
can reduce your HPM by 50 to cast goodberry 10 times.
Assuming your DM isn't going to poke you with a stick for 1
damage during your long rest, you'll have a reliable resource
for extra spellcasting.
Another is to consume Hit Dice instead of Hit Points. This
tends to be a bit more flexible than MHP, and thus more
powerful. The conversion is also trickier. You have as many hit
dice as you have class levels, but you do not have as many
spell slots as you have class levels. Spell slots scale at a
unique staggered rate compared to hit dice. In this way, it
make be closer to how Sorcery Points from the Sorcerer
class convert to spell slot levels. The primary limitation that a
hit dice based conversion provides is that hit dice recovers at
half your total per long rest, so expending hit dice to do
something is sacrificing longevity in the greater long run in
favor of potency in the immediate short term.
Whatever mechanic you decide to use, be wary of paring
them with traditional spellcasting, as by doing so you may be
doubling or even tripling a class' potential spellcasting output.
Always be wary of potential extremes.
Class "Starter Kits"
A class' "Starter Kit" contains the class' hit points, hit dice,
proficiencies, equipment, and 1st level features. They
establish the "pace" at which the class runs at from the
starting line.
The Barbarian, with its largest hit die, moderate AC, action-
oriented skills, encouraged great axe, melee weapon
dependency, and Rage cocktail, hits the ground running into
the thick of things, provoking and being provoked.
The Wizard, with its smallest hit die, low AC, lore-oriented
skills, lack of armor, weakest set of weaponry, Fullcasting,
one-of-a-kind spellbook, and the broadest spell list in the
game, hangs back in the rear, slinging the right spell for the
right occasion. Well, best as it can for 1st level.
The Fighter, with its strong hit die, moderate to high AC, a
bit more flexible skills, any armor and weapon type, Fighting
Style, and short-rest-based self-healing, sets its own pace,
reliably filling any martial role.
The Bard, with its OK hit die, low to moderate AC,
unmatched skill flexibility, better-than-nothing armor,
servicably ideal weaponry, Fullcasting, and support-oriented
Bardic Inspiration, is free to occupy almost any position shy
of the front line, enabling most any party composition.
Be aware of what pace you intend to set for your class.
Your class' initial loadout will echo throughout your class'
progression. They'll help dictate what subclass concepts are
executable. They can give your class a leg up or hold it down.
Your class' features do not exist in a vacuum - they stack upon
a foundation of basics. Your "starter kit" can make your class
too strong or too weak even before you get to the good stuff.

Dos and Don’ts
Summarizing the Fundamentals
If you’ve read through the Fundamentals of 5e Design
Philosophy section, then feel free to skip this section or use
it as a reminder. For those of you who skipped the above
section, enjoy, but do take the time at some point to go back.
The Pillars
Do have a healthy mix of Combat, Exploration, and
Interaction features. Spellcasting can cover for
Exploration/Interaction depending on the spell list.
Don’t make your class only capable in combat. Even the
Fighter gets at least one Exploration/Interaction feature
from each subclass.
Bounded Accuracy and AC
Do adhere to Bounded Accuracy and AC.
Don’t create features that rely on extreme compensations
Do be aware that magic items and their bonuses will exist
in any campaign, and that their bonuses are not important
for ensuring that the PCs remain competent in combat.
Don’t assume any specific magic item and its bonus will
be made available to a PC.
5e Systems
Do use the Advantage/Disadvantage system. For skill
checks, do grant advantage for specific uses of a skill
check rather than all broad uses of that skill check.
Don’t flatly grant advantage to attack rolls without limited
uses or drawbacks, to broad uses of a skill check, and to
saving throws except at high levels.
Do use the Proficiency system.
Don’t double proficiency bonus on attack rolls and saving
throws, or add proficiency bonus to damage or AC (unless
it’s an animal companion).
Saving Throws
Do grant at 1st level saving throw proficiencies in one
“Strong” (DEX, CON, WIS) and one “Weak” (STR, INT,
CHA) saving throw.
Don’t grant at 1st level saving throw proficiencies in two
“Strong” or two “Weak” saving throws.
Bonuses and Modifiers
Do use the proficiency bonus system, or
advantage/disadvantage system, or additional dice for
temporary boosts to attacks/damage/skill checks/saving
throws.
Don’t use small, conditional, temporary, static, stacking
modifiers.
Tiers of Play
Do respect the Tiers of Play (1st-4th level, 5th-10th, 11th-
16th, 17th-20th) and their average damage output needs.
Martials get Extra Attack or something comparable,
Spellcasters get cantrip boosts and 3rd/6th/9th level
spells and spell slots or something comparable.
Don’t ignore the Tiers of Play and each class’ average
damage output needs. Whether your class is offense
focused, support focused, or something else entirely, all
classes need to meet bare minimum competency in battle.
Thematic Narrative
Do develop a strong thematic narrative that answers the
“why” your class has emerged and is demanded in the
world. What wordly or otherworldly pressure or
inspiration necessitates the emergence of your class?
Don’t leave your class with a weak thematic narrative that
only merely describes how it intends to function
mechanically.
Feats
Do be aware of feats and how they may interact with your
class’ features. Watch out for potential excessive
synergies/abuses.
Don't grant your class a feat as a class feature, the most
important aspect of a feat as a class feature, or refer to any
feats in your class description. Don't assume that any
specific feat or even feats in general will be made available
to any given player. Your class must function without feats
and yet also not be made abusable with them.
Damage Reduction
Do use Resistance, Temporary Hit Points, and dice rolls
(e.g. Battlemaster’s Parry maneuver).
Don’t use (or avoid using) Damage Reduction.
Features at Each Class Level
Do grant around 1 or 2 features at most at any given level.
Significant improvements to lower level class features at
higher levels often warrant being counted as distinct
features in the class table.
Don’t grant 3 or more features at any given level, unless
each feature is weak enough to warrant such. Don’t try to
cheat this by putting multiple individually potent abilities
under a single feature title.
Do put “dead” levels wherever a half or fullcaster gains a
new spell slot level. Do make sure that a class gets
something at every level.
Don’t ignore the need for “dead” levels where warranted.
Don’t leave levels empty when it isn’t warranted.
Do be aware that your class may allow for some unique
features at “dead” levels. Fill such levels with slight
improvements to low level core class features.
Don’t randomly stick “dead” levels whenever, wherever.
Every “dead” level exists intentionally and purposefully.
Overall
Do have fun as you go along and seek critique and advice
from others.
Don’t not have fun and ignore critiques because they
challenge you.
Do give yourself adequate comfort and rest, especially
when you're receiving demoralizing critiques.
Don't let people on the internet rile you up and upset you.
Do study the PHB classes and seek to understand their
justifications and quirks.
Don’t ignore the PHB classes and the homework to study
them.
Do try to review other people’s works as a way of studying
class design and innovation.
Don’t give drive-by critiques.
GUIDE TO HOMEBREWING CLASSES |
CREATED BY /u/LEUKU 9

The Good, the Bad, and
the Critique
Firstly, yes, there is such a thing as bad balancing critique.
And I don’t just mean critique that recommends making a
feature too strong. I mean critique that sounds good on its
face, but is in fact inappropriate, has actually nothing to do
with mechanical balance, and/or is unconvincing or
unhelpful.
Let’s start with the Good.
The Good
Good critiques move along the following lines:
The Request for Clarification
The Direct Comparison
The Compensation Comparison, and
The Synergy, or lack thereof
The Request for Clarification
When judging any class feature or combination of features,
especially when the class is in an early iteration, it is
supremely valuable to ask for clarification on intent rather
than slamming a potential abuse or misstep for imbalance.
How to word 5e terminology takes some getting used to, so
asking for the intended direction the homebrewer was going
for can help you understand the class better and provide
much more useful advice.
The Direct Comparison
The basics of homebrew review involve directly comparing
homebrew features with comparable official features. This
kind of comparison tends to consider the features in a
vacuum, separate from the class combination as a whole, and
so while easy to base a critique on can often miss greater
balancing methods and concerns. The balance of any given
feature does not exist in a vacuum, but in a continuum of all
of the features combined.
Though do not let this deter you from making direct
comparisons. Direct comparisons are the foundation of
proper review, and overlooked mistakes, strengths or
weaknesses can often be caught by direct comparisons.
The Compensation Comparison
Deeper than the Direct Comparison is the Compensation
Comparison. Compensation comparisons ask for what
strengths you are receiving in exchange for what weaknesses,
and how this compare to the strength/weakness exchanges of
official classes.
For example, let’s look at the Barbarian. The Barbarian has
the largest PC hit die in the game at 1d12, and they get Rage
to further boost their survivability. What is it losing in
exchange?
First, Rage is limited to STR-based attacks, so that means
no bow-Barbarians.
Second, maintaining Rage requires you to attack or be
attacked, forcing you to always stay in harm's way.
GUIDE TO HOMEBREWING CLASSES |
10 CREATED BY /u/LEUKU
Third, the Barbarian’s Unarmored Defense forces the
Barbarian to be dependent on at least three ability scores,
STR, CON, and DEX, so it is Multiple Ability Score
Dependent (MAD). Unlike the Monk who can use their
primary attack stat, DEX, as part of their AC, the Barbarian
must split their scores in between their attack stat STR, and
their AC stats CON and DEX.
This ultimately results in the Barbarian having lower
starting AC than comparable martials, having a poor attack
stat, or having abysmal mental stats if you choose to pointbuy
15/15/15/8/8/8. While an endgame Barbarian can break the
typical Bounded AC cap, the beginning game Barbarian is
more important to focus on, as that is where the majority of
players will play. Further, an endgame maxed Barbarian
requires spending all of one’s ability score improvement
levels on STR, CON, and DEX, meaning no feats, or
sacrificing its attack stat in favor of AC.
As a bit of a bonus, the Barbarian can wield a shield and
still gain the benefit of their Unarmored AC, unlike the Monk,
but that comes with its own small counterplay with the fact
that Barbarian features typically encourage large-damage-die
two-handed weapons, so choosing to wield a shield runs
counter to the effective play of the Barbarian.
All of these compensations serve to restrict the potency of
a 1d12 hit die and Rage, as well as to encourage a specific
style of play. Reckless Attack further plays on this style of
compensation by giving you greater offensive potency in
exchange for more vulnerability. The combination of
Barbarian features are thus very synergistic, which leads me
to:
The Synergy or lack thereof
Just as how any class should have strong thematic narrative
to fuel both one’s imaginations of the class and the
development of its features, the class’ mechanics should also
to some degree support one another. It’s easy to see how the
Barbarian’s combination of features creates a multi-level-deep
synergy among its various features, feeding into a particular
narrative of how the Barbarian functions both on and off the
battlefield. Bard subclasses are almost invariably granted an
alternative or expanded use of their core class feature,
Bardic Inspiration. Monk subclasses often augment what
their base Martial Arts feature can do. Class features, when
grouped into a whole, should build a foundation that drives a
strong mechanical narrative of play as well as make up for
their strengths and weaknesses.
I have reviewed classes that have had no synergy between
their features, or even had features that were in direct
conflict. One particularly egregious recent example of
conflicting features was with regard to a protective feature
and a damage boosting feature. The protective feature
required your Action to use, and the damage boosting feature
granted additional damage dice to any weapon attack you
make using a reaction. Doesn’t sound like they conflict at all
at first. But in 5e, unless your DM is well-versed in monster
psychology or your party has a regular source of Fear effects,
getting monsters to trigger opportunity attacks from you
tends to occur infrequently. Infrequently enough that it won’t
be a reliable source of damage for you. Unless you have the
Polearm Master feat.
To make the damage boost feature consistently productive,
the Polearm Master provides an easily abusable combination
(bearing in mind that this homebrew class had these two
features appear by as early as 5th level). But worse was that
utilizing the Polearm Master rendered the protective ability
mutually exclusive with the damage boosting feature!
Polearm Master requires your Attack Action, so if you want to
utilize your primary damage boost regularly, you had to not
use your primary protective ability. Are you a protector, or are
you a damage dealer? Designing synergy requires being
aware of much of the interactions between mechanics of
various sources as well as what real gameplay can and will
often consist of.
Now that we’ve covered the Good, let’s have a look at the
Bad.
The Bad
Bad critiques move along the following lines:
Stepping on Toes
The Drive-by Critique
No Other Class Does X
Argument From Tradition, and
The Distant Multiclass
“This is stepping on the toes of X class”
Yes, this is in fact bad advice. But it does have its place.
Before I get to that, let’s discuss why it is bad.
Beyond the fundamentals, there is nothing sacred in
balanced DnD homebrew design. More accurately, there is
not a single feature that can’t be poached in some form.
However, doing so demands a difficult task:
You have to justify it.
You have to justify every single feature you take from another
class. How does it interact with other features in your class?
What strengths and weaknesses emerge? What
compensations are made? How do these compensations
compare to compensations made by official classes?
As an example, let’s take a look at /u/coolgamertagbro’s Pay-
What-You-Want homebrew Pugilist class and how it
compares to the Monk. (I much more prefer the original
version of Pugilist, btw, rather than v2. Also, I’m playing my
Luchador Pugilist right now. Just reached level 4. Working out
good so far. Bonus damage from jumping/falling does not yet
go to crazy lengths. Fall damage is a good deterrent. Seems I
spend most of my time using Brace Up. Good combination
play having my allies prone targets so I can drop onto them.
The Durable feat is quite ridiculous on a Pugilist xD. Will
report more as things progress).
At first glance, the Pugilist is just merely a variant Monk.
Bonus Action unarmed strike, Moxie is Ki, The Ol One Two
is Flurry of Blows, Stick and Move is a variant Step of the
Wind, and Brace Up is a different interpretation of Patient
Defense. It’d be easy to pin this class as just a Monk that
happens to use STR, but both on paper and in gameplay it
feels and plays incredibly differently. If the Monk is a
disabling skirmisher, the Pugilist is an enduring bruiser, more
like a glass cannon that barely manages to stay upright round
to round utilizing its all-important Brace Up and Haymakers
to stave off and bring the pain. The Pugilist will tend to have
slightly lower starting AC, so there is a greater expectation to
being hit, and, at least with regard to v1, being hit is good for
you. It may copy and twist a bunch of features from the Monk,
but it plays different. It feels different. And that, besides
mechanical balance, is what counts.
Its Place:
Now that that’s settled, let’s tidy up by describing when this is
good advice. It is good advice when the feel of the class in
gameplay feels too similar to another class. When it makes
someone go, “I feel like I’m playing a Fighter, except
worse/better/the same.” So if someone comes along with a
Juggernaut class with a d12 hit die and Damage Reduction up
the wazoo and you start to think to yourself, “I feel like I’m
just a Barbarian except better”, that’s when toes are being
stepped on. But if you have a d12 hit die class that turns into
a magical octopus and can do everything an octopus can,
that’s different. It has the Barbarian’s d12 hit die, but it feels
different. It plays different. Its suckers aren’t anywhere near
the Barbarian’s toes.
The class needs to be taken in large parts. The more you
focus in on a single feature, the less this critique is useful. So
if you are homebrewing and you decide to poach the Fighter’s
Action Surge, you as a homebrewer have to come up with an
argument for how on earth your class warrants, nay, deserves
the glory of Action Surge. And as a homebrew reviewer, you
have to look at how the poached feature interacts with
everything else in the class and ask yourself, “To what degree
does this feel and play like a Fighter? What compensations
are being made to make room for Action Surge? Why am I
thinking and working so hard on some stranger’s imaginary
play thing?”
This critique is the kind that doesn’t really have much to do
with mechanical balance. It has much more to do with the
feel of the class, the execution of the class as a whole. If you
are homebrewing a full class, you have to make it distinct
from all the other classes. Otherwise you’re probably better of
just homebrewing a subclass, reflavoring, or multiclassing.
GUIDE TO HOMEBREWING CLASSES |
CREATED BY /u/LEUKU 11
 “This is OP broken nonsense. Stop trying
and don’t quit your day job.” End quote.
This is otherwise known as the unsubstantiated asshole
drive-by critique. Not only is it a quick no-effort critique that
easily deters the less confident potential reviewers from even
looking at your class, it is devoid of substance.
If you look way back in my comment history, you’ll see that
I’ve made Gordon Ramsay-level critiques, and I apologize for
that. I’ve long since toned down my rhetoric in favor of
mechanical preciseness over caustic meanness. But
something I have never done is not substantiate my critique.
If I said something was shit, I explained why, how, what color,
how smelly, and how it compares to the neighbor’s. Now for
many of you potential reviewers, I understand that you don’t
have the kind of time or confidence to do comprehensive
reviews like I do. There’s absolutely no need to go that far. But
if you are going to pick at something, please substantiate.
Back up your argument, even if it’s just a short paragraph.
Reference a feature, make a quick comparison, do some
napkin math if time permits. Just don’t do the TMZ equivalent
of a drive-by critique.
For example, a recent critique I received was the following:
“I don’t even know where to start. This is like taking
[X] and [Y] and smashing them together, removing
their weaknesses, and then making it even better. This
is A+ broken.” End quote.
Not only was this critique unhelpful, it was completely wrong.
Yet at least 8 people supported this critique before even a
single person had actually given the homebrew a serious
review. The quick soundbite sways and deters reviews.
Diamonds are lost in the rough and shite is raised up on
pedestals due largely to these kinds of quick, unsubstantiated
critiques.
Everyone, from homebrewers to reviewers to lurkers, if you
are looking for good homebrew, do not trust any of the quick
critiques except from reviewers who are known to give
substantial reviews. Tag users who give such reviews, so that
when their comments appear, you can see to what depth they
usually go. If someone like me makes a quick review saying,
“Well done. This subclass is fully functional”, that is me
saying I cannot find any mechanical flaws in it whatsoever,
damn good job. The last time I said that was for a
Chronomancer wizard subclass from awhile back, I think.
Also consider that good reviewers genuinely want a
homebrew to succeed. Good reviewers will tell you where
there are flaws. Great reviewers will give you
recommendations on how to fix those flaws. And again, for
those reviewers who are not yet confident in their balancing
chops but also don’t want to give drive-by critiques, just
substantiate whatever two-cents you want to provide. Don’t
think your two-cents aren’t worth it. They inspire
conversation! The more talking, the better! Every haystack
needs to be searched for needles - you may find one.
GUIDE TO HOMEBREWING CLASSES |
12 CREATED BY /u/LEUKU
Homebrewers who are having difficulty getting anybody to
give your work a substantial review, try private messaging one
of these kinds of reviewers. We don’t get paid for these
reviews, which means we genuinely enjoy doing them. If time
permits, I am probably more likely to review something a
person explicitly asks me to than if I were to just come across
it on my subreddit feed. But don’t take it the wrong way if
someone says no. For much of everyone, this is ultimately a
hobby. We do it when time permits. We do it when we feel
like it. Just the same, we don’t do it when we don’t feel like it.
“No other class in the game grants X”
This is yet another critique I have used in the past and will
continue to use. The issue lies with how it is being used and
in what context. The poor use of this critique covers when it’s
just stated that no official class offers X feature, and so
somehow it must be unbalanced. But the very nature of
homebrew demands innovation. Otherwise you risk stepping
on the toes of an official class by not differentiating enough.
So when is this appropriately used? When it refers to a
position. “No other class in the game grants X feature at/until
Y level.” When we say “No other class...”, we need a point of
reference.
For example, imagine a homebrew class that grants True
Sight to 10 feet at 2nd level. No other class in the game
grants at-will True Sight. But there are similar things at
higher levels. For example, the high level spell true seeing.
Also, the PHB Ranger’s 18th level Feral Senses is an
approximate equivalence to True Sight. So the closest thing
any class gets to at-will True Sight is the PHB Ranger at 18th
level. That’s when you can put your foot down and say, “Hey,
no other class gets something like at-will True Sight until
18th level. You can not justify it being at 2nd.”
“No other class uses this progression, so
you can’t use it” or The Argument from
Tradition
This is related to #3 above, but important enough to point out
separately. This is again a critique I have used in the past and
will continue to use. The problem is with which aspect of
class design you are applying this critique to.
Generally, the progressions you do not touch are:
Proficiency Bonus, Spellcasting, and Ability Score
Improvements.
However, remember the true golden rule of homebrew
balance: Justify, Justify, Justify! No matter what you do, you
must justify it. If you can justify it, then you can do almost
anything.
WOTC certainly pushes the envelope. Check out their
Artificer, which while far from being mechanically satisfying
challenges our presumptions of what is sacred. They made
the class a quartercaster (or thirdcaster if you like being
accurate but not rhythmically alliterative) which for them
justifies moving the last Ability Score Improvement Level
from 19th level to 18th! Now this does not mean this was a
good move to make. The Artificer being shortchanged on
casting like this feels pretty painful, and I’d probably prefer to
see the Artificer be a halfcaster or fullcaster. But it shows that
WOTC is willing to experiment beyond our unwritten
assumptions about what is and what is not sacred.
Let’s give an example. Imagine you are making an arcane
halfcaster martial class similar to the Ranger and Paladin.
You plug in all the hits: halfcasting, “dead” levels at 9th, 13th,
and 17th level, weapon focused mechanics. Then you look at
the subclass levels for each of the Ranger and Paladin.
Ranger has 3, 7, 11, and 15. Paladin has 3, 7, 15, and 20. The
two classes share 3, 7, and 15 together.
Unfortunately, one of your core base class features has a
significant upgrade at 11th, so you wouldn’t want to follow
the Ranger class’ progression. And you feel like the distance
between the Paladin’s 7th level feature and 15th level feature
is too far - you want people to have another subclass feature
sooner. But you also want to have an awesome 20th level
feature for each of subclasses. So you come up with a new
progression: 3, 7, 10, and 20.
Are you somehow violating a mechanical balance rule
when diverging from the Ranger and Paladin’s progressions?
Is there some kind of imbalance in switching the subclass
level from 15th to 10th? Only if the numbers don’t work out.
No matter how traditional or experimental your class is,
your math needs to work out at the end of the day. You need
to respect basic average damage minimums. You need to
sufficiently supply the tiers of play with their needs. You need
to have a healthy mix of combat, exploration, and interaction
features.
Ultimately, traditions do not matter so long as the numbers
come out alright. That doesn’t mean do not follow traditional
progressions. The only inherent consequence of abandoning
traditional progressions is that it makes your job of balancing
the class harder. It’s more math you have to calculate. UA
Artificer is a good example - they switched things up, and
unfortunately the math comes out iffy. Alchemist comes out a
bit weak. Gunsmith is fine in terms of damage numbers, but
it ends up boringly repetitive. And the spellcasting is too weak
for my taste. Doesn’t mean they have to abandon their unique
progression. They just need to do more work with it.
So when do you use this critique? When it’s wrecking the
mechanical balance of the class, or making it too difficult to
determine the balance of the class.
A little while back I reviewed a caster class that
experimented with its spellcasting progression. Instead of
halfcasting or fullcasting, its spell slot levels went up to 7th. It
was a 7/9th caster? There were also many other experimental
mechanics, namely 1d4 hit die and CON-based casting.
Anyways, nothing was inherently wrong with attempting any
of these experiments. The only problem was that doing the
math for all of these experimental interactions was damn
hard. Too hard. So ultimately I concluded by saying that while
CON-based casting is achievable, and that he did a good job
moving in that direction, the number of experimental
mechanics at play made it a helluva job to balance. If you’re
going to experiment to that degree, probably best to just do 1
or 2 at a time.
The Distant Multiclass
“This class is broken because at homebrew class level
14, I can multiclass with official class level 5 to create
this crazy level 19 combo.”
When we talk about multiclassing abuse, we have to keep in
mind how soon the abuse can occur as much as we consider
just how much potency the multiclass grants. The higher the
level you go, the more allowance there is for power, because
the scale of conflicts you may deal with increase at an
accelerated pace. 1 goblin at 1st level is 10 goblins at 5th
level and 100 goblins at 11th level, kinda.
Multiclass abuse is a real thing and should be guarded
against. But be wary of going gungho on it, as doing so is an
easy trap to fall into.
Likewise, to homebrewers, study the PHB classes as much
as possible. Always keep in mind potential multiclass abuses.
A class that grants the finesse to two-handed weapons is ripe
for any Rogue or Fighter. A class that grants a STR bonus
that scales with proficiency bonus rather than class level is
ripe for a Barbarian. A class that allows one to make weapon
attacks with Wisdom will be snatched up by a Ranger or
Cleric in no time. If there is a feature you absolutely want to
retain, but the multiclass abuse remains evident, then you
must either gate it by pushing it to a higher level and/or take
available 5e mechanics and terminology to cut the abuse off
at its core.
For example, at 5th level, instead of Extra Attack I had a
feature that let a class make a weapon attack as a Reaction
when a certain common trigger was met. Unfortunately, that
allows a multiclass with Rogue to guarantee Sneak Attack at
least two times per round, once on their turn with their Attack
Action and once more on another creature’s turn with their
Reaction. A damage comparison revealed that at least at 10th
level, such a multiclass would easily out-damage a pure
Rogue. While the feature being gated at 5th level rather than
1st or 2nd reduces the overall appeal of the multiclass abuse,
it is still near enough to make one uncomfortable.
The solution? Change the Reaction Weapon Attack into a
Special Melee Spell Attack that uses your weapon’s statistics.
There is precedence for “special” attacks in 5e that by their
nature disallow things like gaining the benefits of the Extra
Attack feature. By removing the “weapon” keyword from the
ability, the ability to attach Sneak Attack to it is eliminated.
And since this only applies to the Reaction attack, Sneak
Attacking using your Attack Action on your turn is preserved.
This all has the unfortunate consequence of also excluding
things like Fighting Styles. Fortunately the base class doesn’t
have Fighting Styles to begin with and is more defensive than
offensive in nature, so it’s not a huge loss.
This is why both a working knowledge of the litany of
mechanics and wording in the game and input from
reviewers are invaluable. I would not have seen this abuse
nor be able to deal with it in an elegant manner without them.
GUIDE TO HOMEBREWING CLASSES |
CREATED BY /u/LEUKU 13
 Concluding Statements
Processing
Thank you for reading this far. This document was both a
labor of love and of frustration. It embodies approximately
85% to 90% of my knowledge on homebrew balancing. The
missing remainder may end up being covered in the next
essay, Discussion on Innovative Class Design.
I wrote this guide with the hope that in the long run it will
make my life a bit easier. I deeply enjoy reviewing homebrew,
but doing so is frequently, and seemingly increasingly,
exhausting. So much so that I lately ignore homebrew classes
that have interesting new mechanics yet make obvious
mistakes like using two "strong" saving throws instead of
one "strong" and one "weak". I hope that this might raise the
base level of quality in all homebrew classes, and thus make
review discussions about the construction of new unique
mechanics rather than about the flaws in the class'
foundation.
I may have also wrote this guide because I feel I have
something to prove. In recent months, I have felt a creeping
doubt that has made me question the quality of my
homebrews and the efforts I put into them. If there is
anything further you might learn about my personality, it may
be that I am sincere to a fault.
I should not forget that I also wrote this because I
genuinely want to help people make their homebrews work. I
remember starting my reviews because I was not receiving
any. It hurt to feel alone in my efforts, desirous of a living,
functioning class to call my own and yet free to share. My
early criteria for determing which homebrew to review was
whether the homebrew was receiving any attention or not. If
it wasn't, I would change that. Unbeknownst to me, for nearly
a year the Discord of Many Things has long succeeded in
this regard.
As a reviewer, a frequent thought stumbles its way into my
head.
"Why am I working so hard on another
person's imaginary play thing?"
Fortunately, the answer is always easy. And it's the same
answer for why I play DnD: Because it's a shared experience.
Because it's challenging. Because it's fun.
For better, for worse, full class homebrew design is a
marathon. It is a test of stamina, openness and resilience to
criticism, and creativity. Whatever you've got brewing up in
your mind, I am eager to see. Happy Brewing.
GUIDE TO HOMEBREWING CLASSES |
14 CREATED BY /u/LEUKU
Class Design 201
If you've read /u/messy6's Class Design 101, you should
notice that this guide is absent a point system for determining
balance. First hear me state what messy6's point system is
not. It is not a means by which to determine the balance of
any innovative mechanics in your homebrew class. What is it,
then? It is a depiction of how the quantity of features of
official classes relates to spellcasting, proficiencies, etc. It is a
tool that sheds light on a particular frame of PHB class
design. It is useful gaining insight into how the official classes
are structured. It will not however teach you how to balance a
homebrew class, nor will it help you determine whether a
homebrew mechanic is balanced against official material. It is
not intended to do these things.
I am of the belief that due to the complexity of class design,
any point grading system intended to determine balance for
classes will ultimately hurt you rather than help you. This is
because that even as we strive to achieve parity between our
homebrew and official content, we also endeavor to
experiment, to create truly unique mechanics that can find a
home only within a homebrew class. How do you put a
number to a mechanic that no one has ever seen? If
Fullcasting were arbitrarily granted a point value of 10, and
the Battlemaster's Maneuver feature were granted a point
value of 3, then how would we grade a feature that uses short
rest-regenerated dice to cast spells of levels between 1st and
5th level? Or if the Paladin's Divine Smite is graded a 6, then
how do we judge a feature that lets you expend hit dice and
add their result to a single weapon damage roll? And what if
that feature is paired with another feature that lets you regain
one hit die at the end of a short rest? Or if you have to roll the
hit die and take that much damage yourself to add the result
to your weapon damage roll?
To judge balance, we require precedence. We compare
homebrew mechanics to official mechanics. Arbitrary point
values assigned to existing mechanics does not take into
account the potency of combinations of features, and cannot
account for truly innovative mechanics. Instead, the only
thing we can rely on is our analyses and understanding of
what any class can do at a given level, which changes on a
moment to moment basis as a homebrew class develops.
Messy6's Class Design 101 is an excellent primer to official
class design basics. If their work is 101, then consider this
document Class Design 201.
Discussion on Innovative Class Design
Work in Progress Changelog
Please look forward to the next essay. Will likely cover v1.1: Added Class "Starter Kits" to Not Quite
innovative class design as well as a step-by-step example of Fundamentals, added links to my previous essays in the
what reviewing a class for balance may look like. Intro, cosmetic changes
Credits v1.2: Dec15. New Table of Contents, added Concluding
Statements page
Author: /u/Leuku
Art Formatting: /u/Rain-Junkie v1.3: Dec17. Moved Table of Contents to a second page. New
/r/UnearthedArcana, for all my years on the sub Cover Page. Expanded Credits. Added Processing and Class
/r/DnDBehindtheScreen, For loving my essays and in so Design 201 to Concluding Statements page.
doing uplifting my spirits
/u/layhnet, for your indefatiguable tenacity and
camaraderie
Discord of Many Things, for accomplishing together what
I attempted alone, and your friendship

Artwork Credit:
The cover art by Matteo Bassini. It can be found
here
The first and last images were done by
Alexander Nanitchkov. They can be found here
and here.
The second image was done by Piotr Uzdowski.
It can be found here.
Cover font by /u/Solbera

GUIDE TO HOMEBREWING CLASSES |

CREATED BY /u/LEUKU 15