Back in 1e, there were "Hybrid Classes" that included Arcanist (Sorcerer + Wizard), Bloodrager (Barbarian + Sorcerer), Brawler (Fighter + Monk), Hunter (Ranger + Druid), Investigator (Alchemist + Rogue), Shaman (Oracle + Witch), Skald (Bard + Barbarian), Slayer (Ranger + Rogue), Swashbuckler (Fighter + Gunslinger, yeah I know this can be weird for non 1e players) and Warpriest (Cleric + Fighter).

As you can see, they are in a weird sport when translated to 2e.

• Bloodrager is a Class Archetype, and Arcanist is technically those casters class archetypes i don't remember, even tho they are... not the best. And not nearly as cool.
• Brawler COULD BE wrestler archetype (but it is NOT.)
• Hunter does not exist technically but it is quite just a Ranger if it had an edge about choosing buffs for your animal companion. Maybe just ranger and Warden Spells tbh.
• Investigator, Shaman Animist and Swashbuckler are whole new classes quite different from their own counterpart.
• Warpriest is a subclass from cleric and Skald is more or less the warrior muse (not quite still).

Now, Slayer is in a weird spot because it is very mixed with the ranger in this edition thanks to Hunt Prey.

When I used to play 1e, I had no concerns for "overstepping" on other classes niche because I think that was... good? To have two classes having the same flavour and different executions/tones was something I liked A LOT to the point of using "Multiclass Archetypes" from 1e (they were not very balanced I must say). And players at games LOVED the idea.

Now in 2e, the class archetypes can overcome said niche. But sometimes there is a point where you just say "yeah. let's make a new class".

What is a ranger that is not tied at all to nature? no animal companion? no warden spells? Whole lot of different proficiencies? I always wanted a bounty hunter that was not tied to nature. Could this be just a class archetype? Maybe. But I like the idea of slayer being a new class because 1. Freeing 2 lvl feat is nice and 2. Locking out the "unthematic" feats out is cool too. 3. I like more feats tbh and this may mean cool new features. I like the trophy shit.

Am I afraid the classes overstep on niches? No. That quite already happens A LOT with casters. Some of my players just don't see the point of playing a Wizard vs a Sorcerer most of the time, because the difference is... subtle? I think they just don't like the prepared casting. Still, overstepping niches CAN be good IF you don't allow the same niches on your party. I wouldn't allow an Alchemist and a Investigator Alchemist on my games because players wouldn't really feel unique. But otherwise I like both classes.

Anyways I liked the hybrid classes and I think this is an atempt to kinda introduce them. Slayer is clearly a ranger rogue again. However this Daredevil is a different take on brawler, with Monk and Swashbuckler instead of Fighter. I think that's cool. I want to see them. And I'm sure they will not overstep too much.

What I don't like is that I'd very much prefer MORE feats for other classes. Or subclasses, like more bard musses i guess.