New Posts For Thread: D&D Next Classes by Complexity and Power Sourcehttp://community.wizards.com/dndnext/go/thread/view/75882/29618979/DD_Next_Classes_by_Complexity_and_Power_SourceI've heard complaints that the fighter in the playtest is currently too complex. I've also heard people say that it is just right. It seems like there is a mix of players that want complex characters and players that want simple characters. As such,I don't think that this will work. Names are important and classes like fighter and wizard are popular classes. It isn't going to go over well for someone who wants to be a fighter to have to settle for a barbarian because they also want simple. Forhttp://community.wizards.com/dndnext/go/thread/view/75882/29618979/DD_Next_Classes_by_Complexity_and_Power_Source?post_id=527888093#527888093I don't think that this will work. Names are important and classes like fighter and wizard are popular classes. It isn't going to go over well for someone who wants to be a fighter to have to settle for a barbarian because they also want simple. ForWed, 09 Jan 2013 08:18:44 -0600This idea is very old skool D&D and I don't think that's a bad thing, in itself.As others have pointed out, you're walking a fine line here as what class should be complex or simple is something of a battleground issue in the forum (I don't think it'http://community.wizards.com/dndnext/go/thread/view/75882/29618979/DD_Next_Classes_by_Complexity_and_Power_Source?post_id=527882867#527882867This idea is very old skool D&D and I don't think that's a bad thing, in itself.As others have pointed out, you're walking a fine line here as what class should be complex or simple is something of a battleground issue in the forum (I don't think it'Wed, 09 Jan 2013 01:50:30 -0600I really hope that they have enough modularity that each player can play a simple or complex fighter, wizard, cleric, and rogue.If a ten year old wants to play a wizard, there should be a switch that can simplify the wizard to just the very basics.Mohttp://community.wizards.com/dndnext/go/thread/view/75882/29618979/DD_Next_Classes_by_Complexity_and_Power_Source?post_id=527882587#527882587I really hope that they have enough modularity that each player can play a simple or complex fighter, wizard, cleric, and rogue.If a ten year old wants to play a wizard, there should be a switch that can simplify the wizard to just the very basics.MoWed, 09 Jan 2013 01:20:18 -0600The fighter is really the simplest clas. If you are playing the most basic version of a fighter you basically do these things:-Run up to the target-Do attack rolls-Add martial damage dice to your damageAnd the fighter will still be a good striker inhttp://community.wizards.com/dndnext/go/thread/view/75882/29618979/DD_Next_Classes_by_Complexity_and_Power_Source?post_id=527873993#527873993The fighter is really the simplest clas. If you are playing the most basic version of a fighter you basically do these things:-Run up to the target-Do attack rolls-Add martial damage dice to your damageAnd the fighter will still be a good striker inTue, 08 Jan 2013 16:26:27 -0600My purpose in creating this chart is to suggest a possible way to make a class for every player. I know it would probably need some tweaking, but I think there is definitely room for a class that is simpler than the current fighter. There are enoughhttp://community.wizards.com/dndnext/go/thread/view/75882/29618979/DD_Next_Classes_by_Complexity_and_Power_Source?post_id=527873621#527873621My purpose in creating this chart is to suggest a possible way to make a class for every player. I know it would probably need some tweaking, but I think there is definitely room for a class that is simpler than the current fighter. There are enoughTue, 08 Jan 2013 16:17:14 -0600