The problem with capping D&D classes to 4 comes in when we have so many different ideas on what constitutes the attributes of a class from previous editions, such as the varying views on ranger in these posts. Another example would be the bard, which could be a warrior skald, arcane trickster, advisor and keeper of knowledge, roguish gypsy, and more. A general rule I would suggest is that a class with a wide variety of potential backgrounds is worth class and alternative classes...
View full commentThe problem with capping D&D classes to 4 comes in when we have so many different ideas on what constitutes the attributes of a class from previous editions, such as the varying views on ranger in these posts.
Another example would be the bard, which could be a warrior skald, arcane trickster, advisor and keeper of knowledge, roguish gypsy, and more.
A general rule I would suggest is that a class with a wide variety of potential backgrounds is worth class and alternative classes with less variation would be more suitable as a theme.
For example paladin and warlord seem like themes instead of classes to me. Bards and psions do not. Rangers do not. :)
I think that there should be more than 4 class options, but in the modular spirit of D&D Next, it should be possible to play with ONLY those classes and still have a good variety. With Themes you could make a Hunter/Stalker Fighter or Rogue. (Of Course, where the concept of Themes really shines is the possbily of Hunter/Stalker Wizards and other combination that are not obvious and cliche :)). I agree that Rangers should not be bound to one terrain, but have options to be from any environment. I...
View full commentI think that there should be more than 4 class options, but in the modular spirit of D&D Next, it should be possible to play with ONLY those classes and still have a good variety. With Themes you could make a Hunter/Stalker Fighter or Rogue. (Of Course, where the concept of Themes really shines is the possbily of Hunter/Stalker Wizards and other combination that are not obvious and cliche :)). I agree that Rangers should not be bound to one terrain, but have options to be from any environment. I am rather worryed that the only two styles mentioned for Rangers is the "Drizzt Double Weapon" and the Archer. There should be more options - or course the same goes for Fighters. As for Marking, there should be some way for "Defender" classes to Defend besides trying to stand in the way (can be tough with no Attacks of Opportunity) or hit the monster and kill it before it hits someone else. The Guardian Theme Shield Other effect is a good example.
Another example would be the bard, which could be a warrior skald, arcane trickster, advisor and keeper of knowledge, roguish gypsy, and more.
A general rule I would suggest is that a class with a wide variety of potential backgrounds is worth class and alternative classes...
View full comment
View full comment