Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Upcoming One D&D: Unearthed Arcana 'Expert' Classes (Bard, Ranger, Rogue)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Levistus's_Leviathan" data-source="post: 8787091" data-attributes="member: 7023887"><p>I've heard several people describe it as a "Pokemon Trainer" before. Especially since most of their "pet" abilities summon them out of nowhere.</p><p></p><p>Not since Tasha's, they don't. They get to summon it. Like a Pokemon Trainer. </p><p></p><p>No. The Rogue has "jobs" (up until TCoE, at least). Rangers have "IDK, anything remotely nature-y and hunter-y". They don't have a uniting theme besides their mechanical niche of "primal half-caster". </p><p></p><p>"Type" is vague. </p><p></p><p>I don't like that they all automatically get proficiency in armor and weapons. If I were in charge of making D&D, I would change that to make a bigger niche for paladins and to base Clerics off of real-world priests more. But everything else in the class is decent, IMO. The subclasses are mostly designed well. The fact that they get their magic from belief and worship empowers gods is good. The fact that the subclasses are so different while also sharing a core theme and underlying mechanics is good, IMO.</p><p></p><p>In a game where Paladins literally get their magic from swearing an oath, then the differences between oaths that are sworn do justify the subclasses. According to the lore, Paladins get their magic because they swear an oath. Different oaths exist, so different subclasses based on those oaths exist. </p><p></p><p>Hah. No. I don't like games that are "messy". A game can be just as creative and well-designed as a "messy" one if it is internally consistent. And internal consistency helps with expanding on the core rules and giving a basis for worldbuilding off of the system. </p><p></p><p>I'm not saying that some of the subclasses "aren't rangers". I like most of the subclasses and think that their niches should be included in the class. I just think that it's confusingly designed. </p><p></p><p>No, you didn't. I gave the justification from the PHB. The PHB says that rangers get magic "in similar ways to druids". They have the worst official justification for their magic. </p><p></p><p>Your justification that "nature is magic, so people connected to nature are magic" is something I agree is a good starting point. I made the same suggestion in another thread. But that's not the official lore, and doesn't help designing subclasses or worldbuilding.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Levistus's_Leviathan, post: 8787091, member: 7023887"] I've heard several people describe it as a "Pokemon Trainer" before. Especially since most of their "pet" abilities summon them out of nowhere. Not since Tasha's, they don't. They get to summon it. Like a Pokemon Trainer. No. The Rogue has "jobs" (up until TCoE, at least). Rangers have "IDK, anything remotely nature-y and hunter-y". They don't have a uniting theme besides their mechanical niche of "primal half-caster". "Type" is vague. I don't like that they all automatically get proficiency in armor and weapons. If I were in charge of making D&D, I would change that to make a bigger niche for paladins and to base Clerics off of real-world priests more. But everything else in the class is decent, IMO. The subclasses are mostly designed well. The fact that they get their magic from belief and worship empowers gods is good. The fact that the subclasses are so different while also sharing a core theme and underlying mechanics is good, IMO. In a game where Paladins literally get their magic from swearing an oath, then the differences between oaths that are sworn do justify the subclasses. According to the lore, Paladins get their magic because they swear an oath. Different oaths exist, so different subclasses based on those oaths exist. Hah. No. I don't like games that are "messy". A game can be just as creative and well-designed as a "messy" one if it is internally consistent. And internal consistency helps with expanding on the core rules and giving a basis for worldbuilding off of the system. I'm not saying that some of the subclasses "aren't rangers". I like most of the subclasses and think that their niches should be included in the class. I just think that it's confusingly designed. No, you didn't. I gave the justification from the PHB. The PHB says that rangers get magic "in similar ways to druids". They have the worst official justification for their magic. Your justification that "nature is magic, so people connected to nature are magic" is something I agree is a good starting point. I made the same suggestion in another thread. But that's not the official lore, and doesn't help designing subclasses or worldbuilding. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Upcoming One D&D: Unearthed Arcana 'Expert' Classes (Bard, Ranger, Rogue)
Top