Recent content by LordArchaon

It could become faar worse than that to me, seeing the general mindset here. Very disappointed.

What screwed up 4th edition was the focus on balance at all costs and standardization without good reason, and they are falling right back into the same trap.

We have a gamist majority, then.

@Parmandur Evidently you don't care about immersion nor book-keeping.

GOD, I am dreading an update of the rules because of ONE mechanic I saw them pushing, which could become more widespread: the "x times per day where x is your proficiency bonus". If you noticed, it's regularly used for ridiculously irrelevant features that would have still felt weak (but at...

GOD, I am dreading an update of the rules because of ONE mechanic I saw them pushing, which could become more widespred: the "x times per day where x is your proficiency bonus". If you noticed, it's regularly used for ridiculously irrelevant features that would have still felt weak (but at least...

Voted "Other" and surprised of not seeing the option I would have voted, which follows. - Don't allow armored spellcasting for wizard, but have backgrounds and/or themes and/or the equivalent of prestige classes partially or eventually completely override the limitation.

The first and perhaps only post in the thread I agree with: you're the only one that truly differentiated the Paladin, and differentiation is the first and foremost requirement of ANY class. Another 2 cp of mine: I say that in a given faith, the Cleric is the mystical figure, while the Paladin...

Again have to mention Crazy Jerome but this time negatively: I disagree with the above post. Consider them as "hybrid classes" is exactly what kills their interesting side, and uniqueness. If Paladin is just Fighter with limited access to Cleric spells, then just go multiclass/dual-class/hybrid...

I completely agree with this view too! Actually, sum this point of view with Crazy Jerome 's and you get mine: I want classes to be iconic AND without overlap. That means having classes that are really unique, so that each multiclass gives you another unique and different combination. To make a...

I agree with Crazy Jerome ... Multiclassing needs to be considered as a core mechanic. A class that feels a lot like the result of two classes mashed up needs not to exist as such. Classes should be unique for this reason too: because multiclassing them would mean ending up with other unique...

The Paladin is one of the few classes that has me very concerned, when talking about D&D Next /5e and its objective of making every class look, feel and play differently. I already stated before that, at least for Martial classes, I see two "attributes" that could really distinguish classes...

In that case, the problem is justifying the Paladin being a separate class from the Fighter. Maybe I should make a new thread for this, gonna do it right away.

Well, these are good questions IMO. To me, each class should always be thought out in comparison to the others, at least the ones that are similar in either role (strategical, not tactical, see my previous post in this thread) or power source. I already talked about what could really...

Already blogged a bit about this here and will blog again in detail about the Ranger, because I have many ideas about it! My thought basically revolves on the fact that the for martial classes should not differ as much in tactical role (4e's role) but in "Strategical Role". That is *HOW* you...