Search results

...well. I'm a bit late to the thread, but I read it all the way through so hell if I'm not gonna post. Apologies to those of you whom I quote, that haven't posted in the thread since two weeks ago. @Steampunkette opens with a post which is maybe needlessly inflammatory but that, to me...

Anubis 15-2=13 Athena 14 Odin 11+1=12

Anubis 33-2=31 Athena 34 Odin 20+1=21

yikes, boccob, ill fix that

Wow! That never occurred to me. It's a pretty good list, tbh. (and props for correcting to 'acrobat')

Anubis 31 Athena 36 Boccob 1-2=0 Odin 32+1=33 Selune 9

As I've said earlier in the thread, 6 classes isn't meant to be any kind of ideal number, it's a strange place in between the 3 classes of od&d and the 12 classes of 5e. That's what makes it a "challenge." So how would you get from the core 4 classes to 6 classes that are interesting and/or...

Lol, nice surprise torpedo. I always appreciate your humor. To be honest, though, that is a very insightful cultural observation.

I like the term "savant" or even "specialist" better than expert, but I also kidof prefer to keep the archetype that the word "rogue" suggests, "an appealingly mischievous person." Ya, "warrior" always sounded like the obviously better name to me. What's interesting is that the od&d name of...

That's a fair point. I bristle a little bit when people from the ancient past are declared "evil", especially if they were, more or less, above average by the standards of their time. I also thought I should provide some breadcrumbs to follow, regarding the Romans, if anyone on the boards is...

On topic: I don't like including dragons. Something about their faux-ecological color types and profusion of age-based statblocks makes them feel banal and joyless to me--even if dragons like Smaug, Fafnir, and Glaurung are super cool in principle. Off topic: Man, there's a surprising amount...

I don't think you made a very good case that it is "imperative" for WotC to publish Greyhawk. (haters gon' hate, internet pedants gon' go after your word choice) I understood your main arguments on the point to be the following: I basically agree with all of those points but, apart from the...

I completely agree. Most of the compelling creatures informed by longstanding archetypes are covered in any edition's first monster book. Monsters in subsequent or third-party books tend to be extremely specific, modifications on tropes that are already covered, or ridiculous D&Disms. They're...

Curious. I have never played Elder Scrolls Online or even really read anything about it, but that's more or less the list I came up with: Warrior = martial heavy Rogue = martial light Wizard = arcane/high magic Thaumaturge = holy/divine Enchanter ~= nature/fey/green Diabolist =...

Agreed. Yeah, considering the Cleric's weird and gamist origins as a sort of a gish class that didn't get spells at 1st level and gained spell levels slower than a Magic User, the 5e Paladin and Cleric feel like they took that starting point, kept very similar theming, and went in different...

Man, thanks for the great and varied responses guys--one departing drastically from precedent and another doubling down on it. Thanks for being a good sport, it's all just a creative exercise in the end. I like the list of classes you ended with even though the class names weren't your...

Now that the thread has been going for a little bit, here is my entry: I organized the casters into broad themes (maybe more like tones) and the martial casters mechanically. New classes are in orange, places the current classes go are in blue. diabolist—casters with dark and ominous powers...

I know what you mean. It's hard to come up with thematic names for the broad categories that aren't already spoken for somehow. I like diabolist as a name for "scary caster with supernatural friends." Invoker is also a perfect name for this when used in its traditional sense: Invoke—from the...

I knew it was just a matter of time until that was suggested :LOL:

I recognize it's not the gist of your post but, incidentally, "shaman" is considered insensitive in some quarters as well--they even made it to the Wikipedia page :p