Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Asisreo" data-source="post: 9012487" data-attributes="member: 7019027">What I'm saying is that the subclasses are too tightly nested into the base class to try to really say anything about them isolated. Some base classes are weak and have strong subclasses. Some classes are strong and have weak subclasses. That dynamic might not remain stagnant across editions. They may want fighter subclasses to be where the power is. Feats aren't optional so far in OneD&D so you can exclude them from the 5e fighter, but ignoring them in the OneD&D fighter is like ignoring new spells available to the sorcerer. There won't be a RAW featless OneD&D game, the DM would have to change the base rules to disallow feats.Species are also a mandatory mechanic and you don't get a choice to go featless as a OneD&D human fighter. Magic weapons are usually excluded anyways because they're very DM dependent, unlike the other class features. It doesn't matter what parts have improved or not. What matters is the overall player experience. If they get access to the same feats, but the feats have improved, then the class has improved. Just like giving a sorcerer access to better spells improved the sorcerer. You can try to forcefully isolate the base classes with crude assumptions and estimated translations, but what merit is there to that? What meaningful knowledge is there to be gained? That the OneDnD base fighter is carried by its new options? Okay, what insight does that give us in practice?</blockquote>

Verification