Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lycurgon" data-source="post: 8788888" data-attributes="member: 7025583">I suspect they will be standardising Subclasses across Class Groups rather than across the board. The Expert Group all have their subclasses start at 3rd like they do now. If they standardise per Group I suspect Warrior Subclasses will start at 3rd and progress like Expert, but the other groups would not.Warlocks and Sorcerers get theirs at 1st and their concepts really need that. How can you be a Warlock without a Patron? How can you be a Sorcerer without a source for your power? So I suspect that Wizards will get their subclass at first to match them.Clerics need their subclass at 1st too. There shouldn't be Priests that haven't chosen a God yet. So I also expect Druids and Paladins to get their Subclasses at 1st too. For Paladins I think it makes more sense to make their defining Oath at first rather than later. For Druid they don't need to be at 1st but I do think they need to be at or before the level that they get Wildshape because a lot of the Subclasses are about how they modify how they use that power. So 1st works better for them than 3rd.The benefit to this is they can make subclasses that work across Class Groups. A skill master class for all Expert Classes. An Arcane Scholar available for all Mage Classes.But I don't really see them doing subclasses that fit all of the Classes, it would be too broad a scope. So I don't see a good benefit to standardise across the board, it doesn't serve the story of the classes or add anything useful except game symmetry.I also think if they try to have all classes gain their subclasses at 3rd level, it will get a huge amount of negative feedback that they will change it to by group anyway. Some class concepts need to have their source of power defined at the beginning of their career.</blockquote>

Verification