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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Connorsrpg" data-source="post: 6772698" data-attributes="member: 19265">[MENTION=6803643]Marandahir[/MENTION]Just reread you post. Especially pertaining to the Q's re simpler/already done.Yes, you can build some of these concepts with the Battle Master. But here is my point - you can build almost ANYTHING with it. (Same as Champion). It is not a concept on its own. And, the Battle Master has a rule set that is complicated. I think, if you read through, you will find a Duelist easier really.But, again, I am not that fussed if something 'can' be constructed using other methods. I feel each of these have a niche. But just as important is the mechanics. Yes, a couple of these are here for the rules. And yes, they are inspired from non-D&D sources. But they were for players that loved those systems in other games and we thought we would cater to their desires and port them across in a form that 'can' be used with 5E.Sure, not many people will like the idea of 'Raises & Stunts'. But if there are players that love Savage Worlds or the AGE system in a group that prefers D&D, here is their chance to bring in a little of their other favourite system. Same with Fortune Fighter and 13th Age.I fully understand these are not for everyone. They are not to 'replace' other archetypes. They are here as additional ideas/options. Which is the beauty of 5E - easy to add them in. Even better, subclasses allow this sort of customisation without changing too much. Great idea for a base class and subclass add-ons. You can ignore many of the subclasses and the game plays fine. But it is a good part of the game to homebrew and tailor subclasses to your setting, game style, player's desires etc. Just hoping there is someone out there that sees the validity of these options.</blockquote>

Verification