Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Einlanzer0" data-source="post: 8314551" data-attributes="member: 6788934">I don't disagree, and that's more or less what I meant when I used the qualifier of a theme supporting a full class. There is definitely some subjectivity with that, but a general rule of thumb is - a.) is it common in whatever world you're playing in, and b.) is it a &quot;large&quot; enough concept that you can quickly devise a list of four or five subclass ideas with a reasonable amount of distinction between them?There are many concepts that pass this litmus test easily, including psions, witches, shamans, and scholars. And many other concepts could easily replace and incorporate a core class, such as a less-ki oriented brawler/pugilist class that includes monk options among its subclasses, or a robed &quot;wizard&quot; style priest class that includes the core cleric among its subclass options.Some of this I would argue they didn't do a good enough job &quot;walking back&quot; to broaden themes of existing classes enough to fill all design spaces with subclasses. Clerics and Druids are both great examples. All in all, the 12 classes we have are arbitrary with their history in D&amp;D being the only real argument for having them over many other ideas. There's plenty of design space for other full classes and I hope to see WotC do more on occasion.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Einlanzer0, post: 8314551, member: 6788934"] I don't disagree, and that's more or less what I meant when I used the qualifier of a theme supporting a full class. There is definitely some subjectivity with that, but a general rule of thumb is - a.) is it common in whatever world you're playing in, and b.) is it a "large" enough concept that you can quickly devise a list of four or five subclass ideas with a reasonable amount of distinction between them? There are many concepts that pass this litmus test easily, including psions, witches, shamans, and scholars. And many other concepts could easily replace and incorporate a core class, such as a less-ki oriented brawler/pugilist class that includes monk options among its subclasses, or a robed "wizard" style priest class that includes the core cleric among its subclass options. Some of this I would argue they didn't do a good enough job "walking back" to broaden themes of existing classes enough to fill all design spaces with subclasses. Clerics and Druids are both great examples. All in all, the 12 classes we have are arbitrary with their history in D&D being the only real argument for having them over many other ideas. There's plenty of design space for other full classes and I hope to see WotC do more on occasion. [/QUOTE]

Verification