D&D General 6E But A + Thread

[CreamCloud0]

Goliaths are more established and popular in D&D and are the only real "big guy" trope race D&D has managed to popularize across settings (dragonborn failing to hit that trope and landing on honourable warrior race and beast people spaces instead), which is a trope a lot of players are looking for. Goblins are almost certainly more popular than gnomes and perhaps halflings at this point (for new PCs being created today, not retroactively) and basically a trope to themselves so should replace gnomes as one of the "small guy" trope reps in a future PHB if anything.

Agree re half elves and orcs but WotC seem to have taken a simple "if we just pretend it isn't there, it won't be an issue!" approach re mixed species PCs after their appalling rules in the 2024 playtest were rejected.

that's fair i guess, i have little personal attachment to the goliath due to not having history with previous editions and the orc fits the 'big guy' role well enough for me, i did consider swapping out the gnome for goblins but i feel small species are often a bit overlooked so i went with a larger species instead,

if i had my way to distinguish gnomes more i'd try lean more into their existence as pseudo-elemental nature spirits and emphasize them as the proto-land druids,

 

[Minigiant]

Those marked with a dagger are the ones I think most likely to actually get implemented. Those without are not unlikely, per se, but they have a higher bar to clear for one reason or another. Psion and Swordmage, for example, are readymade archetypes, they've appeared in multiple editions, and they're things 5e has struggled with the absence of, repeatedly not-quite-successfully implementing the archetype as a bolt-on for something else. Summoner and Warden are more remote possibilities, as the former technically only appeared in Pathfinder, and the latter, while IMO very cool, is 4e-only and liable to questions as to why it isn't a Barbarian (even though I personally think it's obvious why it isn't.)

As cool as most of them are, I think only the Warlord is necessary for the PHB if the Champion and Battlemaster are broken up.

1. Barbarian
2. Battlemaster
3. Fighter
4. Monk
5. Warlord

MOST of the rest are best as supplements

 

[Minigiant]

symmetry with what?

Dragonborn and Dungeonborn

 

[Minigiant]

Goliaths are more established and popular in D&D and are the only real "big guy" trope race D&D has managed to popularize across settings (dragonborn failing to hit that trope and landing on honourable warrior race and beast people spaces instead), which is a trope a lot of players are looking for. Goblins are almost certainly more popular than gnomes and perhaps halflings at this point (for new PCs being created today, not retroactively) and basically a trope to themselves so should replace gnomes as one of the "small guy" trope reps in a future PHB if anything.

Agree re half elves and orcs but WotC seem to have taken a simple "if we just pretend it isn't there, it won't be an issue!" approach re mixed species PCs after their appalling rules in the 2024 playtest were rejected.

They really could go Regular Human and have half elves and half orcs and mutants and x-men as new Variant Human.

 

[payn]

Dragonborn and Dungeonborn

A little too on the nose wouldn't you say?

 

[CreamCloud0]

Dragonborn and Dungeonborn

oh goddammit

 

[CreamCloud0]

• Alchemist†, the chemist-as-magician, who uses magical ingredients and concoctions to control the world...or themselves.
• Assassin†, the warrior-of-shadow, whose skill with all the subtle ways to stalk (and un-alive) someone transcends mortal limits.
• Avenger, the warrior-of-zeal, whose absolute focus is both shield and sword against their enemies, who executes the turncoat apostate.
• Invoker, the emissary-as-magician, who calls down disaster upon the foes of the faith, Elijah calling fire down against the altar of Baal.
• "Machinist" (not my fav name), the warrior-of-technology, who uses guns, machines, and tools to overcome their foes.
• Psion† (etc.), the telepath-as-magician, who draws on ESP, the paranormal, occult "science" etc. to bend the rules of reality in their favor.
• Shaman†, the spiritualist-as-magician, who straddles the line between material and spirit, the bridge connecting these realms.
• Summoner, the overseer-as-magician, whose magic lies in getting other beings to use magic for her.
• Swordmage†, the warrior-as-magician, for whom swordplay is magic, and magic is swordplay (or other weapons), one and inseparable.
• Warden, the warrior-of-the-land, who wears Nature's power like a cloak, and wreaks Her wrath where he walks.
• Warlord†, the warrior-of-tactics, who transcends limits by cooperating with others rather than purely through her own mettle.

you're entitled to your own opinions of course but over half of these i would say fit neatly into existing class archetypes or at least don't deviate from them enough to warrant their own entire class and mechanics
alchemist - artificer
assassin - rogue
avenger - paladin
invoker - cleric
machinist - artificer
psion
shaman - druid or barbarian
summoner/tamer
swordmage
warden - druid
warlord
personally as i have mentioned upthread i would also add the shapeshifter, split off from the druid, being both the shifter and primal fullcaster is too greedy for a single class and i think is a detriment to both archetypes.

 

[Stalker0]

As cool as most of them are, I think only the Warlord is necessary for the PHB if the Champion and Battlemaster are broken up.

1. Barbarian
2. Battlemaster
3. Fighter
4. Monk
5. Warlord

MOST of the rest are best as supplements

honestly you add in some more charisma/int based manuevers and I think the battlemaster is a solid Warlord Chassis.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I thought we were talking about warriors learning their trade in mercenary guilds or martial-arts schools the same as wizards learn in academic settings and guilds and clerics learn in temples or monasteries and thieves learn in guilds or on the street.

That all looks pretty much the same to me. So what am I missing?

What Fighters should be getting is to be the clear-cut number-one damage dealers in melee, at any level. 4e made them damage absorbers instead, but that's only halfway right: they should be both the best damage absorbers AND the best damage dealers. But somehow Rogues got given the damage-dealing piece, where their party role should be as sneaks and scouts and trapfinders with their combat abilities being a secondary thing at best.

I wish fighters actually were allowed to be "best at fighting", like they used to be. Even 3e gave them higher attack bonuses. How do you justify every PC, no matter their nature, having the same attack bonus?

 

[Micah Sweet]

In 1e, Druid shapeshifting is hella powerful. Not necessarily for combat but for scouting, sneaking, info-gathering, long-range travel, and getting into or out of tight places.

Quite true, and I've played several 1e druids who used that to great advantage. But modern game design often devalues abilities that aren't strong in combat, unfortunately.