Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 6347800" data-attributes="member: 18">None of the classes which have a subclass doesn't get spells get abilities at the right levels for that, sadly (Alpha, anyway).Broadly agree, but please note that the EK gets LESS spellcasting than the Ranger, quite a bit less, when all is said and done.Still, I think the &quot;quick and dirty&quot; spell-less Ranger would be just taking away spells and giving the Ranger both subclasses of Ranger's abilities (and maybe an extra attack at 10th/11th).In general looking at this list it's interesting to see what it adds to D&amp;D, archetype-wise. None of it is completely un-touched ground, but what strikes me as effectively new is:Oath of the Ancients Paladin - The idea that a Paladin can be this sort of pre-gods, protect-the-light/beauty live-drink-love figure is pretty nifty.Way of the Shadows - Ninja is usually a Rogue sub-class or relative in modern editions, but a Monk sub-class makes huge sense, covers a huge number of fantasy figures very well (old and new), and generally seems like a very smart use of a sub-class.Way of Four Elements - Great way to get Avatar/Street Fighter-type characters into proceedings. Rarely seen anything like this in D&amp;D (not never, of course).Totem Warrior - We've seen a ton of (often obscure) totem-ish classes, subclasses, kits and so on in D&amp;D over the years, but I think making such a thing a part of a main PHB class opens D&amp;D up a bit, and is a very smart move.OTOH, I think the EK and Arcane Trickster are actually bad uses of subclasses, which the MC rules should have dealt with, particularly as neither really meshes well with fantasy fiction figures who use both skill-at-arms/stealth and magic. YMMV, etc.!Still the Paladin and Monk additions alone generally improve the game and add to it significantly, I feel.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ruin Explorer, post: 6347800, member: 18"] None of the classes which have a subclass doesn't get spells get abilities at the right levels for that, sadly (Alpha, anyway). Broadly agree, but please note that the EK gets LESS spellcasting than the Ranger, quite a bit less, when all is said and done. Still, I think the "quick and dirty" spell-less Ranger would be just taking away spells and giving the Ranger both subclasses of Ranger's abilities (and maybe an extra attack at 10th/11th). In general looking at this list it's interesting to see what it adds to D&D, archetype-wise. None of it is completely un-touched ground, but what strikes me as effectively new is: Oath of the Ancients Paladin - The idea that a Paladin can be this sort of pre-gods, protect-the-light/beauty live-drink-love figure is pretty nifty. Way of the Shadows - Ninja is usually a Rogue sub-class or relative in modern editions, but a Monk sub-class makes huge sense, covers a huge number of fantasy figures very well (old and new), and generally seems like a very smart use of a sub-class. Way of Four Elements - Great way to get Avatar/Street Fighter-type characters into proceedings. Rarely seen anything like this in D&D (not never, of course). Totem Warrior - We've seen a ton of (often obscure) totem-ish classes, subclasses, kits and so on in D&D over the years, but I think making such a thing a part of a main PHB class opens D&D up a bit, and is a very smart move. OTOH, I think the EK and Arcane Trickster are actually bad uses of subclasses, which the MC rules should have dealt with, particularly as neither really meshes well with fantasy fiction figures who use both skill-at-arms/stealth and magic. YMMV, etc.! Still the Paladin and Monk additions alone generally improve the game and add to it significantly, I feel. [/QUOTE]

Verification