Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
As a strategy 4e or 2e on classes
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Texicles" data-source="post: 5946763" data-attributes="member: 6694608"><p>I say more classes, but only by virtue of the fact that there are many who don't feel that some of the more crucial (imo) archetypes deserve their own class (Paladin, Ranger, Druid, et. al.) because they're just variants on some other class.</p><p></p><p>I think that things got out of hand with 4e essentials classes, and most of those, I'd be happy to see in the "Wacky Classes" or "Themes to make your class more wacky" module.</p><p></p><p>Ultimately, as long as I see my short list - Bard, Cleric, Druid, Fighter, Paladin, Ranger, Rogue, Warlock and Wizard - in the core classes, I'll be as pleased as punch. If there are others, well that's fine too, because I don't have to play them, but it's not going to hurt my feelings if someone else wants to. If any of those classes are excluded, I'll be bummed, and await them in a supplement.</p><p></p><p>The problem is that my list of definite, distinct classes isn't someone else's (colored largely by which edition they're using to think of what a particular class is/does). What is, most certainly, it's own archetypal class in my eyes, can be hand-waved as some minor variant on another by someone who thinks of the class in a different way.</p><p></p><p>I suspect that we all have our lists, but the important thing to remember is, it's easier for you to not play/disallow a class you don't like or doesn't fit the campaign than it is for all the people who want to play that class to just make one up. That's why I am not interested in the discussion of what should be <em><strong>excluded</strong></em>, and prefer to focus on what should be <strong><em>included</em></strong>.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Texicles, post: 5946763, member: 6694608"] I say more classes, but only by virtue of the fact that there are many who don't feel that some of the more crucial (imo) archetypes deserve their own class (Paladin, Ranger, Druid, et. al.) because they're just variants on some other class. I think that things got out of hand with 4e essentials classes, and most of those, I'd be happy to see in the "Wacky Classes" or "Themes to make your class more wacky" module. Ultimately, as long as I see my short list - Bard, Cleric, Druid, Fighter, Paladin, Ranger, Rogue, Warlock and Wizard - in the core classes, I'll be as pleased as punch. If there are others, well that's fine too, because I don't have to play them, but it's not going to hurt my feelings if someone else wants to. If any of those classes are excluded, I'll be bummed, and await them in a supplement. The problem is that my list of definite, distinct classes isn't someone else's (colored largely by which edition they're using to think of what a particular class is/does). What is, most certainly, it's own archetypal class in my eyes, can be hand-waved as some minor variant on another by someone who thinks of the class in a different way. I suspect that we all have our lists, but the important thing to remember is, it's easier for you to not play/disallow a class you don't like or doesn't fit the campaign than it is for all the people who want to play that class to just make one up. That's why I am not interested in the discussion of what should be [I][B]excluded[/B][/I], and prefer to focus on what should be [B][I]included[/I][/B]. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
As a strategy 4e or 2e on classes
Top