Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Kurotowa" data-source="post: 9143337" data-attributes="member: 27957">Elementalists have the problem that D&amp;D's spells aren't arranged in a clear elemental array. Most of them are not elementally aligned at all and of the ones that are, no one element has enough variety to stand alone very well. And any attempt to make a generalist &quot;Master of Elements&quot; just looks like a more narrow Evoker.Summoners have the problem that D&amp;D doesn't handle minions well. They always run into problems of action economy and shared power budget. It's really hard to hit the good middle ground between completely broken and utterly useless. Especially if you try to have temporary or customizable minions available, rather than a permanent Beast Master type pet.Witches have the problem that if you ask five players what their idea of a Witch class should look like, you'll get six different opinions. Also half those ideas are just Druids or Warlocks or Alchemist Artificers with a different name tag. So it's not like there's a clear slot to put them in.Psychics have the problems that not everyone agrees they fit D&amp;D's tone, not everyone agrees how similar or different their mechanics should be from other casters and magic in general, and not everyone agrees what sort of abilities a physic class ought to have. If every choice is a losing one, the right one is to do nothing at all.tl;dr D&amp;D at this point is its own genre, both thematically and mechanically,&nbsp; and you can't just shoehorn in any old fantasy archetype like the days when Dragon magazine was full of weird new classes. It's a lot easier to put out an odd subclass variant than to build an entirely new class.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Kurotowa, post: 9143337, member: 27957"] Elementalists have the problem that D&D's spells aren't arranged in a clear elemental array. Most of them are not elementally aligned at all and of the ones that are, no one element has enough variety to stand alone very well. And any attempt to make a generalist "Master of Elements" just looks like a more narrow Evoker. Summoners have the problem that D&D doesn't handle minions well. They always run into problems of action economy and shared power budget. It's really hard to hit the good middle ground between completely broken and utterly useless. Especially if you try to have temporary or customizable minions available, rather than a permanent Beast Master type pet. Witches have the problem that if you ask five players what their idea of a Witch class should look like, you'll get six different opinions. Also half those ideas are just Druids or Warlocks or Alchemist Artificers with a different name tag. So it's not like there's a clear slot to put them in. Psychics have the problems that not everyone agrees they fit D&D's tone, not everyone agrees how similar or different their mechanics should be from other casters and magic in general, and not everyone agrees what sort of abilities a physic class ought to have. If every choice is a losing one, the right one is to do nothing at all. tl;dr D&D at this point is its own genre, both thematically and mechanically, and you can't just shoehorn in any old fantasy archetype like the days when Dragon magazine was full of weird new classes. It's a lot easier to put out an odd subclass variant than to build an entirely new class. [/QUOTE]

Verification