Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Duncan Haldane" data-source="post: 4041651" data-attributes="member: 514">Well said, Thanee, as always.I have seen too many systems go to pot with the addition of classes that offer trivial variation.&nbsp; For me, of all the non-core classes in D&amp;D 3e products, most were minor variations on what was already available, even if you couldn't exactly model it on the rules.And most of them had names which didn't offer any real conceptualisation of the classes (what is a Hexblade, after all?).&nbsp; Perhaps the most evocative to me was &quot;Scout&quot;, but as much as anything they seem to be a mix of Ranger and Rogue.I remember back in the day playing the board game Talisman, which in its base form had a few class types (can't remember, probably about 20?) but as the game was given expansion after expansion,&nbsp; the number of classes just got bigger and bigger - I think there was around 100 at the end.&nbsp; And too many of those were similar to each other.Even rolemaster suffered from the problem - it had about 16 classes in the base rules, IIRC, with over-arching categories and then finer detail within them.&nbsp; But along came the companions and other additions, each with many new classes and it always seemed to me that I could make new class (x) by taking old class (a) and using skills (1, 2 &amp; 3).I always imagine it this way - in a city in your fantasy world, how many of Class (X) are there? (or country, if you prefer).&nbsp; If you imagine that there might be one or two of a class in your city/country, how often are your PCs going to meet them?&nbsp; If they never meet them, does it matter if they don't exist? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":-)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :-)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":-)" />K.I.S.S. - you can make a swashbukler using Fighter/Rogue, weapon finesse, tumble/balance/jump and a pirate shirt, IMO - it's just all about the roleplaying.Duncan</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Duncan Haldane, post: 4041651, member: 514"] Well said, Thanee, as always. I have seen too many systems go to pot with the addition of classes that offer trivial variation. For me, of all the non-core classes in D&D 3e products, most were minor variations on what was already available, even if you couldn't exactly model it on the rules. And most of them had names which didn't offer any real conceptualisation of the classes (what is a Hexblade, after all?). Perhaps the most evocative to me was "Scout", but as much as anything they seem to be a mix of Ranger and Rogue. I remember back in the day playing the board game Talisman, which in its base form had a few class types (can't remember, probably about 20?) but as the game was given expansion after expansion, the number of classes just got bigger and bigger - I think there was around 100 at the end. And too many of those were similar to each other. Even rolemaster suffered from the problem - it had about 16 classes in the base rules, IIRC, with over-arching categories and then finer detail within them. But along came the companions and other additions, each with many new classes and it always seemed to me that I could make new class (x) by taking old class (a) and using skills (1, 2 & 3). I always imagine it this way - in a city in your fantasy world, how many of Class (X) are there? (or country, if you prefer). If you imagine that there might be one or two of a class in your city/country, how often are your PCs going to meet them? If they never meet them, does it matter if they don't exist? :-) K.I.S.S. - you can make a swashbukler using Fighter/Rogue, weapon finesse, tumble/balance/jump and a pirate shirt, IMO - it's just all about the roleplaying. Duncan [/QUOTE]

Verification