Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pauljathome" data-source="post: 5903634" data-attributes="member: 21807">The last L&L article has crystallized an impression that I've been getting for awhile.DndNext sounds like it is going to have only a fairly small number of classes and that these classes will fiercely protect their perceived niches to a massively greater extent than has been the case in any games post 2nd edition.Obviously, this is all subject to change, things might turn out differently, I'm extrapolating from inadequate information, etc.But they're doing a lot of talking in absolutes. Fighters are THE BEST at fighting. They have the MOST hit points. Rogues are THE BEST at skills. Clerics are the BEST healers.I just don't see where that opens up enough design space for many of the other existing character classes, at least as classes. A Barbarian pretty much is just a fighter with a nature theme. A ranger is either a rogue or a fighter. EtcIn practice, 3.x, Pathfinder and 4th edition really do NOT have classes protecting their niches very much. Between the sheer number of classes,  archetypes, Prestige Classes, Hybrid Classes and multiclassing one can fairly easily build all sorts of characters that are very good fighters, excellent skill monkeys, very good healers, etc without being forced to take a particular classIt very much sounds like characters are going to be significantly more cookie cutter than in 3.x etc. All fighters will be better at fighting than all rogues. All rogues are backstabbing skill monkeys. There will still be customization available (perhaps a lot) through backgrounds and themes but, at root, your character IS your class. Where class is one of perhaps a dozen or so choices.In particular, it sounds like all sorts of character concepts just won't be supported. If you want to play a good fighter who is also trying to be the worlds best swordmaker then you're out of luck. If you're playing a very studious mage who is at least as much a sage as a spell caster then too bad.Presumably they'll add in some support for some favourite types (eg, a sword wielding wizard gish). But if you want to play a Zen Archer or an Adventuring Archaeologist then you're likely out of luck.For a lot of people this may be a good thing. But it certainly doesn't fit my personal tastes very well</blockquote>

Verification