D&D (2024) Collage of Dance Reveal

[jayoungr]

everything should have been:
1-3-6-10-14

Why, though? What do you gain by making all the advancements happen at the same level for every class, apart from consistency?

Sometimes it makes more sense with the class fantasy to have things kick in at different levels: some classes have it baked in from the start (sorcerer needs to know their bloodline), while others can start out as generalists and specialize later (wizard, fighter).

Personally, I'll take flavor over consistency, given the choice.

 

[Staffan]

They totally could (and should) have rejigged the entire game to make subclasses interchangeable if not between all classes at least between classes within the same "power source": it would have been great if every martial class (such as Paladins or Bards) could pick a Fighter subclass, and if every arcane class (such as Bards and Warlocks) could pick a Sorcerer subclass and so on.

I don't think interchangeable subclasses is a good idea. In most cases, subclasses specifically build off class-specific mechanics. Barbarian subclasses have things happen when you rage. Bard subclasses deal with spellcasting and bardic inspiration. Monk subclasses give you other stuff to do with ki. Having subclasses cross over between different classes would not make any sense in most cases. If you feel like a particular concept would work fine with multiple classes, it's better to design subclasses for all the classes where it would be appropriate and have those adapted to how those particular classes work. For example, the "ninja" concept could be either an Assassin rogue or a Way of Shadow monk, but one is using mundane skill to infiltrate and assassinate their target, while the other is using shadow magic to accomplish the same job.

I do think there could be room for an additional layer on top of class/subclass which might be more class-agnostic – perhaps something faction-related? But I wouldn't want to see it replace subclasses.

 

[Horwath]

Why, though? What do you gain by making all the advancements happen at the same level for every class, apart from consistency?

Sometimes it makes more sense with the class fantasy to have things kick in at different levels: some classes have it baked in from the start (sorcerer needs to know their bloodline), while others can start out as generalists and specialize later (wizard, fighter).

Personally, I'll take flavor over consistency, given the choice.

general subclasses. That can be picked by any class.

I.E.
champion could be sub class for all martials
or beastmaster for any class.

 

[Remathilis]

general subclasses. That can be picked by any class.

I.E.
champion could be sub class for all martials
or beastmaster for any class.

I think you could do that with some subclasses, but I think you need class specific ones too. For example, the berserker subclass builds off rage or many bardic ones use bardic inspiration dice. You'd need to divorce all subclasses from using anything from the base class to make that work.

 

[Horwath]

I think you could do that with some subclasses, but I think you need class specific ones too. For example, the berserker subclass builds off rage or many bardic ones use bardic inspiration dice. You'd need to divorce all subclasses from using anything from the base class to make that work.

ofc, it can work only for some subclasses.

i.e. Scout from rogue class can be modified easily to works with all classes, but Aberrant mind from sorcerer should stay call exclusive.

or Expert sub class that gives lots of bonus skill proficiencies, expertise and tools/languages/weapons.

 

[jayoungr]

general subclasses. That can be picked by any class.

I.E.
champion could be sub class for all martials
or beastmaster for any class.

I feel like making subclasses that would work with any class would also work against class fantasy. It might still create a fun game, but it wouldn't be a game with strong niche protection, which has always been one of D&D's hallmarks and, arguably, strengths.

 

[jayoungr]

I do think there could be room for an additional layer on top of class/subclass which might be more class-agnostic

Wouldn't that layer be feats?

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

I feel like making subclasses that would work with any class would also work against class fantasy.

So does multiclassing, especially on a level-by-level basis, yet here we are.

 

[Not a Decepticon]

Huh? This video seems to be saying "Wizards really stepped in it, here are some links to people who are more informed about the situation than I am."

There's also another video around where she interviews Kyle Brink about the fiasco – I didn't check that out because it's over 20 minutes and defending Ms Di's honor isn't that important to me in this case.

But zooming out from this particular question, I think that if you want to reach The Kids These Days, going through Youtube creators is a pretty big avenue.

Ginny's involvement in pushing against OGL was mostly on social media, it was a big deal since WotC was clearly trying to make her one of people to spearhead the ODD hype machine, so when she started posting on twitter what WotC does is naughty word, it was a blow to Wizards.

Eh, what?

What's wrong with a marketing strategy where you hand stuff out and people work hard to market your stuff of their own free will presumably without any direct monetary recompense?

More generally, choose one: bite the hand or eat the feed. Trying to bite the hand that feeds you seldom ends well, and I don't understand why you would expect anyone to try.

I mean, I can understand if you're resentful WotC is getting away relatively scot free from their earlier debacle, but I find it very hard to expect Ginny Di to self-sabotage her own channel just to stick it to the Man... likely WotC would easily have found someone else to create free promotion for their subclass and Ginny would just be short one video, with zero appreciation or anything else to show for her "sacrifice".

So...

First of all, you seem to be misunderstanding who I am mad at here - I am 100% mad at WotC, the youtubers are victims of manipulative marketing strategy. But it doesn't mean that I'm going to let WotC off the hook for trying to enforce this whole naughty word relationship, in which people can no longer speak truth to power because that's "biting the hand that feeds you", when WotC should never be allowed to be the hand that "feeds" people who effectively are D&D Media, the same way video game companies should never be allowed to blacklist people who are critical of them, effectively tying one's income to "playing nice". It's amoral and reduces media to free marketing. naughty word any company that does it.

 

[Not a Decepticon]

So does multiclassing, especially on a level-by-level basis, yet here we are.

If Monk is any indicator, WotC wants to discourage multiclassing now.