Tony Vargas
Legend
Sure, if it didn't suck.
Core Classes: What and how many
- Thread starter Alaxk Knight of Galt
- Start date
Incenjucar
Legend
Maybe if it was about $5.
sorry to disagree, but one of my fervent hopes was that they pull back from roles, and the impresion I got was that they were going to. (did I get that wrong). I really want the end of roles, one of the things in 4e no one in out group enjoyed
riotshieldnation
First Post
It seems I'm not the only one in love with the ardent! (just one from the only one 
)
I'm all for this though, in reality. Maybe not assassin or warlock (for me) and add in a sorc, but all of these seem to be the ones I'd assume people expect from D&D.
)I'm all for this though, in reality. Maybe not assassin or warlock (for me) and add in a sorc, but all of these seem to be the ones I'd assume people expect from D&D.
Tony Vargas
Legend
The objection to roles always perplexes me. They've always been a fixture of D&D, they'd just never been formalized - and consequently hadn't been done in a really functional consistent way.
Maybe it's too much 'seeing the strings?'
Maybe it's too much 'seeing the strings?'
5E should take a lesson from Dragon Age RPG (which has 3 classes - warrior, rogue and mage) and introduce the "base" classes to the original four, and create the rest as subclasses that are easy to hack or create totally new subclasses on your own.
Dragon Age Oracle always has people creating new backgrounds, talents, subclasses, etc that allows players to create the character they want to create.
that would make it easy to create splat books or dragon articles. In order to refine the subclasses, you could use a requisite system, for example to be a knight-subclass, you need the knighthood background to start, and a slayer-subclass couldn't take certain "knight" feats or powers because they don't meet the requisite.
Dragon Age Oracle always has people creating new backgrounds, talents, subclasses, etc that allows players to create the character they want to create.
that would make it easy to create splat books or dragon articles. In order to refine the subclasses, you could use a requisite system, for example to be a knight-subclass, you need the knighthood background to start, and a slayer-subclass couldn't take certain "knight" feats or powers because they don't meet the requisite.
No. My early impression is that WotC is pulling too far back from what I liked about 4e, but this was 'what I want', not 'what I expect WotC to do'.
No. I keep hereing a few people suggest that,there should be only four core classes and that would be a deal breaker for me. I don't mind taking ideas from 1e, that does not mean I want to play 1e.
There are reasons why they choose that list of classes from multiple edition phbs, instead just folding them all into 2 classes, the original fighting-man and the magic user, which could fit all other classes within these two.
First for the majority of fans of 3e and 4e and even a large segement of 2e fans would concider so few classes a dealbreaker. They are used to and prefer a larger list.
Secondly the complaint with some of the subclasses in 4e essential was that they were so mechanically different from thier parent class that making them a subclass and not a full class seemed silly. Classes may have simularities in some areas of fluff and maybe a couple of mechanics, but over all I suspect that will designed and fluffed very deferent and need thier own space.
Take the Assassin, some have suggested the Assassin is just a killing fucused rogue, but I'd argue that the Assassin have evolved more into a shadow magic gish and which draws on some major archetypes such as ninjas and executioners and masters of deadly shadow magic. Do they have things in common with rogues, yes they both tend to organize in guilds (but then again so do mages and crafts people), and they are sneaky (but again so is a ranger). But rogues are basically normal people with grant talent and skills, but an assassin, an assassin is someone who has traded a piece of thier souls in exchange for shadow magic and combined it with particular combat skills and an unrivaled mastery of poisons. An assassin isn't fully human (or base race), anymore, a piece of thier soul is gone in exchange for pursueing this occuptation. You simple can't properly explore the assassin as a subclass, especially since in time the assassin could have subclasses of its own.
That is just one example. I could make many more, such as one for warlocks, priests warlords , but that can wait for when I feel better.
Invisible Stalker
First Post
I can see them releasing a basic box set with just these four classes followed very quickly by a PHB that has a lot more. If 5e is about unifying the editions, there will need to be a lot of 4e races and classes available to play right from the start.
Savage Wombat
Hero
Sort of. It's also like that guy in another thread who objected to the term "buff" - if we already have concerns that the game is too "video-gamy", having obvious WoW slang or concepts showing up makes the feeling worse.
In other words, it's an emotional reaction.
