Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="delericho" data-source="post: 5786152" data-attributes="member: 22424">I voted for 8 classes. Using the 4e power source/role notation, I think the classes should be:Bard: Arcane LeaderCleric: Divine LeaderDruid: Primal ControllerFighter: Martial DefenderPaladin: Divine DefenderRanger: Primal StrikerRogue: Martial StrikerWizard: Arcane Controller(I know some of these don't have the same assignments as in 4e. This is deliberate.)I feel this gives a nice blend: the four 'classics', plus an alternate for each of the roles in a different power source (that should give a nicely different feel).(That I have two classes for each of four power sources, as well as two for each role, is a coincidence, albeit a pleasant one.)Of course, I also think that 5e should keep the power sources implicit - they're useful as a guide for designing the classes, but I don't think they should be mentioned (ever, at all) in the print products.And I'm also in favour of having the books define the four roles, and advising players that a party containing all four is probably the best balanced, but not assigning roles to the individual classes. Instead, each class should be built so it can be built for several roles (so the Fighter could be built as a Striker instead, the Wizard as a Leader, or the Cleric as a Defender, for example). Even so, I think having a primary role in mind is probably also a useful guide for designing the classes.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="delericho, post: 5786152, member: 22424"] I voted for 8 classes. Using the 4e power source/role notation, I think the classes should be: Bard: Arcane Leader Cleric: Divine Leader Druid: Primal Controller Fighter: Martial Defender Paladin: Divine Defender Ranger: Primal Striker Rogue: Martial Striker Wizard: Arcane Controller (I know some of these don't have the same assignments as in 4e. This is deliberate.) I feel this gives a nice blend: the four 'classics', plus an alternate for each of the roles in a different power source (that should give a nicely different feel). (That I have two classes for each of four power sources, as well as two for each role, is a coincidence, albeit a pleasant one.) Of course, I [i]also[/i] think that 5e should keep the power sources implicit - they're useful as a guide for designing the classes, but I don't think they should be mentioned (ever, at all) in the print products. And I'm also in favour of having the books define the four roles, and advising players that a party containing all four is probably the best balanced, but [i]not[/i] assigning roles to the individual classes. Instead, each class should be built so it can be built for several roles (so the Fighter could be built as a Striker instead, the Wizard as a Leader, or the Cleric as a Defender, for example). Even so, I think having a primary role in mind is probably also a useful guide for designing the classes. [/QUOTE]

Verification