Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D Next Q&A: More Classes/Subclasses, Retraining & Playing Without Subclasses
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Jester David" data-source="post: 6178897" data-attributes="member: 37579"><p>Fewer classes are better for a few reasons.</p><p></p><p>First, it prevents unfamiliar ideas from taking over the table. No matter how many splatbooks are released the classes will have some familiar elements, the warblade will still do something fightery, the shugenja will do wizardly things, and the like. This makes the subclasses feel familiar while being easier for the DM to remember what the class does, and easier to learn.</p><p>As a related point, it prevents classic classes being made redundant from a story perspective. So many 3e classes were variants on the core classes with a slight, slight story tweak. And many 4e classes were established classes with a role tweak. To make room for the invoker, you had to narrow what it means to be a cleric. When you describe a "heavily armoured warrior skilled with a sword" or "arcane spellcaster in robes" only one class should print to mind.</p><p>It also makes new options easier to describe. Rather than having to start from scratch describing what a "dragonfire adept" or "archivist" is, you just need to mention it's a subclass of ______ and half the work is done.</p><p></p><p>Second, it's also good for balance. It prevents future options from becoming too overpowered, as they're not making an entire new class from scratch. </p><p>And it prevents new options from making old ones redundant. Pathfinder has that with the ninja being a better rogue than the rougue, and 4e had this with all the second gen controllers being better at controlling than the PHB1 wizards. Instead, if a class is underperforming, they can release better subclasses keeping a core option relevant.</p><p></p><p>Third, it allows for better support. Everyone remembers the classes that saw no options in 3e beyond their one source book. 4e tried to counter this by declaring "everything is core" and thus worthy of support in future accessories. But there were quickly too many classes for equal coverage. </p><p>Subclasses mean all future books have a finite number of classes to generate content for. Every feat, magic item, or spell aimed at a wizards applies to almost all versions of the wizard.</p><p></p><p>Fourth, it takes less space. 5e classes can take less room than a 4e class, but they're still not light on the page count. You get more diverse content if you diversify via subclasses. You can have three or four subclasses in the space it takes to have a single class. Even if you keep the same fluff:crunch ratio as the late 4e books, you'll effectively get more options though subclasses.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Jester David, post: 6178897, member: 37579"] Fewer classes are better for a few reasons. First, it prevents unfamiliar ideas from taking over the table. No matter how many splatbooks are released the classes will have some familiar elements, the warblade will still do something fightery, the shugenja will do wizardly things, and the like. This makes the subclasses feel familiar while being easier for the DM to remember what the class does, and easier to learn. As a related point, it prevents classic classes being made redundant from a story perspective. So many 3e classes were variants on the core classes with a slight, slight story tweak. And many 4e classes were established classes with a role tweak. To make room for the invoker, you had to narrow what it means to be a cleric. When you describe a "heavily armoured warrior skilled with a sword" or "arcane spellcaster in robes" only one class should print to mind. It also makes new options easier to describe. Rather than having to start from scratch describing what a "dragonfire adept" or "archivist" is, you just need to mention it's a subclass of ______ and half the work is done. Second, it's also good for balance. It prevents future options from becoming too overpowered, as they're not making an entire new class from scratch. And it prevents new options from making old ones redundant. Pathfinder has that with the ninja being a better rogue than the rougue, and 4e had this with all the second gen controllers being better at controlling than the PHB1 wizards. Instead, if a class is underperforming, they can release better subclasses keeping a core option relevant. Third, it allows for better support. Everyone remembers the classes that saw no options in 3e beyond their one source book. 4e tried to counter this by declaring "everything is core" and thus worthy of support in future accessories. But there were quickly too many classes for equal coverage. Subclasses mean all future books have a finite number of classes to generate content for. Every feat, magic item, or spell aimed at a wizards applies to almost all versions of the wizard. Fourth, it takes less space. 5e classes can take less room than a 4e class, but they're still not light on the page count. You get more diverse content if you diversify via subclasses. You can have three or four subclasses in the space it takes to have a single class. Even if you keep the same fluff:crunch ratio as the late 4e books, you'll effectively get more options though subclasses. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D Next Q&A: More Classes/Subclasses, Retraining & Playing Without Subclasses
Top