Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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
*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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D Next Q&A: Warlock Pacts, Patrons, and Iniate Feats
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="DMZ2112" data-source="post: 6223828" data-attributes="member: 78752"><p>Nope, that's it in a nutshell. The part of me that can't wipe the smile off my face when I'm watching the old D&D cartoon thinks that the idea of a four-color D&D setting where the classes each represent universally recognized identities ("Take extra care when Yanick is on duty. He's not just a guardsman -- he's a Fighter.") has undeniable legs, but I would never propose that it should in any way be core canon. It's just too niche. </p><p></p><p>Regarding the rest of your post, I think I may have misrepresented myself in my vehemence -- I absolutely think classes should be guided by flavor, and I am not suggesting that they be sterile stat blocks. I was a huge supporter of the D&D4 role/power source grid (or mechanics/flavor grid, if you prefer), and I was deeply disappointed when it seemed they just gave up on it wholesale. Despite my fervent belief that all of D&D characterdom can be distilled down to less than ten classes, I would not have objected in the slightest if WotC had stuck to their guns and filled out the grid, resulting in 30-40 classes.</p><p></p><p>The trouble with D&D4 was not the number of classes; it was the interchangeability of those classes. The classes were insufficiently defined, not in the least because many of them occupied the same role/power source combination. The creation of the roles and power sources was an excellent first step, but it should have tipped WotC off to the notion that whether you are differentiating classes based on mechanics OR flavor, either way you need a certain amount of distance between each concept.</p><p></p><p>I think there are lots of reasons for this, but the big one is easily explained: D&D is not a competitive game, and classes do not need to be balanced against each other. However, if two classes are too similar, suddenly they do have to be perfectly balanced, or else one will be played and the other panned. Each class should have its own reason for being, and its own draw to players. That way, it will always have an audience.</p><p></p><p>Returning to the thread topic, that is my concern for the warlock. It needs to be functionally distinct from the wizard. If it's a pet class or a gish, that would be great! Neither of these things are yet represented in D&D PC canon. But it can't just be a spooky spellcaster, because then it's going to be in a permanent balance war with the wizard, because anyone can reflavor the wizard to be spooky if the wizard is a better class mechanically, or reflavor the warlock to be less spooky if the warlock is a better class mechanically.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="DMZ2112, post: 6223828, member: 78752"] Nope, that's it in a nutshell. The part of me that can't wipe the smile off my face when I'm watching the old D&D cartoon thinks that the idea of a four-color D&D setting where the classes each represent universally recognized identities ("Take extra care when Yanick is on duty. He's not just a guardsman -- he's a Fighter.") has undeniable legs, but I would never propose that it should in any way be core canon. It's just too niche. Regarding the rest of your post, I think I may have misrepresented myself in my vehemence -- I absolutely think classes should be guided by flavor, and I am not suggesting that they be sterile stat blocks. I was a huge supporter of the D&D4 role/power source grid (or mechanics/flavor grid, if you prefer), and I was deeply disappointed when it seemed they just gave up on it wholesale. Despite my fervent belief that all of D&D characterdom can be distilled down to less than ten classes, I would not have objected in the slightest if WotC had stuck to their guns and filled out the grid, resulting in 30-40 classes. The trouble with D&D4 was not the number of classes; it was the interchangeability of those classes. The classes were insufficiently defined, not in the least because many of them occupied the same role/power source combination. The creation of the roles and power sources was an excellent first step, but it should have tipped WotC off to the notion that whether you are differentiating classes based on mechanics OR flavor, either way you need a certain amount of distance between each concept. I think there are lots of reasons for this, but the big one is easily explained: D&D is not a competitive game, and classes do not need to be balanced against each other. However, if two classes are too similar, suddenly they do have to be perfectly balanced, or else one will be played and the other panned. Each class should have its own reason for being, and its own draw to players. That way, it will always have an audience. Returning to the thread topic, that is my concern for the warlock. It needs to be functionally distinct from the wizard. If it's a pet class or a gish, that would be great! Neither of these things are yet represented in D&D PC canon. But it can't just be a spooky spellcaster, because then it's going to be in a permanent balance war with the wizard, because anyone can reflavor the wizard to be spooky if the wizard is a better class mechanically, or reflavor the warlock to be less spooky if the warlock is a better class mechanically. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D Next Q&A: Warlock Pacts, Patrons, and Iniate Feats
Top