Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="empireofchaos" data-source="post: 6777595" data-attributes="member: 6800918"><p>This is pretty similar to how I think of class, and the vision of it I tried to lay out in this thread. Humors or elements can be impressed into service in conceptualizing archetypes, or the suits in a tarot deck (especially for those of us who have experience with Everway). For me, Weber is more important than Jung (because it's his concept of calling that lies at the root of the way class is conceptualized in the new PHB, but ultimately, it's a question of personal background. And speaking of background, I like the way you lay out the relationship between that feature and class. That's precisely why I have a problem with people who say that the ranger class (e.g.) has become irrelevant now that there is an outlander background, and skills that fighters can select. They're not the same thing, and not felt with the same intensity. I would only add that the archetype has to be experienced as just that - a type - because belonging to a class makes little sense unless its a category to which you sense you belong, with others.</p></blockquote><p></p>