Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mephista" data-source="post: 6777718" data-attributes="member: 6786252">Fighter and Rogue are admittedly the hardest to differentiate considering they're the most varied, but take that sea of a thousand thugs, and you'll easily pick out the oathbreaker paladins, the evil clerics and warlocks, etc.  And, again, that's assuming that they don't all have classes - we could easily be looking at a sea of fighters, barbarians, rogues, and the occasional other.  We've already agreed that individual tables can vary how many people have classes, from everyone to PCs only.  That makes your entire argument meaningless, because you're using different assumptions than others.  The only way to solve this argument is if we come up with a baseline.  Without a baseline, no one is arguing about the same thing.  Its like trying to argue which is better for you - healthy foods, or therapy.  The two are incomparable, since they both touch on very different things. And I find this particularly amusing, because that's not my argument at all.  In fact, my argument is "I object to the assessment someone cannot differentiate between classes without a PHB to reference in the default D&D setting."  You are attempting to shoehorn me into a "side" when I'm not on either side.  And I only spoke up against a specific flawed argument.  It was unscientific, it made no sense.  In a world where there are multiple instances of monks, barbarians, wizard, etc, you can compile and analyze abitlies and differences.  And you will come up with the same division of classes.The only other argument I might have been making is that the default D&D setting uses the "everyone has classes and roles" baseline stance.   And (related to that last one) it might include "it depends on the table, since homebrew settings are the most popular."At your table, you're right, and things work like you describe.   At an Adventure League table, you'd be wrong (since the AL uses the default setting).   Want to argue that the default setting (without any local interpretations, as strict to the official rules as possible) for 5e doesn't use classes for humanoids, I'd say that's one argument we could actually have.  As things stand, however, no one is on the same page.  Hells.  I'm going to argue no one is on the same -book-.</blockquote>

Verification