Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="delericho" data-source="post: 5782511" data-attributes="member: 22424">No, I'm saying this is the wrong place to do it. The existing race/class split is easy to understand - I've never had a player not grasp it immediately.However, to move from &quot;race as a class&quot; to the full &quot;races &amp; classes module&quot;, one of two things must happen:- The player can unpick his &quot;dwarf as a class&quot; out so it becomes a &quot;Dwarf Fighter&quot; under the new paradigm. In which case the game has made a marginal simplification at the outset, at the cost of a much greater complexity later. IMO, that is a bad trade-off.Or, if the game doesn't allow that 'unpicking' of &quot;dwarf as a class&quot; to &quot;Dwarf Fighter&quot;, or if doing that is just too much effort:- The player just discards his character and builds a new one. IMO, that doesn't seem a good solution either - the player presumably likes his character, and is invested in him; he just wants the flexibility of the new mechanics.I'm not very familiar with Essentials, but my understanding was that the Essentials classes were little more than builds, and that the player could &quot;step off the path&quot; any time he wanted? At least, that was the argument I kept seeing put forward why Essentials wasn't a 4.5e. If it was not the case, that would be a mistake in Essentials.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="delericho, post: 5782511, member: 22424"] No, I'm saying this is the wrong place to do it. The existing race/class split is easy to understand - I've never had a player not grasp it immediately. However, to move from "race as a class" to the full "races & classes module", one of two things must happen: - The player can unpick his "dwarf as a class" out so it becomes a "Dwarf Fighter" under the new paradigm. In which case the game has made a marginal simplification at the outset, at the cost of a much greater complexity later. IMO, that is a bad trade-off. Or, if the game doesn't allow that 'unpicking' of "dwarf as a class" to "Dwarf Fighter", or if doing that is just too much effort: - The player just discards his character and builds a new one. IMO, that doesn't seem a good solution either - the player presumably likes his character, and is invested in him; he just wants the flexibility of the new mechanics. I'm not very familiar with Essentials, but my understanding was that the Essentials classes were little more than builds, and that the player could "step off the path" any time he wanted? At least, that was the argument I kept seeing put forward why Essentials wasn't a 4.5e. If it was not the case, that would be a mistake in Essentials. [/QUOTE]

Verification