Level Up (A5E) Every Archetype in A5e AND 3PP

[xiphumor]

Looks like artificer and rogue need some love. Also, there's a PMG archetype for the Scholar in Carry the Darkness, but I see no purple in the scholar column of the chart.

Fixed! My spreadsheet was working, but I forgot to replace the image for 3PP classes.

 

[xiphumor]

EDIT: Added Planestrider’s Journal

 

[xiphumor]

EDIT: Updated in anticipation of Secrets of the Selkies

 

[xiphumor]

EDIT: Added Sinuous Sentinels

 

[xiphumor]

EDIT: Added GPG #25 (Artificers look normal now!)

 

[Timespike]

Now we just need the savant back in the LUSRDs and we can start chipping away at that one too.

 

[xiphumor]

Now we just need the savant back in the LUSRDs and we can start chipping away at that one too.

I definitely have two, maybe three more savants in me, but after that I think I’ll move on to other things

 

[Morrus]

Now we just need the savant back in the LUSRDs and we can start chipping away at that one too.

Unless you’re literally reprinting the class you don’t need it to be in the SRD to make archetypes for it. You are allowed to say the name of things that aren’t in a license! McDonalds, Apple, Star Wars!

 

[xiphumor]

Unless you’re literally reprinting the class you don’t need it to be in the SRD to make archetypes for it. You are allowed to say the name of things that aren’t in a license! McDonalds, Apple, Star Wars!

Even referencing the feature Motto of the Tropezaros? That sounds like it could be trademarked.

And I think that many of the designers (and myself) feel like if something isn’t in the SRD of a company that otherwise has a very generous SRD, the implied message is “please don’t touch this,” even if legally we could do otherwise. Especially when it was previously in the SRD and then removed.

 

[Timespike]

Pretty much what Clarke said. I'm an "err on the side of caution" person anyway. I've also always felt like I was safest pointing to rules people could find in an SRD (in this case, the specific names of features and archetype levels).

That said, it's your game company! I can re-list Thematic Toolkit: Hazardous Knowledge today if you're cool with it @Morrus . (Though for me to pull the trigger on doing so, I will want a direct acknowledgement that doing so is fine; I'm more comfortable inferring negatives than positives.)