Excited About Race / Class / Theme
- Thread starter MortalPlague
- Start date
TarionzCousin
Second Most Angelic Devil Ever
Yes.
Ahnehnois
First Post
Sure. You could do away with the class system entirely.
But D&D is based around certain classic archetypes that are represented as classes. First the fighter, magic user, and thief/rogue, then the cleric, then ranger, druid, bard, and so on, then barbarian, monk, assassin, and so on. The warlord (or marshal, or leader, conceptually) is either another level down that list or not on it at all.
Like I said, the concept of a "warlord" or a leader who enhances other characters is compatible with most of the classic archetypes. It's very easy for me to imagine a fighter or barbarian or knight/paladin who is charismatic and considers himself a warlord. Cleric warlord? Sure. Wizard warlord? Sure. Rogue warlord? A little iffy, but doable. Conversely, a wizard thief doesnt seem like it should work without multiclassing; the same for a cleric wizard. Basically it boils down to what has historically been in D&D, but also how the game is played. What 4e calls a leader has always been more a theme than one class and has never been the sole imperative of any class (excepting the marshal, a bit of a strange one).
So I don't think it would be relegating the idea to make it a theme, I think it would make a lot of people happy (although not everyone, I'm sure).
Man, I love this thread. It's really zeroing in on distinguishing the difference between class-specific vs class-independent traits -- and good use of themes makes class creation feel so much more organic without getting into the hazards of a purely classeless system.
I hope 5E will use themes for all that it's worth.
(But this is where Crazy Jerome is probably secretly thinking that the elegance of the idea itself is insufficient and we also must account for design as well
I hope 5E will use themes for all that it's worth.
(But this is where Crazy Jerome is probably secretly thinking that the elegance of the idea itself is insufficient and we also must account for design as well
I don't see enough information about themes to decide if they're a good idea or not. At the moment what I understand from comments (and guesses on this board) makes me skeptical.
It's still fun to speculate about possibilities even if I don't think I'll like themes.
Take the idea that races "might" level and combine it a goal to enable 1e/2e style play. You might be able to have:
Fighter/Magic-user/Thief
Fighter/Magic-user/Cleric
If the power level of race, class, and theme were equivalent contributors to your character then, perhaps, someone who wanted to multi-class like a Half-Elf could drop their racial and theme benefits in exchange for extra named classes.
Alternatively, if every class had a full primary progression and a secondary progression. You could balance the power level / contribution such that the power of race = theme = secondary class progression. A character would still have a primary class but they could have up to two secondary classes which would also make Fighter/Magic-user/Thief possible.
Random ideas that may, or may not, work within the structure of D&D Next.
It's still fun to speculate about possibilities even if I don't think I'll like themes.
Take the idea that races "might" level and combine it a goal to enable 1e/2e style play. You might be able to have:
Fighter/Magic-user/Thief
Fighter/Magic-user/Cleric
If the power level of race, class, and theme were equivalent contributors to your character then, perhaps, someone who wanted to multi-class like a Half-Elf could drop their racial and theme benefits in exchange for extra named classes.
Alternatively, if every class had a full primary progression and a secondary progression. You could balance the power level / contribution such that the power of race = theme = secondary class progression. A character would still have a primary class but they could have up to two secondary classes which would also make Fighter/Magic-user/Thief possible.
Random ideas that may, or may not, work within the structure of D&D Next.
I might be remembering wrong, but wasn't it Fighter/Cleric/Magic-user?
I don't know how 4E themes work, but I might enjoy being able to choose a Minor Theme and Major Theme for each PC.
Minor Themes could be Commoner, Pubcrawler, Dwarven Stonecutter, etc.
Major Themes could be Noble, Tiefling Blood, Radiant Paladin, etc.
Themes could be swapped when appropriate without affecting class mechanics (ie., swapping Radiant Paladin for Fallen Paladin).
If you don't want/need a Major Theme, maybe you can trade a Major Theme for an extra feat or other counterbalance.
You might pick up a new Minor Theme during the course of an adventure.
You can quickly put together a mundane NPC by layering one or more themes (don't need the same rules as PCs).
Minor Themes could be Commoner, Pubcrawler, Dwarven Stonecutter, etc.
Major Themes could be Noble, Tiefling Blood, Radiant Paladin, etc.
Themes could be swapped when appropriate without affecting class mechanics (ie., swapping Radiant Paladin for Fallen Paladin).
If you don't want/need a Major Theme, maybe you can trade a Major Theme for an extra feat or other counterbalance.
You might pick up a new Minor Theme during the course of an adventure.
You can quickly put together a mundane NPC by layering one or more themes (don't need the same rules as PCs).
Last edited:
TarionzCousin
Second Most Angelic Devil Ever
Click on the red "D&D 5E Info" button up top.
Or read below:
EN World D&D 5E Info Page said:
Similar Threads
