Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="5ekyu" data-source="post: 7589097" data-attributes="member: 6919838">Sorry but you justify your approach by saying how bad the champion is, even noting how battle master outshines it, and then upgrade the Baseclass too?Not solid approach.The purpose of the Champion is to be a simple &quot;by the numbers&quot; option that is easy to pick up and play. Key to that is all of its bonuses for the most part bring baked in, mechanical up-ticks and not a list of new choices.Your battle stance tag-ons really seems to be more of a battle master thing. Higher tactics etc, losing the meaning of the champion.If you want to invent a brand new, separate distinct sub-class (or class) to outshine the existing ones, great. But I would say dont throw away the core purpose of champion in the process by tagging these things into it.Call it the Dominator sub-class (or class) and leave Champion as is.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="5ekyu, post: 7589097, member: 6919838"] Sorry but you justify your approach by saying how bad the champion is, even noting how battle master outshines it, and then upgrade the Baseclass too? Not solid approach. The purpose of the Champion is to be a simple "by the numbers" option that is easy to pick up and play. Key to that is all of its bonuses for the most part bring baked in, mechanical up-ticks and not a list of new choices. Your battle stance tag-ons really seems to be more of a battle master thing. Higher tactics etc, losing the meaning of the champion. If you want to invent a brand new, separate distinct sub-class (or class) to outshine the existing ones, great. But I would say dont throw away the core purpose of champion in the process by tagging these things into it. Call it the Dominator sub-class (or class) and leave Champion as is. [/QUOTE]

Verification