Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Alzrius" data-source="post: 8589517" data-attributes="member: 8461">I think the issue is that a class's fluff/lore is meant to evoke a particular archetype, which has thematic &quot;room&quot; for differing takes on that particular implementation (e.g. &quot;wizard&quot; could conceivably be used for Merlin or Harry Potter).The reason that's an issue, as I see it, is that this &quot;broad range&quot; runs up against problems because it not only requires niche protection against other archetypes (which usually isn't that hard to do, so long as the archetypes are sufficiently different in their general presentation), but virtually invites specialized classes that sacrifice breadth for greater specificity in what they're trying to evoke, all while still sitting at the same mechanical level as other classes. Hence getting a &quot;Potter&quot; class and a &quot;Merlin&quot; class both sitting alongside the more generic &quot;wizard&quot; class.Given that there's no real way to quantify issues of thematic breadth vs. depth, I'm not sure there's an easy answer for this within the context of the class-based system of character development (as opposed to, say, point-buy). Certainly, having customizable features that exist apart from class-design (e.g. feats) helps, but they seem like an imperfect answer.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Alzrius, post: 8589517, member: 8461"] I think the issue is that a class's fluff/lore is meant to evoke a particular archetype, which has thematic "room" for differing takes on that particular implementation (e.g. "wizard" could conceivably be used for Merlin or Harry Potter). The reason that's an issue, as I see it, is that this "broad range" runs up against problems because it not only requires niche protection against other archetypes (which usually isn't [i]that[/i] hard to do, so long as the archetypes are sufficiently different in their general presentation), but virtually invites specialized classes that sacrifice breadth for greater specificity in what they're trying to evoke, all while still sitting at the same mechanical level as other classes. Hence getting a "Potter" class and a "Merlin" class both sitting alongside the more generic "wizard" class. Given that there's no real way to quantify issues of thematic breadth vs. depth, I'm not sure there's an easy answer for this within the context of the class-based system of character development (as opposed to, say, point-buy). Certainly, having customizable features that exist apart from class-design (e.g. feats) helps, but they seem like an imperfect answer. [/QUOTE]

Verification