Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Volund" data-source="post: 7557055" data-attributes="member: 6872597">Most classes would be significantly nerfed without their archetype. The classes that pick an archetype at first level would be most affected. Clerics without a domain would lose 10 free spells, a channel divinity, possible armor and weapon proficiencies, damage upgrades at 8th level, and a signature ability at 17th if they ever got that far. And what's a warlock without a patron? As others have said elsewhere, the rules should be taken as a whole - a drastic change to the rules in one area impacts the use of the whole system.Eliminating archetypes would flatten the power progression of most classes, which was a feature of 1e but not one I look back on fondly. I do however appreciate your interest in preserving an old school adventuring vibe. It's not the same as not having any archetypes, but our group is going to try a campaign with severely reduced archetype choices. After our current campaign wraps up a player in our group is eager to run a campaign of classic AD&amp;D modules converted to 5e. To ease running the game and give it more of a 1e feel, we're working on a single archetype that most corresponded to each 1e class (and no MC), even locking in a few sub-choices, like choosing forest for land druids, and humanoids/giants for the UA ranger's favored enemies. Once a class is selected, there won't be any other choices for class features so in that sense it's kind of like playing without archetypes. This will be a major change for our group that usually plays with a wide-open 5e character toolkit!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Volund, post: 7557055, member: 6872597"] Most classes would be significantly nerfed without their archetype. The classes that pick an archetype at first level would be most affected. Clerics without a domain would lose 10 free spells, a channel divinity, possible armor and weapon proficiencies, damage upgrades at 8th level, and a signature ability at 17th if they ever got that far. And what's a warlock without a patron? As others have said elsewhere, the rules should be taken as a whole - a drastic change to the rules in one area impacts the use of the whole system. Eliminating archetypes would flatten the power progression of most classes, which was a feature of 1e but not one I look back on fondly. I do however appreciate your interest in preserving an old school adventuring vibe. It's not the same as not having any archetypes, but our group is going to try a campaign with severely reduced archetype choices. After our current campaign wraps up a player in our group is eager to run a campaign of classic AD&D modules converted to 5e. To ease running the game and give it more of a 1e feel, we're working on a single archetype that most corresponded to each 1e class (and no MC), even locking in a few sub-choices, like choosing forest for land druids, and humanoids/giants for the UA ranger's favored enemies. Once a class is selected, there won't be any other choices for class features so in that sense it's kind of like playing without archetypes. This will be a major change for our group that usually plays with a wide-open 5e character toolkit! [/QUOTE]

Verification