Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 8638584" data-attributes="member: 18">It's not popular with newbies though!It's popular with ancient D&amp;D-playing dudes in their 30s and 40s who just have a beer and chill whilst they play.This is was discussed at some length in another thread. Personally I've introduced a number of new people to D&amp;D in 5E, and none of them have expressed the slightest interest in Champion. It's got zero distinctiveness, it doesn't have any pop-culture equivalent, and if you tell people it's simple, and for newbies, they don't want that (also, frankly, it's not meaningfully easier to play than say, a Warlock). Even the boringest most man's man vanilla &quot;straight white guy&quot; man I ever played with, who likes soccer, cars, holidays in Spain, the suburbs and so on, and had never played an RPG before didn't pick a Fighter, he went straight for Spellblade or whatever it was called in 4E. And in my experience most new players circle around Ranger (so many Rangers), Druid, Warlock, Bard, and a few others. Wizard if they really like Harry Potter.Going back to 2/3/4E I likewise saw (and the thread agreed on this) pretty much zero new players wanting to be &quot;Basic Fighters&quot; or the like.Sure, and that's a valid concern but newbies love them. If there is a class with &quot;pet animal&quot; as a feature, newbies from around the world will flock to that class. It's not even a Pokemon thing, it like waaaaay predates that.Personally I'd say just give them a familiar that does basically nothing mechanically and most of them will be happy. Just don't make it easy to kill.Re: Talent of magic, if they don't get 'em level one, they ain't going to pick that class, because other classes do get them level 1. Just telling ya.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ruin Explorer, post: 8638584, member: 18"] It's not popular [I]with newbies[/I] though! It's popular with ancient D&D-playing dudes in their 30s and 40s who just have a beer and chill whilst they play. This is was discussed at some length in another thread. Personally I've introduced a number of new people to D&D in 5E, and none of them have expressed the slightest interest in Champion. It's got zero distinctiveness, it doesn't have any pop-culture equivalent, and if you tell people it's simple, and for newbies, they don't want that (also, frankly, it's not meaningfully easier to play than say, a Warlock). Even the boringest most man's man vanilla "straight white guy" man I ever played with, who likes soccer, cars, holidays in Spain, the suburbs and so on, and had never played an RPG before didn't pick a Fighter, he went straight for Spellblade or whatever it was called in 4E. And in my experience most new players circle around Ranger (so many Rangers), Druid, Warlock, Bard, and a few others. Wizard if they really like Harry Potter. Going back to 2/3/4E I likewise saw (and the thread agreed on this) pretty much zero new players wanting to be "Basic Fighters" or the like. Sure, and that's a valid concern but newbies love them. If there is a class with "pet animal" as a feature, newbies from around the world will flock to that class. It's not even a Pokemon thing, it like waaaaay predates that. Personally I'd say just give them a familiar that does basically nothing mechanically and most of them will be happy. Just don't make it easy to kill. Re: Talent of magic, if they don't get 'em level one, they ain't going to pick that class, because other classes do get them level 1. Just telling ya. [/QUOTE]

Verification