Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 8199786" data-attributes="member: 6704184">Maybe. Or it might use something like classes that you can then branch out of as you advance, or a system none of us have seen before. Yep early D&amp;D was incomplete in terms of archetypes. Nothing complicated here. This is silly, as an assumption. It’s possible, but far from a safe assumption. Super hero movies are just as likely an influence, as are fantasy high budget tv shows, and Star Wars. Yep, D&amp;D hasnt ever really tried to do The Chick. Maybe the Bard, but yeah, D&amp;D has always had a plethora of “5th Man” classes, and they’ve been called that by players. but that is also irrelevant to my point. AUDnD would be more likely to focus on those broad archetypes and then build out from there, than to try to fit all the archetypes into the core book.I don’t know why people assume that it would be made for mass appeal, either. It’d likely be very indie, and fairly niche in focus, while trying to be diverse and inclusive.We might see a Seven Samurai twist on the Band, of course. But there would be a Leader, a Face, a Big Guy, a Smart Guy, and a Lancer (usually a fast heavy hitter that isn’t as tough as the big guy), for sure. By whatever names. Probably simple names like Warrior and Priest and Magician or Sorcerer or one of the other classic “magic guy” names, though Gandalf is a Wizard so that might still be what it’s called.How the game would spin out from there is completely unknowable.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="doctorbadwolf, post: 8199786, member: 6704184"] Maybe. Or it might use something like classes that you can then branch out of as you advance, or a system none of us have seen before. Yep early D&D was incomplete in terms of archetypes. Nothing complicated here. This is silly, as an assumption. It’s possible, but far from a safe assumption. Super hero movies are just as likely an influence, as are fantasy high budget tv shows, and Star Wars. Yep, D&D hasnt ever really tried to do The Chick. Maybe the Bard, but yeah, D&D has always had a plethora of “5th Man” classes, and they’ve been called that by players. but that is also irrelevant to my point. AUDnD would be more likely to focus on those broad archetypes and then build out from there, than to try to fit all the archetypes into the core book. I don’t know why people assume that it would be made for mass appeal, either. It’d likely be very indie, and fairly niche in focus, while trying to be diverse and inclusive. We might see a Seven Samurai twist on the Band, of course. But there would be a Leader, a Face, a Big Guy, a Smart Guy, and a Lancer (usually a fast heavy hitter that isn’t as tough as the big guy), for sure. By whatever names. Probably simple names like Warrior and Priest and Magician or Sorcerer or one of the other classic “magic guy” names, though Gandalf is a Wizard so that might still be what it’s called. How the game would spin out from there is completely unknowable. [/QUOTE]

Verification