Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
L&L: New Packet Hits This Wednesday
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="LightPhoenix" data-source="post: 6103717" data-attributes="member: 115"><p>Hey, an actual interesting L&L article! Shock and amazement!</p><p></p><p><strong>Druid</strong> - I like the idea for Wildshape, but I'm expecting "Shape Bloat" to be an eventual problem for the Druid. Personally, I'd prefer some sort of modular system; you get base stats plus some adjustments for each form. That way, for example, you can model a bunch of Medium Animals (dogs, wolves, what have you) and have them be relatively balanced. In this system, you might choose classes of forms instead of specifics (ex: Medium Animal, Tiny Animal, Medium Elemental, etc). I guess it ends up being a sort of 3E/4E amalgamation.</p><p></p><p><strong>Ranger </strong>- The problem with the Ranger as a class ties back to the problem with the Warlord from last week's Q&A. That is, while the concept holds its own weight, the class itself is designed as basically a "Fighter-hybrid." In this case, taking away the Ranger's TWF/Archery (a good thing, IMO) leaves the Ranger with Favored Enemies and... well, that's it really. The Ranger's "wilderness lore" has most been covered by spells since the days of AD&D. So it makes sense to fill it with spells (presumably with overlap from the Druid).</p><p></p><p><strong>Paladin</strong> - I like that the Paladin has taken over the "knight" archetype from the Fighter, and that the class is designed to be easily extensible. While the default options are based on good and evil, it's certainly possible to extend that to be alignment-neutral. I also like the continued separation of the Paladin from the Cleric in the realm of power source. I suppose that you could make Oaths or re-skin them to be based on Gods, but this way there's no built-in obligation.</p><p></p><p><strong>Fighter</strong> - I'll have to see the mechanic in action, but I like the flavor evoked by the idea of pausing in combat. It follows the flow of most combats a little more realistically, in that there's a series of attacks, ripostes, defenses, trades, and then a slight pause before the next series. I like that damage bonus is gone, but I'm <em>extremely</em> skeptical of multiple attacks; that was a very onerous issue in high-level 3E play. That said, I very much like the implication that while all this new stuff is being developed, they are still iterating the older stuff as well. Obviously the Fighter is getting another pass this time around; hopefully the other classes get additional passes as well.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="LightPhoenix, post: 6103717, member: 115"] Hey, an actual interesting L&L article! Shock and amazement! [B]Druid[/B] - I like the idea for Wildshape, but I'm expecting "Shape Bloat" to be an eventual problem for the Druid. Personally, I'd prefer some sort of modular system; you get base stats plus some adjustments for each form. That way, for example, you can model a bunch of Medium Animals (dogs, wolves, what have you) and have them be relatively balanced. In this system, you might choose classes of forms instead of specifics (ex: Medium Animal, Tiny Animal, Medium Elemental, etc). I guess it ends up being a sort of 3E/4E amalgamation. [B]Ranger [/B]- The problem with the Ranger as a class ties back to the problem with the Warlord from last week's Q&A. That is, while the concept holds its own weight, the class itself is designed as basically a "Fighter-hybrid." In this case, taking away the Ranger's TWF/Archery (a good thing, IMO) leaves the Ranger with Favored Enemies and... well, that's it really. The Ranger's "wilderness lore" has most been covered by spells since the days of AD&D. So it makes sense to fill it with spells (presumably with overlap from the Druid). [B]Paladin[/B] - I like that the Paladin has taken over the "knight" archetype from the Fighter, and that the class is designed to be easily extensible. While the default options are based on good and evil, it's certainly possible to extend that to be alignment-neutral. I also like the continued separation of the Paladin from the Cleric in the realm of power source. I suppose that you could make Oaths or re-skin them to be based on Gods, but this way there's no built-in obligation. [B]Fighter[/B] - I'll have to see the mechanic in action, but I like the flavor evoked by the idea of pausing in combat. It follows the flow of most combats a little more realistically, in that there's a series of attacks, ripostes, defenses, trades, and then a slight pause before the next series. I like that damage bonus is gone, but I'm [I]extremely[/I] skeptical of multiple attacks; that was a very onerous issue in high-level 3E play. That said, I very much like the implication that while all this new stuff is being developed, they are still iterating the older stuff as well. Obviously the Fighter is getting another pass this time around; hopefully the other classes get additional passes as well. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
L&L: New Packet Hits This Wednesday
Top