Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
L&L: Subclasses
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="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 6125234" data-attributes="member: 1465"><p>Well, thematic yes, mechanical not necessarily.</p><p></p><p>Of course <em>completely</em> different mechanics may look odd as alternatives inside a class, but also may not.</p><p></p><p>At least we already have examples about subclasses where the mechanics are the same but the relative weight of 2 mechanics is different between subclasses: the two druidic circles, they both share spellcasting and wildshape mechanics, one is slanted towards the first and one towards the second.</p><p></p><p>We also have an example of subclasses (Wizard) where a certain mechanic (rituals) is significantly different in a specific subclass (Scholarly Wizard): rituals can be cast from any known spell rather than only from prepared spells. This may or may not be a "different" mechanic for rituals, depends how you see it, but it certainly has potentially huge tactical differences...</p><p></p><p>Overall I certainly don't think we <em>need</em> even more mechanics for subclasses, it's probably best to just limit the number of mechanics in the game, and focus the design work on making them as solid as possible. But the subclasses can <em>alter</em> those mechanics, and technically can also introduce more, there's no fundamental limit to this.</p><p></p><p>For example, <em>Rage</em> could have been a mechanic unique to a Fighter subclass called Barbarian. It didn't happen, because WotC designers have decided that Barbarian is a character archetype with enough breadth to deserve its own class and they chose Rage as a signature feature of such archetype. However, the Barbarian class is the only class that so far has never seen any subclass option, and maybe the reason could be that the archetype is a bit too narrow to create variations, but another reason could be that it is the Rage feature itself which is an encumbering presence in the class with a rigid mechanics: maybe we'll get barbarian subclasses with altered Rage mechanics or focus on something else.</p><p></p><p>A similar thing could have happened to <em>Ki</em>, to be bundled in a Fighter subclass. However the concept of Ki is much more supernatural than Rage, and much more generic, so it should be easier to create lots of Monk subclasses by just designing tons of Ki effects.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Li Shenron, post: 6125234, member: 1465"] Well, thematic yes, mechanical not necessarily. Of course [I]completely[/I] different mechanics may look odd as alternatives inside a class, but also may not. At least we already have examples about subclasses where the mechanics are the same but the relative weight of 2 mechanics is different between subclasses: the two druidic circles, they both share spellcasting and wildshape mechanics, one is slanted towards the first and one towards the second. We also have an example of subclasses (Wizard) where a certain mechanic (rituals) is significantly different in a specific subclass (Scholarly Wizard): rituals can be cast from any known spell rather than only from prepared spells. This may or may not be a "different" mechanic for rituals, depends how you see it, but it certainly has potentially huge tactical differences... Overall I certainly don't think we [I]need[/I] even more mechanics for subclasses, it's probably best to just limit the number of mechanics in the game, and focus the design work on making them as solid as possible. But the subclasses can [I]alter[/I] those mechanics, and technically can also introduce more, there's no fundamental limit to this. For example, [I]Rage[/I] could have been a mechanic unique to a Fighter subclass called Barbarian. It didn't happen, because WotC designers have decided that Barbarian is a character archetype with enough breadth to deserve its own class and they chose Rage as a signature feature of such archetype. However, the Barbarian class is the only class that so far has never seen any subclass option, and maybe the reason could be that the archetype is a bit too narrow to create variations, but another reason could be that it is the Rage feature itself which is an encumbering presence in the class with a rigid mechanics: maybe we'll get barbarian subclasses with altered Rage mechanics or focus on something else. A similar thing could have happened to [I]Ki[/I], to be bundled in a Fighter subclass. However the concept of Ki is much more supernatural than Rage, and much more generic, so it should be easier to create lots of Monk subclasses by just designing tons of Ki effects. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
L&L: Subclasses
Top