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
Legends & Lore: Clas Groups
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="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 6193178" data-attributes="member: 7006"><p>One point to make here is that Paladins now have their own spell list, of which many of those spells ARE NOT ones Clerics have too.</p><p></p><p>So no... Paladins are no longer "Fighter/Clerics" by some people's definitions. Paladins are Paladins. WotC's just finally gotten around to making its spell list reflect that, probably in an effort just to finally get the "Fighter/Cleric" people to realize that that is NOT what Paladins are or going to be.</p><p></p><p>And on another note in regards to how some folks think "hybrid" classes should belong to two class groups... I don't agree. Because that does two things:</p><p></p><p>1) It waters down that "hybrid" class in power because of the attempt to make it relatively equal across both class groups. This was always the problem with the older edition bard-- not a strong enough weapon combatant, not a strong enough healer, not a strong enough trickster type. So it was a middling class all the way around because they were afraid of giving the bard TRUE power to be relatively on par with other classes *and* to then also give the class additional roles and abilities. The "support class" syndrome.</p><p></p><p>The Fighter, the Barbarian, the Paladin, (and now possibly the Monk)... they all need to be <em>focused</em> on martial weapon/combat. Sure, you can give them extra other abilities to help facilitate that-- combat styles, smites, rages, flurries of blows... but they still need to be built to more or less be equivalent to each other (if not out and out replacements for each other.) Because as soon as you make one of these (or another class) a "half-warrior"... it's now the bard. Just too weak to be nothing more than a support class, and thus not worth the paper its printed on.</p><p></p><p>2) If you really want characters to straddle two class groups, we already have that. It's called "multiclassing". THAT'S how you can create characters that grab parts of different class groups. So why would we want to jam the "hybrid" classes into the exact same hole that "multiclassing" is meant to fill? Let multiclassing create the half-warrior/half-trickster character, rather than try and force the ranger to do it. Let the Ranger be on par with the Rogue so that it can be a competent replacement in a group that doesn't have a Rogue. Don't hamstring the Ranger by making it a weak-ass Fighter and a weak-ass Rogue. Because that serves nobody.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="DEFCON 1, post: 6193178, member: 7006"] One point to make here is that Paladins now have their own spell list, of which many of those spells ARE NOT ones Clerics have too. So no... Paladins are no longer "Fighter/Clerics" by some people's definitions. Paladins are Paladins. WotC's just finally gotten around to making its spell list reflect that, probably in an effort just to finally get the "Fighter/Cleric" people to realize that that is NOT what Paladins are or going to be. And on another note in regards to how some folks think "hybrid" classes should belong to two class groups... I don't agree. Because that does two things: 1) It waters down that "hybrid" class in power because of the attempt to make it relatively equal across both class groups. This was always the problem with the older edition bard-- not a strong enough weapon combatant, not a strong enough healer, not a strong enough trickster type. So it was a middling class all the way around because they were afraid of giving the bard TRUE power to be relatively on par with other classes *and* to then also give the class additional roles and abilities. The "support class" syndrome. The Fighter, the Barbarian, the Paladin, (and now possibly the Monk)... they all need to be [I]focused[/I] on martial weapon/combat. Sure, you can give them extra other abilities to help facilitate that-- combat styles, smites, rages, flurries of blows... but they still need to be built to more or less be equivalent to each other (if not out and out replacements for each other.) Because as soon as you make one of these (or another class) a "half-warrior"... it's now the bard. Just too weak to be nothing more than a support class, and thus not worth the paper its printed on. 2) If you really want characters to straddle two class groups, we already have that. It's called "multiclassing". THAT'S how you can create characters that grab parts of different class groups. So why would we want to jam the "hybrid" classes into the exact same hole that "multiclassing" is meant to fill? Let multiclassing create the half-warrior/half-trickster character, rather than try and force the ranger to do it. Let the Ranger be on par with the Rogue so that it can be a competent replacement in a group that doesn't have a Rogue. Don't hamstring the Ranger by making it a weak-ass Fighter and a weak-ass Rogue. Because that serves nobody. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Legends & Lore: Clas Groups
Top