Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ki11erDM" data-source="post: 6193245" data-attributes="member: 58179">If this means you have a group, a class, and a subclass... then I HATE this.  I see zero reason to add another layer of complexity just for semantics.If this means you have just a group, and a class...then this is ok.   Still silly, but at least it seems to satisfy those that could not get over the idea of having two people throwing fireballs and magic missiles around, just with different mechanics, having the same class name.As another bonus this does help them create design space for psionics. They can now just release a splat book that adds a 'Group' called psionics.  As for the trickster debate.  "Expert" is horrible.  Expert in what?  Spells?  Pottery? Flossing?  The only name that fits is Rogue.  Then give me a Rake class...</blockquote>