Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Falling Icicle" data-source="post: 6178299" data-attributes="member: 17077">The way I see it, something should be a subclass when it is just a minor variant of the main class and still shares the basic features of that class. A specialist wizard is still a wizard, as is a wizard of high sorcery, a dark sun defiler, etc. A shaman is just a variant druid. A totem barbarian is still a barbarian. A blackguard is just a paladin that serves dark powers. But is a warlock or psion really just a slightly different wizard? Hardly. You could say that about sorcerers, but not warlocks and especially not psions. They have pretty much nothing in common except that they use magic. A druid and cleric have far more in common than a wizard and psion do!The main thing that should determine whether or not something should be a class or subclass is whether or not its concept is broad enough that it could have subclasses of its own. Warlocks and Psions clearly fit into that category. Warlocks have a variety of pacts, and as in 4e, they could include the binder as well. Psions have a variety of disciplines, not unlike specialty schools for wizards, plus the wilder and the other psionic classes introduced in 4e, like the ardent. Even sorcerers could very easily be their own class, with a variety of different bloodlines. Just because they were effectively just wizards that didn't prepare spells before doesn't mean they couldn't be designed well as their own class now.</blockquote>

Verification