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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7363766" data-attributes="member: 996">True, but no spellcaster has a Champion sub-class sitting in it with 0 versatility to contrast to that.  It'd look - wrong - for a sub-class that could swap out extra attack for huge amounts of versatility to be contrasted with the Champion, which might appear strictly inferior by contrast.  A new class avoids that sort of appearance... They're the kinds of things that a class might see down the road.  Tactical, Inspiring or maybe Bravura, and a newish faux-MC martial-archetype/sub-class would do for a start.  The potential for them to exist illustrates it could be a full class.  Only the wizard got such a huge complement of sub-classes up front.  Guess it's special in a lot of ways. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />   Most PH classes started with only 2 or three.  When Mearls, in the podcast, says that a full class should have potential for 8-10 sub-classes, that's what he was talking about, for expansion, over years or a decade plus.I don't believe you have that data.  I certainly played 'em all.   (OK, Insightful for like one season of Encounters and it was resoundingly meh, for me.)  Not nearly all the Paths, though.  There were more than I remember, actually...Not that the majority of folks playing a class need to have played a given sub-class for it to be worthy of inclusion, let alone for it to serve as an example of the breadth of the class concept and it's potential for growth years down the line in 5e.  Are there a whole lot of folks playing each of the 8 wizard specialties, or is the inclusion of all 8 in the PH just completeness in homage to the old School classifications.  (Rhetorical:  I doubt we have that data, either.)</blockquote>

Verification