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: 7372183" data-attributes="member: 996">Is there a Class Designer's guide somewhere that spells that out?  Is so, link it.  If not, don't pretend that there's anything so bizarre as a requirement for single-player or single-class party viability in an essentially cooperative game that runs on spotlight balance.  That's OK, then.  If it isn't a bar to the consideration of a class for inclusion, then it only has bearing on the later design phase.   I know 5e has a rep for being 'too easy,' but if you do follow those guidelines, you'll end up with 6-8 medium/hard encounters (by including some encounters where the party is outnumbered, resulting in hard encounters with less-than-hard exp value), and single class parties will likely choke on that, especially indifferently optimized ones at 1st level.  Some of the more versatile classes, though, you could optimize a party of them to cover everything it needs, and, if you heavily optimize a single-class party it could probably blow it's way through at least a full day of standard encounters, even if they're all hard. But, honestly, that's going beyond the viability of the class to the manipulation of the system. If it's hidden, you can't claim it as a goal, it could just be a fantasy of your own.  No reason it shouldn't hit that imaginary design goal, with a full class, either.  The sub-class in question doesn't even start to boot up until 3rd, of course, because it's a sub-class.  :shrug: Again, that is a baseless assertion.  You'll need to find it in print, or get a designer to swear to it, before I even start to take you seriously.I mean, Mearls /is/ on record with goals for 5e's inclusiveness and integration of all past editions to the point different players could enjoy the 'styles' of different editions, at the same table.  No one takes that seriously. No, only on how design might be approached. Nod.  I can see that as a development path, too.  Treat this class as a faux-MC sub-class like the EK or AT is a faux-Wizard-MC for their native classes, and extrapolate the full class from that.</blockquote>

Verification