Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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
*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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
New Barbarian Primal Paths in November 7th Unearthed Arcana
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="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7703472" data-attributes="member: 996"><p>To be fair, the major, foremost, overriding, insuperable, reason that you have classes in your game, when your game is D&D, <em>is that D&D has always had classes.</em> </p><p></p><p>And, while that was true of every edition, even the most arguably-revolutionary, it is exceptionally true of 5e, which tries so very hard (and successfully!) to evoke the classic game.</p><p></p><p>There's been noises from Mike about maybe slipping the Shaman in under the Artificer. Those would seem to be two very different narratives, probably justified by similar function & mechanics. The UA non-spellcasting Ranger and Favored Soul would also seem to have very different narratives from their parent class. Similarly, the EK, AT and Way of the Open Hand each seem to be notably different in narrative from the other sub-classes under the same class. </p><p></p><p>So, no, I don't find that idea compelling. </p><p></p><p>5e classes seem to focus on distinctiveness supported by mechanics, and have quite a bit of room for different narratives. The Bladesinger and EK might have more in common with eachother's narratives than with an Abjurer or Champion, but they're not grouped under a 'gish' class, one is a Wizard tradition like the Abjurer, the the other a fighter archetype like the Champion. </p><p></p><p>Mechanics in 5e differentiate classes beyond just fluff. You might be able to re-fluff them a bit, but the fluff, the traditional concept of the class, & the mechanics are all used to differentiate one class from another. Re-fluffing is more an option for a player than re-imagining the class's traditions or changing it's mechanics, but it's a decidedly constrained option. </p><p></p><p>To really get maximum flexibility the player and DM would have to work together - the player articulating the concept he's working for, and the DM tweaking the mechanics to support a reasonable version of that fluff that works within the context of his campaign.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7703472, member: 996"] To be fair, the major, foremost, overriding, insuperable, reason that you have classes in your game, when your game is D&D, [i]is that D&D has always had classes.[/i] And, while that was true of every edition, even the most arguably-revolutionary, it is exceptionally true of 5e, which tries so very hard (and successfully!) to evoke the classic game. There's been noises from Mike about maybe slipping the Shaman in under the Artificer. Those would seem to be two very different narratives, probably justified by similar function & mechanics. The UA non-spellcasting Ranger and Favored Soul would also seem to have very different narratives from their parent class. Similarly, the EK, AT and Way of the Open Hand each seem to be notably different in narrative from the other sub-classes under the same class. So, no, I don't find that idea compelling. 5e classes seem to focus on distinctiveness supported by mechanics, and have quite a bit of room for different narratives. The Bladesinger and EK might have more in common with eachother's narratives than with an Abjurer or Champion, but they're not grouped under a 'gish' class, one is a Wizard tradition like the Abjurer, the the other a fighter archetype like the Champion. Mechanics in 5e differentiate classes beyond just fluff. You might be able to re-fluff them a bit, but the fluff, the traditional concept of the class, & the mechanics are all used to differentiate one class from another. Re-fluffing is more an option for a player than re-imagining the class's traditions or changing it's mechanics, but it's a decidedly constrained option. To really get maximum flexibility the player and DM would have to work together - the player articulating the concept he's working for, and the DM tweaking the mechanics to support a reasonable version of that fluff that works within the context of his campaign. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
New Barbarian Primal Paths in November 7th Unearthed Arcana
Top