Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 8521193" data-attributes="member: 7006">I think we are pretty much okay with what we have, although I personally would re-arrange some stuff if given the chance.&nbsp; But the ideas I would have would run counter to the default way D&amp;D has been presented so I know it would not actually happen.Given my druthers I'd genericize more stuff.&nbsp; For spellcasters for instance I'd let them select which of the three ability scores are their primary, based upon their domain/school etc.&nbsp; So Enchantment wizards would use CHA, and Knowledge cleric would use INT.&nbsp; I would also then make &quot;schools&quot; that were thematically based rather than just the type of spells... so you could have a Pyromancer/Aeromancer/Geomancer etc (thus removing the need of the Sorcerer class), or a Psychic (thus removing the need of a Psion class).&nbsp; By the same token I'd increase and genericize the Combat Maneuvers system of the Battlemaster so that every martial class could take maneuvers, and increase the types of maneuvers so that a more acceptable Warlord type of character could be made without actually needing a Warlord class.In other words... I'd probably prefer to remove the class system entirely and let people buy and build their &quot;classes&quot; as they see fit so they could attribute any narrative and fluff to it as they want (thus making Backgrounds become more like the &quot;name&quot; of their class).&nbsp; Now I'd be okay with the game presenting default &quot;class builds&quot; using the system so you could have a base &quot;Cleric&quot; or &quot;Wizard&quot; pre-made in the book (the same way in games like Mutants &amp; Masterminds they give you basic character builds of your &quot;tank&quot; or &quot;speedster&quot; or &quot;energy manipulator&quot;)... but I wouldn't expect anyone to ever use them (the same way almost no one ever uses the default build at the top of each class write-up currently.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DEFCON 1, post: 8521193, member: 7006"] I think we are pretty much okay with what we have, although I personally would re-arrange some stuff if given the chance. But the ideas I would have would run counter to the default way D&D has been presented so I know it would not actually happen. Given my druthers I'd genericize more stuff. For spellcasters for instance I'd let them select which of the three ability scores are their primary, based upon their domain/school etc. So Enchantment wizards would use CHA, and Knowledge cleric would use INT. I would also then make "schools" that were thematically based rather than just the type of spells... so you could have a Pyromancer/Aeromancer/Geomancer etc (thus removing the need of the Sorcerer class), or a Psychic (thus removing the need of a Psion class). By the same token I'd increase and genericize the Combat Maneuvers system of the Battlemaster so that every martial class could take maneuvers, and increase the types of maneuvers so that a more acceptable Warlord type of character could be made without actually needing a Warlord class. In other words... I'd probably prefer to remove the class system entirely and let people buy and build their "classes" as they see fit so they could attribute any narrative and fluff to it as they want (thus making Backgrounds become more like the "name" of their class). Now I'd be okay with the game presenting default "class builds" using the system so you could have a base "Cleric" or "Wizard" pre-made in the book (the same way in games like Mutants & Masterminds they give you basic character builds of your "tank" or "speedster" or "energy manipulator")... but I wouldn't expect anyone to ever use them (the same way almost no one ever uses the default build at the top of each class write-up currently.) [/QUOTE]

Verification