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
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
One D&D Expert Classes Playtest Document Is Live
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="Hussar" data-source="post: 8791271" data-attributes="member: 22779"><p>I think this really, really nails it on the head. This conversation about rangers reminds me so much of the psionic conversations. It follows pretty much the same lines.</p><p></p><p>There are a group of gamers that are really passionate about psionics and nothing less than a complete psionic subsystem separate from the magic system will do. Then you have a larger group that probably doesn't really have any strong opinion in either direction. Then you have someone like me who isn't all that enthusiastic about psionics in the first place and is really against the idea of adding an entire subsystem like 2e or 3e psionics just so that one player can play a psionicist. </p><p></p><p>Complexity increases exponentially. Every subsystem needs to work with every other subsystem and the more subsystems you add, the more complex the game gets. And, it often falls to the DM to police these sorts of things since I cannot possibly be the only DM out there who has players who are ... not particularly thorough in their understanding of the rules that apply to their character. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite7" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue :p" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":p" /> </p><p></p><p>Which just adds to the workload of the DM.</p><p></p><p>D&DOne has the stated goal of streamlining and making things easier to run. They've been pretty clear about that. They are going to make the game easier to use at the table at the expense of complexity. We see this in the monster stat blocks and in how the classes are now shaping up. Which means that any calls to increase complexity are just not going to get any real traction. People don't want a <em>more</em> complicated game. Running D&D is hard enough as it is. Adding in a subsystem for rangers, which may or may not come up in your next campaign, or even the one after that, but will come up two or three years after the release of D&DOne - meaning that the DM now has to go back and relearn that stuff just so Dave can play that ranger. </p><p></p><p>From a strictly practical standpoint, you cannot really have separate subsystems for half the classes while the other half the classes use the standard systems. Not when you have so many classes. It makes running the game so much more difficult - you run one campaign where everyone is a standard system - fighter, rogue, wizard, cleric and then the next campaign you have ranger, monk, psionicist, artificer and the poor DM's brains leak out their ears.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 8791271, member: 22779"] I think this really, really nails it on the head. This conversation about rangers reminds me so much of the psionic conversations. It follows pretty much the same lines. There are a group of gamers that are really passionate about psionics and nothing less than a complete psionic subsystem separate from the magic system will do. Then you have a larger group that probably doesn't really have any strong opinion in either direction. Then you have someone like me who isn't all that enthusiastic about psionics in the first place and is really against the idea of adding an entire subsystem like 2e or 3e psionics just so that one player can play a psionicist. Complexity increases exponentially. Every subsystem needs to work with every other subsystem and the more subsystems you add, the more complex the game gets. And, it often falls to the DM to police these sorts of things since I cannot possibly be the only DM out there who has players who are ... not particularly thorough in their understanding of the rules that apply to their character. :p Which just adds to the workload of the DM. D&DOne has the stated goal of streamlining and making things easier to run. They've been pretty clear about that. They are going to make the game easier to use at the table at the expense of complexity. We see this in the monster stat blocks and in how the classes are now shaping up. Which means that any calls to increase complexity are just not going to get any real traction. People don't want a [I]more[/I] complicated game. Running D&D is hard enough as it is. Adding in a subsystem for rangers, which may or may not come up in your next campaign, or even the one after that, but will come up two or three years after the release of D&DOne - meaning that the DM now has to go back and relearn that stuff just so Dave can play that ranger. From a strictly practical standpoint, you cannot really have separate subsystems for half the classes while the other half the classes use the standard systems. Not when you have so many classes. It makes running the game so much more difficult - you run one campaign where everyone is a standard system - fighter, rogue, wizard, cleric and then the next campaign you have ranger, monk, psionicist, artificer and the poor DM's brains leak out their ears. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
One D&D Expert Classes Playtest Document Is Live
Top