And, finally...as I said upthread, classes are not made for all people. I get that some folks have zero or even negative interest in, for example, an independent Warlord class or an independent Psion class. But there are enough people out there who really, really want those things, that I can't justify telling them "nope, sorry, the way is shut."
Yeah, no, I get that. I'm just approaching the conversation in a "where can I find common ground with you" angle. I get the Psion is a popular concept for many people, I have a favorite 3pp version of one. I just don't think they fit well in the game. I have just never fully gotten over the issue of how to make magic and psionics different. The closest I've come is making Psionic only come from the Far Realms, as a type of "different physics", that way it doesn't fit because it isn't MEANT to fit.
Here's the list, with explanations/thematics, if that would be more relevant to you. Again, first the existing ones; both lists lightly edited from the original post.
Hmm... I think I'm going to cut and shuffle these to discuss them. I think that will show my thought process best.
- Artificer, the engineer-as-magician, with shades of other professional fields (blacksmith, surgeon, sapper, etc.), where craft-ken is magic
- Alchemist, the chemist-as-magician, who uses magical ingredients and concoctions to control the world...or themselves.
- "Machinist" (not my fav name), the warrior-of-technology, who uses guns, machines, and tools to overcome their foes.
I see the Alchemist inside the artificer from the way you have set this up. They are still using craft-ken and a professional field to accomplish magic. I think the current mechanical presentation of the Artificer Alchemist is garbage, but the placement of the concept is solid.
Seeing what you want from the machinist... I'm torn. On one hand, a "warrior of technology" reads to me like Iron Man or a Gunner, which if you are repairing and making your own gadgets... that's the Artificer. If it isn't that, and it is just a Gunner who can't really make guns, just use them... then they are a fighter. One key to that is that all weapons ARE technology, they just are not MODERN technology.
- Barbarian, the warrior-of-passion, whether it be warp-spasms or altered states of consciousness or spirit-indwelling.
- Fighter, the warrior-of-skill, who transcends the limits of IRL mundane soldiers through grit and tenacity.
- Monk, the warrior-of-discipline, who transcends limits through enlightenment and practiced form, often semi-spiritual in nature.
- Paladin, the warrior-of-devotion, power manifest through purity, both in keeping promises and in inspiring others by their example.
- Ranger, the warrior-of-the-hunt, who straddles the line between man and beast, city and wilderness, tools and nature.
- Rogue, the warrior-of-trickery, who knows the ways of not being struck or spotted, and of striking and seeing, of locks and keys.
- Assassin, the warrior-of-shadow, whose skill with all the subtle ways to stalk (and un-alive) someone transcends mortal limits.
- Warlord, the warrior-of-tactics, who transcends limits by cooperating with others rather than purely through her own mettle.
- Swordmage, the warrior-as-magician, for whom swordplay is magic, and magic is swordplay (or other weapons), one and inseparable.
- Avenger, the warrior-of-zeal, whose absolute focus is both shield and sword against their enemies, who executes the turncoat apostate.
- Warden, the warrior-of-the-land, who wears Nature's power like a cloak, and wreaks Her wrath where he walks.
I think your color analogy is very apt here. Again, you have made a line between the Assassin who knows how to stalk someone, but contrast it with the Rogue who knows how to see and not be seen. Those are the same skills to me. There is a difference, but just like a difference between Scarlet and Crimson, it is slight and not very noticeable unless they are side by side. Which is why I think a subclass works very well for them. They are just such close concepts, that making an Assassin Class would inevitably be making a variant Rogue Class.
And I see the same thing with the Warden and the Ranger/Barbarian or the Avenger and the Paladin/Barbarian. There are differences, but I'm not convinced those differences can be pulled out enough to make them feel unique. For example, Zeal is a type of passion, and absolute focus is an altered state of consciousness. I can slip that aesthetic around a Barbarian with ease (and have done so)
- Bard, the artist-as-magician, whether that art be music, dance, oratory, fencing, whatever--the magic of the fine and performing arts.
- Cleric, the devotee-as-magician, servant and shepherd both, remembering that a shepherd's crook was both tool and weapon.
- Druid, (these days) merging shapeshifter-as-magician and geomancer-as-magician, calling on the magic of land and beast.
- Sorcerer, the inheritor-as-magician, who has magic power not because it was sought, but because it is part of who they are.
- Warlock, the bargainer-as-magician, who represents the power of Faustian bargains and clever swindlers cheating evil powers.
- Wizard, the scientist-as-magician, who represents pure knowledge unlocking ultimate power, the deep secrets of reality.
- Shaman, the spiritualist-as-magician, who straddles the line between material and spirit, the bridge connecting these realms.
- Summoner, the overseer-as-magician, whose magic lies in getting other beings to use magic for her.
- Invoker, the emissary-as-magician, who calls down disaster upon the foes of the faith, Elijah calling fire down against the altar of Baal.
See, and I run into a similar issue with the Invoker, that is just another flavor of the Cleric. You could build that easily by simply taking no healing or buffing spells for a cleric. These concepts I don't even see as different shades of the same idea, as you have said, the crook is a tool AND a weapon. the cleric is both concepts. We've just spent too long focusing only on the servant and healer aspects of the class, and not on the more relevant invoker concepts.
The shaman I think is more confusing to me now, because it seems like it would be the summoner? And, I agree a summoner of some sort would be a good archetype thematically, it has just been a long-standing mechanical problem to attempt to make a summoner. If we could find mechanics for it that worked, I'd be all for it, but the mechanics have always backfired.
