Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Acid_crash" data-source="post: 3292408" data-attributes="member: 16278">For those who think that the AE classes are too specific in some ways to be core classes, why would somebody write an Alternate Player's Handbook but keep the same classes as in the core d20 fantasy game???Each class in AE fills a niche, IMHO, that the main game doesn't fill as well.  But each class is also tied to the AE world, and I think trying to mesh AE with core D&D is more of a headache than its worth.The Champion is a much better take on the Paladin than the Paladin could hope to achieve.  Plus, it's not just a Champion of Good, but I can be a Champion of Death.  Can't do that in D&D without some major overhaul to the rules.I can play a warrior mage right out the box without multiclassing.I have a wizard class that actually feels like a wizard to me.I have stopped comparing the Oathsworn to the Monk, although this is one comparison where I do think the Monk is better than the Oathsworn.I have a runecaster who gains runic abilities.I do agree that the Witch name doesn't really mesh with the usual sense of what a witch is, and in my mind it's more like a Elementalist mage...so that name doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but the class rocks.</blockquote>