Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Abstruse" data-source="post: 5939540" data-attributes="member: 6669048">Because the discussion needs to take place over what is and is not a class in Next. That line is getting drawn and we need to discuss where it should be drawn and why. "That class has always been part of the game!" shouldn't be argument enough, and neither should "fanboys will throw a fit if it's not included!" The former doesn't apply because it's a new edition and there are changes in every edition of the game (the assassin class, for example), and the latter is simply a business argument rather than a game design argument.It shouldn't be reason enough for you. Descending AC was part of the game for a long time, as was to-hit tables and gold-for-XP and lots of other complicated weirdness. That's not a good enough reason to put them back in the game.In order for Next to be the best overall version of D&D, there has to be a clear and concise guideline for game design. "That's how we've always done it" doesn't work if how we've always done it is wrong or there's a better way to do it. In some cases you can make the argument that it doesn't "feel" the same, like D&D without AC, HP, classes, or levels. But those mechanics can be made to work in a modern game as the current playtest is showing. If you want to keep something in the game because it's legacy, it shouldn't get a free grandfather clause pass. It should work in the game and fit the current design. If it doesn't, pound on it until it does or find another way to do it.Again, it's a question of where to draw that line. Why should avengers be on the "theme" side but paladins and rangers be on the "class" side? There's not going to necessarily be a right or wrong answer as it's almost completely opinion based, but the discussion itself is important. What makes a class a class and not a theme? What intrinsic value does a paladin have that makes it a class versus something like an avenger or a samurai? I have my answers and other people have theirs. Me explaining my reasoning and them explaining theirs, then dissecting those reasonings is very important to coming to a consensus about what the game should be.Some 3rd party material is very good. Most of it is complete crap, either broken as hell or undervalued. I'm not sure you really remember what it was like in the early 2000s with the complete glut of third party stuff out there. I don't know about you, but I have never had the time or money to buy every single book printed in order to read them all and determine how they would affect my game. Plus I had some very sneaky players, who would ask me one week if this class is okay and then next week ask me if this feat was okay and then a month later, I suddenly see how friggin' broken that combination is once they hit a certain level. And honestly, I'm not sure if that glut has gotten better or worse with Pathfinder considering the number of PDF publishers out there now since I've completely banned all non-Paizo material from my Pathfinder game for exactly that reason.Having OGL or something similar is a good thing. It allows for a lot more options to be out there and it gives a good way for more established companies to recognize talent, the way that a lot of video game companies use the modding community as a way to scout talent. But it should not be used as a crutch by WotC for game design. "Oh, we don't need to include this class/race/whatever because some third party group will do it" is not going to cut it. We should hold them to a higher standard than that.</blockquote>

Verification