Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
ShortQuests -- Pocket Sized Adventures! An all-new collection of digest-sized D&D adventures designed for 1-2 game sessions.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="seasong" data-source="post: 1060559" data-attributes="member: 5137">Yes,but all of the class abilities fit a particular archetype <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />. Not every wizard will want a familiar, but a familiar is appropriate to the archetype. The ranger has a muddled archetype... and the archetypes that are muddled into that are better represented with other character classes.For the monk, actually, I have similar issues, but I want an unarmed master martial artist, and there aren't really any other classes that do it quite as well, so I'm still thinking about that one.The bounty hunter idea is very nice, but again, only covers parts of the ranger archetype - it doesn't jive very well with the wild empathy, animal companion, evasion, and druid-lite spell list. The ranger is still trying to be several things at once.On the other hand, I like the idea of a bounty hunter. I may make a PrC with the non-magical, non-nature-y aspects of the ranger.I believe the original idea was that it was part of the lay on hands thing, but there isn't a really good reason for the bio-only aspect of it. I find this idea intriguing <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />. I may put together an alternate package, so that remove disease applies to more different things as the paladin goes up in level. The ability to break enchantment on a reasonably regular basis might tempt some to the higher levels of paladin.Again,however, I am not interested in how restrictive an archetype is compared to how muddled it is. The ranger doesn't really know what it is - the paladin knows EXACTLY what it is.And the archetype the paladin is filling in my campaign (Spirit of the Community) makes the cookie cutter approach look pretty righteous <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />.Agreed <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />. But I'm not really working on the paladin here.I'm calling it berserker. I think the flavor for this class sucks, which is why I rewrote it (my berserker has the same stats as the barbarian, but is described as a warrior who develops his primal instincts and "animal self" to become a frightening warrior, rather than his skill with a weapon).This is the same setting that has my alternate sorcerer that you gave such good commentary on <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />.</blockquote>

Verification