Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Xetheral" data-source="post: 8255424" data-attributes="member: 6802765">I think there's room to thread the needle and refashion classes on something similar to the 5e Warlock chassis without ending up with 4e. One could probably end up closer to Star Wars Saga Edition, which managed to have the classes on identical chassis without the same level of pushback that 4e got concerning class similarity.I'm thinking something like each class gets an &quot;invocation&quot; every level, but have each level of increased spell access require an invocation. So, for example, being able to prepare third level arcane spells would require selecting the &quot;Arcane Spell Preparation: Third Level&quot; invocation (with prereqs of class level 5 and &quot;Arcane Spell Preparation: Second Level&quot;). Subclasses would simply add to the list of invocations available to select, making them very flexible and modular.This type of chassis would give individual Bards the ability to choose how much of a caster they wanted to be by varying the number of invocations spent on Spell Access. So this would allow for both a full-caster Bard and a spell-less Bard with the same class.The downside, of course, is that the invocations other than Spell Access need to be powerful enough to be worthwhile choices. (That could be partially ameliorated by gating some of a full casters' normal daily spell slot allotment behind other invocations, raising the opportunity cost of investing in spellcasting.)With a large number of such &quot;invocations&quot; devoted to the separate spellcasting subsystem (e.g. spell access, spell slots, metamagic for sorcerers, school-specific spell buffs for wizards, magical secrets for bards, eldritch blast buffs for warlocks, smiting for paladins) and &quot;invocations&quot; devoted to the skill subsystem (e.g. expertise, jack-of-all-trades, reliable talent, peerless skill), on top of the diversity seen in existing passive and activated Warlock invocations (e.g. Aspect of the Moon [passive] vs Book of Ancient Secrets [passive/active] vs Lifedrinker [passive enhancement to activated ability] vs Sign of Ill Omen [activated]), I think such a system would be perceived as having a greater diversity of &quot;invocations&quot; than some of the detractors saw in 4e's AEDU powers, despite still having a unified chassis.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Xetheral, post: 8255424, member: 6802765"] I think there's room to thread the needle and refashion classes on something similar to the 5e Warlock chassis without ending up with 4e. One could probably end up closer to Star Wars Saga Edition, which managed to have the classes on identical chassis without the same level of pushback that 4e got concerning class similarity. I'm thinking something like each class gets an "invocation" every level, but have each level of increased spell access require an invocation. So, for example, being able to prepare third level arcane spells would require selecting the "Arcane Spell Preparation: Third Level" invocation (with prereqs of class level 5 and "Arcane Spell Preparation: Second Level"). Subclasses would simply add to the list of invocations available to select, making them very flexible and modular. This type of chassis would give individual Bards the ability to choose how much of a caster they wanted to be by varying the number of invocations spent on Spell Access. So this would allow for both a full-caster Bard and a spell-less Bard with the same class. The downside, of course, is that the invocations other than Spell Access need to be powerful enough to be worthwhile choices. (That could be partially ameliorated by gating some of a full casters' normal daily spell slot allotment behind other invocations, raising the opportunity cost of investing in spellcasting.) With a large number of such "invocations" devoted to the separate spellcasting subsystem (e.g. spell access, spell slots, metamagic for sorcerers, school-specific spell buffs for wizards, magical secrets for bards, eldritch blast buffs for warlocks, smiting for paladins) and "invocations" devoted to the skill subsystem (e.g. expertise, jack-of-all-trades, reliable talent, peerless skill), on top of the diversity seen in existing passive and activated Warlock invocations (e.g. Aspect of the Moon [passive] vs Book of Ancient Secrets [passive/active] vs Lifedrinker [passive enhancement to activated ability] vs Sign of Ill Omen [activated]), I think such a system would be perceived as having a greater diversity of "invocations" than some of the detractors saw in 4e's AEDU powers, despite still having a unified chassis. [/QUOTE]

Verification