Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="steeldragons" data-source="post: 7662557" data-attributes="member: 92511">Well, yes. And 2e was the edition of a Thousand Kits. But they were acknowledged as being specific...specifications/specializations of a particular type of class or for a particular creature. Called out as completely optional/additive, as I recall, and modifications to existing classes...not [in most cases] classes in/of themselves.But yes, in 1e there was a new class to be found in various non-PHB or guidebook sources every day. Our group bitd came up with our fair share of homebrew classes. But I would not say, for example, our homebrewed shapeshifting ranger-type guys based on the Visionaries 80's cartoon (&quot;Knights of the Magical Light&quot;, y'all) ought to be its own class in 5e...cuz...well, they were a ranger or druid or paladin subtype [and incredibly &quot;broken/OP&quot; by today's standards, as I recall ;P]...at best.Whereas the 3e model says: Hexblade, Soulknife, Spellthief, Duskblade, Beguiler, Binder, Warlock, Shadowcaster, etc..etc.. ad nauseum all warrant their own classes...or &quot;prestige&quot; tier classes.It was more a comment on mindset and expectations I was attempting to address than the &quot;what was in actual print&quot; of any particular edition...if that makes sense?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="steeldragons, post: 7662557, member: 92511"] Well, yes. And 2e was the edition of a Thousand Kits. But they were acknowledged as being specific...specifications/specializations of a particular type of class or for a particular creature. Called out as completely optional/additive, as I recall, and modifications to existing classes...not [in most cases] classes in/of themselves. But yes, in 1e there was a new class to be found in various non-PHB or guidebook sources every day. Our group bitd came up with our fair share of homebrew classes. But I would not say, for example, our homebrewed shapeshifting ranger-type guys based on the Visionaries 80's cartoon ("Knights of the Magical Light", y'all) ought to be its own class in 5e...cuz...well, they were a ranger or druid or paladin subtype [and incredibly "broken/OP" by today's standards, as I recall ;P]...at best. Whereas the 3e model says: Hexblade, Soulknife, Spellthief, Duskblade, Beguiler, Binder, Warlock, Shadowcaster, etc..etc.. ad nauseum all warrant their own classes...or "prestige" tier classes. It was more a comment on mindset and expectations I was attempting to address than the "what was in actual print" of any particular edition...if that makes sense? [/QUOTE]

Verification