Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 5796356" data-attributes="member: 29398">Nice list.&nbsp; A few thoughts...Maybe not even the &quot;stabby Rogue&quot; but instead the non-caster's version of the &quot;I win&quot; button when dealing with non-fantastic foes.&nbsp; I'm an Assassin.&nbsp; I don't fight very well, but if I get a chance to line up my strike for a few minutes while you're unaware of me, and if I can pull it off, you're dead.&nbsp; Period.A big HEAR HEAR to the renaming idea!&nbsp; With that, Barbarian can become what it should have been all along: a sub-race of Human.Doing up different spell lists for each deity is a huge amount of work, particularly if the individual spells also have deity-specific variants (DSV).&nbsp; For example, it only makes sense that a Light spell cast by a Sungod Cleric should be more effective somehow than the same spell cast by a Moongoddess Cleric.&nbsp; While I like the idea, I certainly can't blame the designers for putting it way down the priority list. <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&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />They could easily enough split it down into some sub-classes - Archer, Knight, Swashbuckler, etc. - if required.To me, those are the only two Wizard specialties that are worthy of their own classes.&nbsp; The rest all just kinda blend together into generic Wizard territory.Yes, and make psionics completely optional.Another idea here might be to introduce a third type of Cleric - the War Cleric - which has some fighter-y abilities and some caster-y abilities, can't cure worth a damn but is really good with the battle spells; and that's what you start as if your career goal is Paladin.I don't.&nbsp; I used to really like psionics but not so much any more, and I'd prefer them to not be in core at all.&nbsp; Great option-book material, though, and a good place to hide the Monk as well. <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&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Go back to calling it a Thief, and I'd suggest it should be the &quot;I can do anything but you'll never know about it because I'm just that quiet&quot; class. <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&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Can these be blended into one class, without the setting-specific flavour?I can't see how Wizard (or MU) is any more setting-specific than most of the other classes.Lanefan</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 5796356, member: 29398"] Nice list. A few thoughts...Maybe not even the "stabby Rogue" but instead the non-caster's version of the "I win" button when dealing with non-fantastic foes. I'm an Assassin. I don't fight very well, but if I get a chance to line up my strike for a few minutes while you're unaware of me, and if I can pull it off, you're dead. Period. A big HEAR HEAR to the renaming idea! With that, Barbarian can become what it should have been all along: a sub-race of Human. Doing up different spell lists for each deity is a huge amount of work, particularly if the individual spells also have deity-specific variants (DSV). For example, it only makes sense that a [I]Light[/I] spell cast by a Sungod Cleric should be more effective somehow than the same spell cast by a Moongoddess Cleric. While I like the idea, I certainly can't blame the designers for putting it way down the priority list. :) They could easily enough split it down into some sub-classes - Archer, Knight, Swashbuckler, etc. - if required. To me, those are the only two Wizard specialties that are worthy of their own classes. The rest all just kinda blend together into generic Wizard territory. Yes, and make psionics completely optional. Another idea here might be to introduce a third type of Cleric - the War Cleric - which has some fighter-y abilities and some caster-y abilities, can't cure worth a damn but is really good with the battle spells; and that's what you start as if your career goal is Paladin. I don't. I used to really like psionics but not so much any more, and I'd prefer them to not be in core at all. Great option-book material, though, and a good place to hide the Monk as well. :) Go back to calling it a Thief, and I'd suggest it should be the "I can do anything but you'll never know about it because I'm just that quiet" class. :) Can these be blended into one class, without the setting-specific flavour? I can't see how Wizard (or MU) is any more setting-specific than most of the other classes. Lanefan [/QUOTE]

Verification