Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Minigiant" data-source="post: 8086346" data-attributes="member: 63508">For the EK it's close to 90%1/3 caster? your evocations never threaten level appropriate enemies. Your abjurations do little at the levels you get them as well. Canrips? The only thing good about EKsWeapon Bond? RibbonWar Magic? A buff to the only thing goodabout EKs: cantripsEldritch strike? Your attack spells suck when you get them so...Arcane Charge? Buff to base fighter featureImp War Magic?&nbsp; Your attack spells suck when you get them so...EKs, Chmpions, and Battlemasters are fighter first. That's why you say...I feel people are looking at the image and not the mechanics and play. The EKs in the game I DM and the game I play both sparingly use their spell slots as they have little impact. Our Battlemaster is know more for his Action Surge and Second Wind over his dice and maneuvers.But this discussing is about classes.Man who fights isn't a class.If you attempt to put Fighter, Barbarian, Ranger, and Paladin under &quot;Man who fights&quot; as a subclass, you are just renaming class to subclass.Should 5e have more classes? Maybe. Not every big concept, fantasy adventurer archeype is in 5e as of now officially.What 5e doesn't need it big concepts shoehorned into subclasses or simple archetypes spread into full classes. I don't think 6e needs that either.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Minigiant, post: 8086346, member: 63508"] For the EK it's close to 90% 1/3 caster? your evocations never threaten level appropriate enemies. Your abjurations do little at the levels you get them as well. Canrips? The only thing good about EKs Weapon Bond? Ribbon War Magic? A buff to the only thing goodabout EKs: cantrips Eldritch strike? Your attack spells suck when you get them so... Arcane Charge? Buff to base fighter feature Imp War Magic? Your attack spells suck when you get them so... EKs, Chmpions, and Battlemasters are fighter first. That's why you say... I feel people are looking at the image and not the mechanics and play. The EKs in the game I DM and the game I play both sparingly use their spell slots as they have little impact. Our Battlemaster is know more for his Action Surge and Second Wind over his dice and maneuvers. But this discussing is about classes. Man who fights isn't a class. If you attempt to put Fighter, Barbarian, Ranger, and Paladin under "Man who fights" as a subclass, you are just renaming class to subclass. Should 5e have more classes? Maybe. Not every big concept, fantasy adventurer archeype is in 5e as of now officially. What 5e doesn't need it big concepts shoehorned into subclasses or simple archetypes spread into full classes. I don't think 6e needs that either. [/QUOTE]

Verification