Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Undrave" data-source="post: 8089463" data-attributes="member: 7015698">The game ALWAYS had roles, only in 1e it was Fighting-Man, Magic User, Cleric and Thief. The class were the roles. In other edition you had stuff like 'The healer', 'the Face', 'the Melee' and so forth. Class and roles are intrisinctly linked. You can't have a class be good at EVERYTHING (because then, why have aclass?), so it's important to know what you want your class to be good AT. you have to have an idea of what that character would look like, either in terms of narrative ("Okay, so the Thief is sneaky and can pick lock or disarm traps.") or mechancally ("The Rogue gets Sneak Attack instead of extra attacks") then you build from there. It doesn't mean you can't have options to break out of the box, but you need to start with a box if you want to give your class an actual identity and you want to be able to tell WHERE to break from the box and what options to offer that would do so.. And you need your class features to syngerize if you want the character to feel like its progressing at what its good at.I think the fact that Wizards COULD do everything in the past was always a problem with the design, with the flimsy explanation that "It's magic, it can do everything!" and leads to a Wizard that, frankly, has no identity that isn't wrapped up in its mechanical idiosyncracies.Archetypes in story and media fullfill a role too, but their role is dependant on their relationship with the narrative. It,s why TV Tropes has lists of things like the Four Humors or the Five-Man Band and all the rest. In D&D you interact with the resolution system and the type of obstacles the game can put in your way. You got the guy who uses pure physical abiliy, you got the guy who is more subtle and skill based, and you got the D&D Magic User who breaks the rules. Bruce Lee, to me, was a Striker, a DPS, a damage dealer, whatever you want to call him. He hit hard and fast and you couldn't touch him because he was too fast and too strong! The 5e Monk hits about as hard as a wet paper bag and is about as resilient. It's a weird grab bag of abilities that all have legacy value but don't super build up on each other. You got defining features like Stunning Strike coming up after other classes already got their schtick and it over values the impact of Ki, making a ton of important abilities compete for your meager supply. The 'role' is a design tool, it doesn't need to be player facing. If you do a good job, players will be able to instinctively understand what they're supposed to do with that character just from reading the class features and seeing them in play. They won't even realize the role was there! Honestly, when I play a Monk I never know what the heck I'm supposed to be doing.</blockquote>

Verification