Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="LurkAway" data-source="post: 5798779" data-attributes="member: 6685059">Yes, that makes sense.What I find interesting is that the core classes are very generic and flexible and don't have a lot of conceptual baggage. If you pick a fighter, there aren't a lot of players who would complain that you're not a fighter.The advanced classes start to pigeonhole character concepts, and that's when you run into trouble, with paladins, assassins, etc. when two guys with different concepts of a paladin don't see eye to eye.I think that when previous editions put an alignment restriction on a class, it was using mechanics to draw a line in the sand and state &quot;This is what this class concept means&quot;. The disadvantage is that it's inflexible. The advantange is that it puts everyone on the same page.Kinda like saying: This is a vampire class. Your skin does not sparkle in the sunlight. If you want a sparkling vampire, get the Twilight module. (I don't mean to be cheeky, I'm just picking an example of a vampire meaning different things to different people and having to pick one concept over another).I think it's very important to put everyone on the same page, by either defining what is the paladin and why it has a Lawful alignment restriction, or forget the alignment restriction and loosen up the character concept so that everyone can read Paladin and see 2+ ways of defining it. And right now, with all the editions, we don't have that.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="LurkAway, post: 5798779, member: 6685059"] Yes, that makes sense. What I find interesting is that the core classes are very generic and flexible and don't have a lot of conceptual baggage. If you pick a fighter, there aren't a lot of players who would complain that you're not a fighter. The advanced classes start to pigeonhole character concepts, and that's when you run into trouble, with paladins, assassins, etc. when two guys with different concepts of a paladin don't see eye to eye. I think that when previous editions put an alignment restriction on a class, it was using mechanics to draw a line in the sand and state "This is what this class concept means". The disadvantage is that it's inflexible. The advantange is that it puts everyone on the same page. Kinda like saying: This is a vampire class. Your skin does not sparkle in the sunlight. If you want a sparkling vampire, get the Twilight module. (I don't mean to be cheeky, I'm just picking an example of a vampire meaning different things to different people and having to pick one concept over another). I think it's very important to put everyone on the same page, by either defining what is the paladin and why it has a Lawful alignment restriction, or forget the alignment restriction and loosen up the character concept so that everyone can read Paladin and see 2+ ways of defining it. And right now, with all the editions, we don't have that. [/QUOTE]

Verification