Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 5729057" data-attributes="member: 2067">&quot;New Archetypes&quot; are not something you can choose to create, though. Archetypes are recognized, not engineered. As far as the power sources go, it's really a matter of personal taste which ones exist and which ones don't and why. It's not like there are hard and fast rules for it, and there's no objective criteria you can measure it against and say, &quot;This should be a power source!&quot; and &quot;This should not be a power source!&quot; You could have only one power source: &quot;Heroism.&quot; You could also have a unique power source for every single character.I think the thematic distinction is useful, but it is only that: a theme. Not even a coherent theme. Warlocks could arguably be divine. Invokers could be arcane. Rogues could be shadow. Rangers could be primal. The choice to do one or the other is mostly stylistic at the moment, since every class needs its own list of 500 unique powers anyway, and there's no law that says that if a power deals weapon damage it can't be an arcane power (or whatever). It's muddled. I think for D&amp;D, that the broad categories make sense, though they could be better applied. I think a unified power source &quot;powers&quot; list may help this, since it would mean, forex, rogues and fighters using mostly the same list (though perhaps only overlapping in a few places, like priests with different gods). Then, I'd support allowing new power choices in with feats. If your rogue wanted to dabble in shadow magic, he could take a feat to gain access to some limited palette of shadow powers (perhaps there was a feat that let you take shadow powers with the &quot;stealth&quot; keyword). Or if your shirtless wrestler of a fighter wanted to gain some primal powers, he could dabble. Got a priest of the god of knowledge? Take a feat that gives you access to Arcane Spells that are Divinations!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="I'm A Banana, post: 5729057, member: 2067"] "New Archetypes" are not something you can choose to create, though. Archetypes are recognized, not engineered. As far as the power sources go, it's really a matter of personal taste which ones exist and which ones don't and why. It's not like there are hard and fast rules for it, and there's no objective criteria you can measure it against and say, "This should be a power source!" and "This should not be a power source!" You could have only one power source: "Heroism." You could also have a unique power source for every single character. I think the thematic distinction is useful, but it is only that: a theme. Not even a coherent theme. Warlocks could arguably be divine. Invokers could be arcane. Rogues could be shadow. Rangers could be primal. The choice to do one or the other is mostly stylistic at the moment, since every class needs its own list of 500 unique powers anyway, and there's no law that says that if a power deals weapon damage it can't be an arcane power (or whatever). It's muddled. I think for D&D, that the broad categories make sense, though they could be better applied. I think a unified power source "powers" list may help this, since it would mean, forex, rogues and fighters using mostly the same list (though perhaps only overlapping in a few places, like priests with different gods). Then, I'd support allowing new power choices in with feats. If your rogue wanted to dabble in shadow magic, he could take a feat to gain access to some limited palette of shadow powers (perhaps there was a feat that let you take shadow powers with the "stealth" keyword). Or if your shirtless wrestler of a fighter wanted to gain some primal powers, he could dabble. Got a priest of the god of knowledge? Take a feat that gives you access to Arcane Spells that are Divinations! [/QUOTE]

Verification