Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FrogReaver" data-source="post: 8309636" data-attributes="member: 6795602">This has came up a few times and it makes absolutely no sense to me.  The existing classes are all concept first.  Some are better concepts than others to base a class on, but that's their origin.  They also already exist and so any new class has to navigate around the conceptual space they already occupy.The Wizard concept is not just 'more magic':Wizards study magical knowledge and want more of it.  They devote their lives to pursue it.  Eldritch Knights do not fulfill this concept.Eldritch Knights on the other hand:They are explicitly a combination of Fighting and Wizardry. The Battlemaster entry is more generic:Martial Techniques that focus on leadership, inspiration and tactics such as Rally, Commander's Strike, and Maneuvering Strike would be the martial techniques of a leader martial (aka Warlord).  The Battlemaster isn't said to combine fighting with Warlordry as the EK is said to combine Fighting and Wizardry and that causes him to have a different conceptual space.  Conceptually, he's not a combination fighter/leader.  He is THE leader fighter.In an alternate universe of 5e Design that included the Warlord and then had the battlemaster created - the Battlemaster may very well have been defined as Fighting and Warlordry combination.  But that's not the universe we are in.</blockquote>