Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 6171173" data-attributes="member: 1465">I just want to chime back in to say that I purposefully avoided listing "symmetry per se" as a benefit. Rather, I mentioned 3 possible benefits, with the caveat that they aren't major benefits, but what I wanted to discuss is if the current asymmetric situation really has benefits itself, because I see some but they aren't major either IMHO.The (admittedly minor) benefits of having subclasses always start at 3rd level IMHO could be:- support apprentice tier concept: since at the moment all subclasses represent specialization*, not choosing your subclass while you are still an apprentice enforces the concept of apprentice itself- equality: all classes treated the same, all require 2 levels of apprentice before going into a specialization- multiclassing: if you dip into another class 1-2 levels only, you would be a more generic member of that class, and you'd get into some specialization only if you take 3+ levels, once again this connects to the concept of apprentice tier also when taking up a secondary class*Note the following important shift about Clerics in the last packet: until the previous packet, a Cleric's subclass was defined by her deity, and clearly a D&D Cleric is always a "Cleric of deity X" since the start. It makes little sense (except in a very non-standard setting!) for a Cleric not to have a deity until a certain level. But now, the subclass is your choice of domain. It's very different... you still choose your deity at level 1st, but each deity typically has more domain, so choosing your domain is indeed a specialization, it is what differentiate you from other clerics of the same deity. Maybe you choose Justice domain because you join the inquisitor path, while your collegue (same deity) chooses the Protection domain because she will take the parish path.Instead, the situation about Paladin is not fully compatible with subclass being a specialization, and it is therefore an exception. This is because the Oath is still alignment-based (presumably at least, since now we only have visibility to one Oath only) so it makes little sense that you choose between being a Paladin or a Blackguard only at 3rd level... I don't know what to say here, except that the Paladin still looks unresolved to me, since I don't know yet for sure if it will only have "good oaths" or also others, tho I presume the latter.</blockquote>

Verification