Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Symmetric Balance vs Asymmetric Balance.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Emberashh" data-source="post: 9172745" data-attributes="member: 7040941"><p>Issue is that having more open classes isn't the same thing has having more classes, and thats where you're closing off the design space. </p><p></p><p>The dissatisfaction with those that came after the original 3/4 is rooted in bad, if not nonexistent, design. Like how the Ranger to this day is still just a cobbled together homebrew mishmash rather than a bespoke design. (With the only attempt to do bespoke being so poorly executed now people are biased against it)</p><p></p><p>Classes should matter if they exist, and if they don't matter they shouldn't be there. </p><p></p><p>And fwiw, I personally think a hybrid approach is best. My own game has classes that are designed as such, but multiclassing is so permissive that in practice it acts as a point buy type system. Between 20 classes and 80 subclasses and the ability to mix and match all of them, including taking multiple subclasses, while still supporting Classes that actually matter, you do a lot better than going one way or the other. </p><p></p><p>Those who don't want to care about their build so much won't have to, and those that do will be given a more substantial playground to do so than anything else on the market. (Given theres Skill Paths on top of this as well as another big dimension to character building)</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Niche protection is stupid and an unnecessary constraint when you want the game to be permissive towards people playing what they want to play, and not what the game needs them to play. </p><p></p><p>And its especially stupid because its a cooperative game and you shouldn't be coming into it from that kind of selfish perspective in the first place. You're not lesser if someone else can do the same thing. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>That tends to lead into the Prestige Class problem where people are eventually going to skip the required plot beats just so they can play what they want to play. </p><p></p><p>Its one of those things where one has to be conscious of how people are playing the game and embrace it. Probably the wisest design decision from WOTC that they haven't repeated that mistake in two editions.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Emberashh, post: 9172745, member: 7040941"] Issue is that having more open classes isn't the same thing has having more classes, and thats where you're closing off the design space. The dissatisfaction with those that came after the original 3/4 is rooted in bad, if not nonexistent, design. Like how the Ranger to this day is still just a cobbled together homebrew mishmash rather than a bespoke design. (With the only attempt to do bespoke being so poorly executed now people are biased against it) Classes should matter if they exist, and if they don't matter they shouldn't be there. And fwiw, I personally think a hybrid approach is best. My own game has classes that are designed as such, but multiclassing is so permissive that in practice it acts as a point buy type system. Between 20 classes and 80 subclasses and the ability to mix and match all of them, including taking multiple subclasses, while still supporting Classes that actually matter, you do a lot better than going one way or the other. Those who don't want to care about their build so much won't have to, and those that do will be given a more substantial playground to do so than anything else on the market. (Given theres Skill Paths on top of this as well as another big dimension to character building) Niche protection is stupid and an unnecessary constraint when you want the game to be permissive towards people playing what they want to play, and not what the game needs them to play. And its especially stupid because its a cooperative game and you shouldn't be coming into it from that kind of selfish perspective in the first place. You're not lesser if someone else can do the same thing. That tends to lead into the Prestige Class problem where people are eventually going to skip the required plot beats just so they can play what they want to play. Its one of those things where one has to be conscious of how people are playing the game and embrace it. Probably the wisest design decision from WOTC that they haven't repeated that mistake in two editions. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Symmetric Balance vs Asymmetric Balance.
Top