Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 9147409" data-attributes="member: 6704184">I assume they were thinking of the playtest BM, which does get a skill, but it’s not like BM was the only subclass mentioned in the post I replied to. I am the white guy blinking meme. Subclass is part of class, not fracking separate from it. In 5e, some classes put large parts of what makes the class work into the subclasses. The sorcerer is practically inert sans subclass. Fighter subclasses are the bulk of a fighter’s mechanical representation of thier concept of what sort of warrior they are.    Meh. You already know how I feel about this supposed requirement in the base class in order for the class to attain “good design”.Okay. I guess we will still be having this argument in 2025. Like when I suggested a set of abilities that aren’t spells, like explicitly aren’t magical effects, but use a Spellcasting classes native spell slots to fuel them, and you specifically act like I’m taking a flamethrower to the whole concept of a spellless ranger?Nah. One need not wonder any such thing, any more than taking a couple levels of any other class.</blockquote>