Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DarkKestral" data-source="post: 3750884" data-attributes="member: 40100">Oh, I get that bards, rangers, druids, and paladins are probably more archetypal than the D&D cleric. However, the cleric is what it is because nothing else can fit the niche. But I've always seen them as a bit of 'specialized roles within a more general specialty' type of deals. Part of it is that they cross 'role boundaries' a bit, so there is certainly reason for disagreement here. Paladins tank and heal. Druids in D&D can tank, heal, damage, or battlefield control. Rangers do skill-y stuff and can do the 'main fighter' role. Bards are battlefield controllers and skill specialists.Ultimately, you have to make a stand on where to be on the classless->permanently single-role with pre-defined abilities spectrum as well as the level -> non-level spectrum. They both have their advantages. Heavily specific class systems with a level basis are great for pick up and play character design, but lack in the ability to always emulate a given character idea well. Classless, level-less systems are great for designing characters 'to spec' but are prone to being fiddly. (Roundedness or the lack thereof can be a problem for either type, so I don't consider that a valid concern for one group or another. All four types can exhibit a distinct lack of 'niche protection' or have a design which often breaks 'niche boundaries'. One is easier to break niches, but it suffers from a lack of character roundedness in a different fashion, in that characters are usually built to maximize effectiveness and can do it a lot more effectively.)</blockquote>

Verification