Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7101537" data-attributes="member: 996">D&amp;D-style Clerics and wizards, and the distinction between D&amp;D Sorcerers and D&amp;D Wizards, and D&amp;D Paladins &amp; Rangers, for that matter, are not recognizable without some prior exposure to D&amp;D - Bards and, especially, Druids are pushing it without some prior exposure to Celtic mythology.&nbsp; (Ironically, while the 5e Ranger apparently flails for any sort of coherent identity, 'ranger' does conjure up things to the non-D&amp;Der not entirely inconsistent with it - guiding people through the wilderness, commando actions, pursuing a quary, etc - even if it's via Rangers of the 'Army,' 'Park' and 'Lone' variety as much or more than the Strider archetype). So, no, the first priority was evoking the classic game, and classes did that.&nbsp; Two classes went ahead and evoked the less-classic 3.5, but one of them didn't go all that well.&nbsp; :shrug:&nbsp;What's not to appeal to veteran and returning players in the PH?&nbsp; The classes are mostly familiar from the TSR era, but for two variant Mages from the d20 SRD era.&nbsp; 'Veteran' in the sense of system masters?&nbsp; Turn on feats &amp; MCing.&nbsp;A very small grain.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />&nbsp;The Monk was in 1e, as were Assassins, 1e OA had ninjas and Ki and whatnot. Dragonborn evoke the Draconians of 2e.&nbsp; Concentration and HD are very traditional labels, even if there's some less-traditional nuance or functionality to them in 5e.&nbsp;I vaguely remember talk of 'what if there were a 'Druidic Paladin' or 'Nature Paladin' back in the day.&nbsp; And the Sorcerer (and Warlock) in 3.x was a direct outgrowth of dissatisfaction with Vancian that - albeit mostly in the form of 'mana'/spell-point variants - went all the way back, too.But, yes, Inspiration sticks out like sore thumb, just kinda tacked on.&nbsp; (ouch, painful mixed metaphor, that)There a very few new-ish things in 5e, but overwhelmingly &amp; intentionally, it evokes the classic game.&nbsp; If it didn't evoke it thoroughly enough, they'd be burning PHs on YouTube.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7101537, member: 996"] D&D-style Clerics and wizards, and the distinction between D&D Sorcerers and D&D Wizards, and D&D Paladins & Rangers, for that matter, are not recognizable without some prior exposure to D&D - Bards and, especially, Druids are pushing it without some prior exposure to Celtic mythology. (Ironically, while the 5e Ranger apparently flails for any sort of coherent identity, 'ranger' does conjure up things to the non-D&Der not entirely inconsistent with it - guiding people through the wilderness, commando actions, pursuing a quary, etc - even if it's via Rangers of the 'Army,' 'Park' and 'Lone' variety as much or more than the Strider archetype). So, no, the first priority was evoking the classic game, and classes did that. Two classes went ahead and evoked the less-classic 3.5, but one of them didn't go all that well. :shrug: What's not to appeal to veteran and returning players in the PH? The classes are mostly familiar from the TSR era, but for two variant Mages from the d20 SRD era. 'Veteran' in the sense of system masters? Turn on feats & MCing. A very small grain. ;) The Monk was in 1e, as were Assassins, 1e OA had ninjas and Ki and whatnot. Dragonborn evoke the Draconians of 2e. Concentration and HD are very traditional labels, even if there's some less-traditional nuance or functionality to them in 5e. I vaguely remember talk of 'what if there were a 'Druidic Paladin' or 'Nature Paladin' back in the day. And the Sorcerer (and Warlock) in 3.x was a direct outgrowth of dissatisfaction with Vancian that - albeit mostly in the form of 'mana'/spell-point variants - went all the way back, too. But, yes, Inspiration sticks out like sore thumb, just kinda tacked on. (ouch, painful mixed metaphor, that) There a very few new-ish things in 5e, but overwhelmingly & intentionally, it evokes the classic game. If it didn't evoke it thoroughly enough, they'd be burning PHs on YouTube. [/QUOTE]

Verification