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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="The Shadow" data-source="post: 5893052" data-attributes="member: 16760">Now see, I just don't think something like that belongs as a base class.  It's not a common fantasy archetype at all.  Nor does it sound like something a 1st level character would be - like shadowdancer, it sounds more like something you'd eventually become.  And to be a little more nitpicky, there is nothing about the name 'assassin' that screams shadow powers at me.[MENTION=6688937]Ratskinner[/MENTION]:  I don't know about the 'superclasses' - 2e didn't really do much of anything with them, as I recall.  The game would have played exactly the same if you just ignored the whole subclass business.  However, you're right about the druid - it really was just another specialty priest.  That could happen again, I don't know.  Wildshape could be turned into a spell or series of spells easily enough - and I think that actually might make more sense than a class ability.Exactly!  Turning an old class into a theme opens up tons and tons of new options!  The trick is, the class in question can't have too many unique abilities, otherwise it won't 'fit' into a single theme - and as someone mentioned, it would suck to have to wait X levels to gather the themes for what you could have done as a single class in the past.Ranger, Barbarian, and Assassin should work fine as themes and/or backgrounds, so far as I can see at this point.  How many others, I don't know.I disagree about the latter - customisable clerics fit just dandy into a monotheism.  I've done it up brown in one of my campaigns.  The key is that you have different orders of priests devoted to a particular aspect of the Divine Nature.</blockquote>

Verification