NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 6193250" data-attributes="member: 4937">I presume that this is about D&D Next?Well, I consider D&D Next to be vaporware at this point but my preferences would obviously be informed by my current solutions on this problem.In general, I consider the adventurer/explorer archetype to be different than the detective/mastermind archetype which is in turn different than the rogue/trickster archetype.   They have in common that they are skillful at mundane task to the point of eventually being superhuman, but it is not at all clear to me that Sherlock Holmes, Van Helsing, Indiana Jones, Jack Sparrow, Batman, and some cat burglar are all the same class - and that's before we mention Robin Hood or Aragorn son of Arathorn.   I mean, they could be I suppose, but that would be for me an overly broad class.In my current game I've gotten the archetypes broken into two groups:RoguesExplorersRogues differ from explorers in being fundamentally about stealth, trickery, deceit, evasion.  Explorers on the other hand are fundamentally about endurance, movement, diplomacy, and knowledge.   Explorer is a more robust fighter like class.  They are tough and hardy.   Rogues are nimble and quick.   Of course, there is a continuum here and the two concepts have good synergy, but if the concept lies somewhere in the middle - say a Pirate - then this suggests a multiclass Explorer/Rogue.I'm presently lacking a Detective/Mastermind type class, but I'm working on one.   It's a challenging concept to create and be satisfying to both the player and the DM while useful in and out of combat situations.   The ultimate class is likely to be the PC version of the NPC expert class, but as of yet I've never seen this done really well despite a lot of trying by a lot of skilled rules smiths.As for a group, I think of all of these as belonging to the 'Skillful' group, as opposed to a 'Martial' group - Fighter, Fanatic, and Hunter - which are distinguished by the focus of their combat abilities, or the 'Mystic' group - Shaman, Cleric, Wizard, Sorcerer - which are distinguished by the source of their magical power.   I also have a 'Champion' class that lies for me conceptually half way been the Martial and Mystic groups and a 'Bard' class that is halfway between the 'Skillful' and the 'Mystic' groups, and a couple other classes that I consider rather campaign specific and not generalists.   I suppose you could equally argue that 'Explorer' is halfway between skillful and martial.I'm pretty sure I don't see the 'group' framework as a really useful way to think about things.  What value are you really adding?</blockquote>

Verification