Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
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!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Two quick thoughts about all these new fangled base classes . . .
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Storm Raven" data-source="post: 3265358" data-attributes="member: 307"><p>I don't know. looking at it, it seems like it would work just fine converted to a feat tree aimed at characters with BAB requirements and so on.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Is niche protection that important? If you pare down the classes to a handful, and then give reasonably balanced characters options to select from as they advance, doubling up on abilities will likely be self-defeating anyway. Besides, what stops people from stepping on each other's niche's right now other than not playing the same class? How is avoiding playing the same class any different than taking different character options?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I think that if you want to make the overpowered fighter/caster type combinations of earlier editions, then you are right. if you want to make characters who are good facsimiles of the semi-caster classes that we have had floating around, then I think you are wrong. What are the paladin and ranger other than slighty different versions of a warrior/caster combination? Why do they need to be defined classes rather than simply multiclasses with differing feat choices? really, when you boil characters down, they amount to one of the following three things or some combination thereof: Spellcaster, Warrior, or Skillmonkey.</p><p></p><p>Where I think 3e missed the boat was when it didn't recognize this and use the robust multiclassing, skill and feat system to take care of all of these combinations and permutations that are represented by the plethora of base classes. Sure, in 1e or 2e, where this sort of system wasn't in place, then there could be a reaon for this, but then you get into the point where you have things like the "Sentinel" class, and the "Bandit" class and the "Huntsman" class and so on, each with some minor schtick that they brought to the table. I say the game should dump this sort of thing and make a small number of base classes customizable to accomplish the same goal.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Storm Raven, post: 3265358, member: 307"] I don't know. looking at it, it seems like it would work just fine converted to a feat tree aimed at characters with BAB requirements and so on. Is niche protection that important? If you pare down the classes to a handful, and then give reasonably balanced characters options to select from as they advance, doubling up on abilities will likely be self-defeating anyway. Besides, what stops people from stepping on each other's niche's right now other than not playing the same class? How is avoiding playing the same class any different than taking different character options? I think that if you want to make the overpowered fighter/caster type combinations of earlier editions, then you are right. if you want to make characters who are good facsimiles of the semi-caster classes that we have had floating around, then I think you are wrong. What are the paladin and ranger other than slighty different versions of a warrior/caster combination? Why do they need to be defined classes rather than simply multiclasses with differing feat choices? really, when you boil characters down, they amount to one of the following three things or some combination thereof: Spellcaster, Warrior, or Skillmonkey. Where I think 3e missed the boat was when it didn't recognize this and use the robust multiclassing, skill and feat system to take care of all of these combinations and permutations that are represented by the plethora of base classes. Sure, in 1e or 2e, where this sort of system wasn't in place, then there could be a reaon for this, but then you get into the point where you have things like the "Sentinel" class, and the "Bandit" class and the "Huntsman" class and so on, each with some minor schtick that they brought to the table. I say the game should dump this sort of thing and make a small number of base classes customizable to accomplish the same goal. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Two quick thoughts about all these new fangled base classes . . .
Top