Unearthed Arcana makes an unexpected return (the last one was back in May) with a three-page PDF containing two subclasses -- Path of the Wild Soul for the barbarian, and Way of the Astral Self for the monk.
May I interest you in the Hero System?
I cannot blame it on that one... but honestly that is my same point of view and I might have never come back to D&D if not for 4th edition (in which classes finally made sense to me) it was a toss up at the time over to Dresden Files or Hero GamesWhile I understand that other people play differently, I’ve never viewed classes as something that actually exists inside the game fiction. They’re always just packages of (hopefully) balanced ability progression that can be reskinned or adjusted to fit the actual character concept. I think I was exposed to the 2e DMG “create-a-class system” at too formative an age.![]()
Next month: the Peanut Summoner (Fighter) and the Shampoo Eater (Druid).
I did these numbers before, but excluding B/X, we get the following, allowing editions to get credit for the year they are released AND the year the next edition is released:
OD&D 1974 - 1978* (5 years)
1e 1978 - 1989 (12 years)
2e 1989 - 2000 (12 years)
3e 2000 - 2008 (9 years)
4e 2008 - 2014** (7 years)
5e 2014 - ???
*We will use 1978 as the dividing line between OD&D and 1e, as that is the year of publication of the PHB; the MM was published a year prior, and the DMG a year later.
**Unlike prior editions, the announcement of, and extensive public playtesting of, "Next" arguably ended the cycle in 2012, but I don't want to get into that debate.
So there are a number of ways to look at this-
Average age of editions: 9 years
Average age of editions (absent OD&D): 10 years
Or you could say that since 2e , the editions have been getting shorter, and estimate that 5e has an expected life of 5-6 years.
In the alternative, you could argue discontinuities, and say that OD&D+1e+2e is one system, 3e is another system, and 4e is another system, in which case it would be shorter.
Or, you could point to WoTC saying they want the product to remain "evergreen" (similar to 1e/2e, or maybe Monopoly) and posit that 5e has a multi-decade run.
Personally, my best guess is we will either see something for the 50th anniversary (2024)***, and if not, then they are really going for the "evergreen".
***In terms of a new edition; I expect and hope that they will have reprints of some old classics available!
Yes, the context matters.
However, I don't tink the context is Eberron for a very simple reason: Mention of the Feywild. The Eberron equivalent is called something different. If you where writing something for a specific setting you wouldn't namecheck something that didn't exist in that setting.
Given the level of whackyess of exploding flumphs, I think Rick and Morty is a more probable context.
Heck, the Centaur/Minotaur article actively provided a plausible "you know, for Greek Myth settings!" flavor text.
sigh
Yes, it is true that Barbarians, like everything else in 5e, is getting DA MAGIC.
Just because something is already a little bad, doesn't mean we can't complain when they make it worse, right?
Up next-
The Swordcerer. It's the new melee sorcerer subclass, that uses all the spellslots for melee attacks.
I swear, I feel like WoTC is like those people who gave us peanut butter + jelly in a jar. Some things you WANT separate.
This is just ridiculous, a Flumph, really? Whatever happened to Barbarians hating magic?
The longer I play D&D the more its seems that classes are just a bunch of powers/classes features.
They should just give players a race and a set number of points per level with which you can buy whatever features you want.
I didn't think about it before, but you're right. The mechanics would work fairly well for a wilder-type. And the Astral Monk needs even less reskinning to make it a psionic character subclass.