Unearthed Arcana Unearthed Arcana Fighter: Samurai, Sharpshooter, Arcane Archer & Knight

I'm getting, like, unhealthy amounts of mad, clicking on that broken link.

 

[RotGrub]

Knight is a background in the PHB. Then their is the fighter Subclass Purple Dragon Knight in the SCAG. In the PHB Paladins are refered to as Knights in the fluff and their powers seem to back that up. So the question becomes how many Knights can dance on the head of a pin.

Exactly, the designers have jumped the shark with this edition too. This is exactly what happened in 4e with the Vampire Vampire Vampire (race, class, theme). LMAO! so sad.

IMO, this is what happens when you don't fire your old design team who failed you.

 

[RotGrub]

That would be literally every element in the game, as no style of play is shared by everyone.

There certainly are styles of play shared by people.

Which is why we should see far more optional rules than what we currently have.

With that said, I think it's very easy for designers to identify gamey dissonant mechanics and make them optional.

 

[MechaTarrasque]

It's been a step that Mearls hinted at for a while, being dissatisfied with the Current fighter subclasses for being defined by their mechanics only, rather than having a flavour of their own like every other class.

I don't agree it was necessary to start having fighter subclasses based on flavour rather than mechanics (As the fighter's been the traditional go-to class for every conceivable fighting archetype; it's going to be a *pain* to make a subclass for every single possible fictional archetype the fighter has to fill) but I do kind of see what Mearls is trying to do naming these things "knight" and "Samurai".

In previous editions, fighter+fluff (+mechanics that were looking for a good home)=new class, so fighter+fluff (+mechanics that are looking for a good home)=new subclass isn't really new.

 

[Sacrosanct]

That would be literally every element in the game, as no style of play is shared by everyone.

But some are a lot more popular than others, and/or are core parts of what makes D&D D&D. Not all preferences are equal.

 

[TwoSix]

With that said, I think it's very easy for designers to identify gamey dissonant mechanics and make them optional.

It's UA. How much more optional do you want it to be?

Or you could just say "No 4e mechanics in 5e, those are bad."

 

[Colder]

Y'all that don't like the subclasses because "they should be backgrounds:" what are your feelings on the Rogue subclasses Thief and Assassin? Those were in the PHB and actually are both the same background (criminal). Do they get a pass?

 

[cbwjm]

People complaining about the names knight and samurai, do you complain about the names thief & assassin as well? Do they mean that no one else can steal from others or kill for money?

The names are just that, names. You can still be a knight in shining armour without taking the fighter's knight subclass.

Sent from my SM-G925I using EN World mobile app

 

[cbwjm]

Y'all that don't like the subclasses because "they should be backgrounds:" what are your feelings on the Rogue subclasses Thief and Assassin? Those were in the PHB and actually are both the same background (criminal). Do they get a pass?

Aw man, now I'm going to look silly for saying the same thing straight after you

Sent from my SM-G925I using EN World mobile app

 

[Colder]

Aw man, now I'm going to look silly for saying the same thing straight after you

Sent from my SM-G925I using EN World mobile app

We'll just say we co-authored it.

 

[Elderbrain]

Y'all that don't like the subclasses because "they should be backgrounds:" what are your feelings on the Rogue subclasses Thief and Assassin? Those were in the PHB and actually are both the same background (criminal). Do they get a pass?

... It's not quite the same thing. You can be a criminal without being either a thief or an assassin. Also, taking the "criminal" background does not give you the thieving skills or assassin skills (death attack, etc.) of actually taking the Rogue archtypes in question. Whereas there already exists a perfectly good knight and samurai in the PH, (i.e. Battle Master for Samurai, and maybe Champion for a Knight, or as one prefers) notwithstanding that it isn't CALLED that. It's like the situation with ninjas: you could play a ninja by playing a Way of Shadow Monk (the PH actually suggests this) or a Rogue Assassin, or multiclassing. No need for a specifically-named "Ninja" archtype.