Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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
*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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Vote Up a 5e-Alike: Fighter Draft 2, plus Archetypes (and a poll)
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="Quickleaf" data-source="post: 9194732" data-attributes="member: 20323"><p>Wow! Nice work so far [USER=6915329]@Faolyn[/USER] - you definitely have the tenacity needed for this sort of class design.</p><p></p><p>While I'm not part of the Vote-Up endeavor, I can offer my feedback on the core Warrior class that you are developing, with a focus on big picture / conceptual things. </p><p></p><p>I think you have a couple things working really well. I want to first call those out, and perhaps suggest ways you might intensify those aspects of design (if you're so inclined)...</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><strong>Origin as class feature</strong> – While I don't know how this would interact with Multiclassing (if that's a thing), it's wonderful flavor. If you want this to also have a mechanical impact on the character, that could be neat (Beyond the Wall's playbooks do this), e.g. skill proficiencies, certain default class info, starting gear – these could be influenced by rolls/choices on the Origin tables. That would be a very distinctive design direction differentiating what you're doing from 5e / 5e-alikes.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><strong>Fighting Styles with additional bonuses</strong> – This works nicely to deepen an early character choice. I have two thoughts: First, would be nice to see a dedicated Versatile weapon fighting style letting you use the weapon as a shield or somesuch. Second, bonuses to AC or Attack are valued higher in 5e than bonuses to damage – i.e. it's not a +1 AC or Attack = +1 Damage ratio. 1: 2 is probably more fair, and even that is not quite true at mid to higher levels.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><strong>Warrior Learnings</strong> – A nice bit of flavor! It does play oddly if, say, you have proficiency in History and Courtly Leanings... are you then applying 2x proficiency bonus? Narratively, it's also a bit confusing if, say, levels 1-3 deal with a borderlands scenario and the player decides to choose Courtly Leanings at 3rd level... what does that mean? But the idea of the warrior's story continuing to develop (and being reflected mechanically) beyond 1st level / archetype level is something I think would be worth exploring as a design choice.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><strong>Reputation</strong> – A great thing to include IMO, showcasing that skilled warriors in your system always have reputations - that's good implicit worldbuilding. Mechanically (1/rest advantage Charisma check) it kind of sucks, but conceptually I think it has lots of potential.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><strong>Inner Fire </strong>– The "Legendary Resistance" aspect of this feels right for a warrior. Just watch this feature's Check/Attack aspect in light of other Classes you design... e.g. I could see a Rogue / Expert feature that involves auto-succeeding on a check fighting for the same niche as Inner Fire.</li> </ul><p>Those are all strengths of the draft, from my perspective, and I think they're worth leaning into. OK, now I'll get into the stuff that I think may be problematic or need further thought...</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><strong>Maneuvers, so many maneuvers </strong>– You're not at LevelUp degree of maneuvers, but it's definitely a lot. This isn't necessarily a problem, but it does beg a question "Is this system intended to be more complex / involve more player character creation choices compared to a 5e baseline? Or is it intended to be less complex?" I'm not clear from this design, but I <em>think</em> you're aiming for a <em>slight</em> increase in complexity?</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><strong>Weapon Specialization</strong> – This exists in an ecosystem. If that ecosystem involves a player finding one or two magic weapons and being able to consistently rely on those in most scenes to bypass most monster resistances, Weapon Specialization is a perfect fit. However... if you're deviating from that assumption with a different ecosystem (e.g. wildly hacking monster resistances or magic weapons), then you may want to reconsider Weapon Specialization...for example "Bonded Weapon" can work similarly without requiring defining a type of weapon and simply being a specific weapon they've acquired.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><strong>Weapon Mastery </strong>– This relates to my point below about giving new things to warriors, but I wonder if the fantasy drawing people to continue playing a high level warrior who has mastered a weapon is "roll better damage dice"? Or is it more nuanced than that? There's nothing poorly designed here – it works totally fine and it's simple – but I think it's a good question to ask: Is this feature fulfilling the player fantasy we are trying to fulfill?</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><strong>Lack of new things at high levels </strong>– The weight of the NEW things (not improved existing things) a warrior can do after 9th level are really defined by your Martial Archetype. In this way, I see it repeating one of the flaws of the 5e Fighter class. Now, if you don't see that as a flaw, then you're totally fine, nothing to see here. If you do see that as a concern, however, it's worth interrogating whether you want all of the NEW stuff for high level warriors to be consolidated in Martial Archetypes AND whether your Martial Archetypes are actually giving NEW stuff.</li> </ul></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Quickleaf, post: 9194732, member: 20323"] Wow! Nice work so far [USER=6915329]@Faolyn[/USER] - you definitely have the tenacity needed for this sort of class design. While I'm not part of the Vote-Up endeavor, I can offer my feedback on the core Warrior class that you are developing, with a focus on big picture / conceptual things. I think you have a couple things working really well. I want to first call those out, and perhaps suggest ways you might intensify those aspects of design (if you're so inclined)... [LIST] [*][B]Origin as class feature[/B] – While I don't know how this would interact with Multiclassing (if that's a thing), it's wonderful flavor. If you want this to also have a mechanical impact on the character, that could be neat (Beyond the Wall's playbooks do this), e.g. skill proficiencies, certain default class info, starting gear – these could be influenced by rolls/choices on the Origin tables. That would be a very distinctive design direction differentiating what you're doing from 5e / 5e-alikes. [*][B]Fighting Styles with additional bonuses[/B] – This works nicely to deepen an early character choice. I have two thoughts: First, would be nice to see a dedicated Versatile weapon fighting style letting you use the weapon as a shield or somesuch. Second, bonuses to AC or Attack are valued higher in 5e than bonuses to damage – i.e. it's not a +1 AC or Attack = +1 Damage ratio. 1: 2 is probably more fair, and even that is not quite true at mid to higher levels. [*][B]Warrior Learnings[/B] – A nice bit of flavor! It does play oddly if, say, you have proficiency in History and Courtly Leanings... are you then applying 2x proficiency bonus? Narratively, it's also a bit confusing if, say, levels 1-3 deal with a borderlands scenario and the player decides to choose Courtly Leanings at 3rd level... what does that mean? But the idea of the warrior's story continuing to develop (and being reflected mechanically) beyond 1st level / archetype level is something I think would be worth exploring as a design choice. [*][B]Reputation[/B] – A great thing to include IMO, showcasing that skilled warriors in your system always have reputations - that's good implicit worldbuilding. Mechanically (1/rest advantage Charisma check) it kind of sucks, but conceptually I think it has lots of potential. [*][B]Inner Fire [/B]– The "Legendary Resistance" aspect of this feels right for a warrior. Just watch this feature's Check/Attack aspect in light of other Classes you design... e.g. I could see a Rogue / Expert feature that involves auto-succeeding on a check fighting for the same niche as Inner Fire. [/LIST] Those are all strengths of the draft, from my perspective, and I think they're worth leaning into. OK, now I'll get into the stuff that I think may be problematic or need further thought... [LIST] [*][B]Maneuvers, so many maneuvers [/B]– You're not at LevelUp degree of maneuvers, but it's definitely a lot. This isn't necessarily a problem, but it does beg a question "Is this system intended to be more complex / involve more player character creation choices compared to a 5e baseline? Or is it intended to be less complex?" I'm not clear from this design, but I [I]think[/I] you're aiming for a [I]slight[/I] increase in complexity? [*][B]Weapon Specialization[/B] – This exists in an ecosystem. If that ecosystem involves a player finding one or two magic weapons and being able to consistently rely on those in most scenes to bypass most monster resistances, Weapon Specialization is a perfect fit. However... if you're deviating from that assumption with a different ecosystem (e.g. wildly hacking monster resistances or magic weapons), then you may want to reconsider Weapon Specialization...for example "Bonded Weapon" can work similarly without requiring defining a type of weapon and simply being a specific weapon they've acquired. [*][B]Weapon Mastery [/B]– This relates to my point below about giving new things to warriors, but I wonder if the fantasy drawing people to continue playing a high level warrior who has mastered a weapon is "roll better damage dice"? Or is it more nuanced than that? There's nothing poorly designed here – it works totally fine and it's simple – but I think it's a good question to ask: Is this feature fulfilling the player fantasy we are trying to fulfill? [*][B]Lack of new things at high levels [/B]– The weight of the NEW things (not improved existing things) a warrior can do after 9th level are really defined by your Martial Archetype. In this way, I see it repeating one of the flaws of the 5e Fighter class. Now, if you don't see that as a flaw, then you're totally fine, nothing to see here. If you do see that as a concern, however, it's worth interrogating whether you want all of the NEW stuff for high level warriors to be consolidated in Martial Archetypes AND whether your Martial Archetypes are actually giving NEW stuff. [/LIST] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Vote Up a 5e-Alike: Fighter Draft 2, plus Archetypes (and a poll)
Top