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: Poll 6: Archetypes and Fighters/Warriors NOW WITH EXTREME FIRST DRAFT!
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="Lanefan" data-source="post: 9175746" data-attributes="member: 29398"><p>To be honest, I'm not quite sure what you mean by 'archetype' here.</p><p></p><p>To me, an archetype is the (stereo)typical representation of something e.g. the scholarly old wizard or the lithe Elven Rogue or the strong-arm thick-head Part-Orc warrior. And for me, an archetype isn't something to start with, it's something to build toward over the long term. For example, you can't be a scholarly old wizard without first having been a less-scholarly young wizard; and the levels from 1-to-capstone represent the journey from one state to the other.</p><p></p><p>But you seem to be using the term to mean (or as a substitute for) sub-classes. Please clarify.</p><p></p><p>Most of those should be separate classes right out the gate.</p><p></p><p>Flat hard no.</p><p></p><p>D10 hit dice, yes. I'm not a fan of the HD mechanic as used in 5e in any way, but a short rest should give back a few h.p. (maybe a dice the size of your level e.g. a 5th-level Fighter gets back d5 h.p. on a short rest).</p><p></p><p>That's a much bigger can of worms and probably worth its own entire poll; because it also opens up rest and recovery rates, ability refresh rates, and a bunch of other variables.</p><p></p><p>Fighters should be able to become proficient with any weapon (i.e. they can choose any weapon they like) but the number of weapons you can be proficient in should be very limited a la 1e (and even more limited for non-warrior classes).</p><p></p><p>Specialization with a proficient weapon? Yes please. What I'd like to end up with are warriors that are vaguely decent (but not perfect) with anything they pick up, quite good with a very few proficient weapons, and amazing with the one weapon they really focus on.</p><p></p><p>Archer should be its own class. Swashbuckler should be its own class. The styles used should be baked in to those classes and emphasized there, while a generalist Fighter can only learn the basics of any given style(s).</p><p></p><p>Keep it short, keep it simple. Fighters should neither be complicated to generate (or build - hate that term) nor to play.</p><p></p><p>Increased crit ranges, as in critting more often? No. Crits (and fumbles) shouldn't be predictable.</p><p></p><p>Increased crit effects, such that when a Fighter does crit it packs a bigger punch? Hell yeah. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> Maybe when a Fighter crits the Fighter's level is added to the damage and then all the damage is multiplied (none of this rolling another die, just add it all up and double it).</p><p></p><p>Different elements of this idea (which I like) could - and I think should - be applied to different classes. Fighters could get the march-without-exhaustion piece, Rogues could get the needs-less-sleep piece (they're trained to sleep lightly), Monks could get the gain-a-new-sense ability, and so on.</p><p></p><p>No, mostly because I want social mechanics to largely come out altogether and this goes the other way.</p><p></p><p>I'd say this kind of thing should be baked in - if you're a Fighter, your knowledge of such things is likely to be better than that of the average Joe. That said, "better" doesn't mean "perfect"; and it'd be easy to overdo this.</p><p></p><p>Here's one of the few places where I support a bit of front-loading: Fighters should gain extra attacks (at no penalty) at 4th-7th-10th but only if using a proficient weapon, and then stop there. I could even be talked into 2nd-5th-8th on this one for their specialized weapon only.</p><p></p><p>Other classes should also gain extra attacks but much more slowly and maybe not so evenly-spaced e.g. Clerics might get them at 6th-15th while Thieves get them at 8th-12th and Mage types never get them at all.</p><p></p><p>As for what else Fighters should get? The one thing that leaps to mind is the cap should come off as to how many magic items they can use, i.e. Fighters get to ignore attunement limits. That way, high-level Fighters who have accumulated some tinker toys are better positioned to keep up with the casters.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 9175746, member: 29398"] To be honest, I'm not quite sure what you mean by 'archetype' here. To me, an archetype is the (stereo)typical representation of something e.g. the scholarly old wizard or the lithe Elven Rogue or the strong-arm thick-head Part-Orc warrior. And for me, an archetype isn't something to start with, it's something to build toward over the long term. For example, you can't be a scholarly old wizard without first having been a less-scholarly young wizard; and the levels from 1-to-capstone represent the journey from one state to the other. But you seem to be using the term to mean (or as a substitute for) sub-classes. Please clarify. Most of those should be separate classes right out the gate. Flat hard no. D10 hit dice, yes. I'm not a fan of the HD mechanic as used in 5e in any way, but a short rest should give back a few h.p. (maybe a dice the size of your level e.g. a 5th-level Fighter gets back d5 h.p. on a short rest). That's a much bigger can of worms and probably worth its own entire poll; because it also opens up rest and recovery rates, ability refresh rates, and a bunch of other variables. Fighters should be able to become proficient with any weapon (i.e. they can choose any weapon they like) but the number of weapons you can be proficient in should be very limited a la 1e (and even more limited for non-warrior classes). Specialization with a proficient weapon? Yes please. What I'd like to end up with are warriors that are vaguely decent (but not perfect) with anything they pick up, quite good with a very few proficient weapons, and amazing with the one weapon they really focus on. Archer should be its own class. Swashbuckler should be its own class. The styles used should be baked in to those classes and emphasized there, while a generalist Fighter can only learn the basics of any given style(s). Keep it short, keep it simple. Fighters should neither be complicated to generate (or build - hate that term) nor to play. Increased crit ranges, as in critting more often? No. Crits (and fumbles) shouldn't be predictable. Increased crit effects, such that when a Fighter does crit it packs a bigger punch? Hell yeah. :) Maybe when a Fighter crits the Fighter's level is added to the damage and then all the damage is multiplied (none of this rolling another die, just add it all up and double it). Different elements of this idea (which I like) could - and I think should - be applied to different classes. Fighters could get the march-without-exhaustion piece, Rogues could get the needs-less-sleep piece (they're trained to sleep lightly), Monks could get the gain-a-new-sense ability, and so on. No, mostly because I want social mechanics to largely come out altogether and this goes the other way. I'd say this kind of thing should be baked in - if you're a Fighter, your knowledge of such things is likely to be better than that of the average Joe. That said, "better" doesn't mean "perfect"; and it'd be easy to overdo this. Here's one of the few places where I support a bit of front-loading: Fighters should gain extra attacks (at no penalty) at 4th-7th-10th but only if using a proficient weapon, and then stop there. I could even be talked into 2nd-5th-8th on this one for their specialized weapon only. Other classes should also gain extra attacks but much more slowly and maybe not so evenly-spaced e.g. Clerics might get them at 6th-15th while Thieves get them at 8th-12th and Mage types never get them at all. As for what else Fighters should get? The one thing that leaps to mind is the cap should come off as to how many magic items they can use, i.e. Fighters get to ignore attunement limits. That way, high-level Fighters who have accumulated some tinker toys are better positioned to keep up with the casters. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Vote Up a 5e-alike: Poll 6: Archetypes and Fighters/Warriors NOW WITH EXTREME FIRST DRAFT!
Top