Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9364469" data-attributes="member: 6790260">The main problem with this design is that it forces all of those "branching" classes to be saddled with the core mechanics of whatever they've branched off of, and that can be an enormous design burden. The Fighter, for example, is incapable of being a real Warlord replacement, for the same reason that it's incapable of being a real Wizard replacement despite having the Eldritch Knight subclass. There's just too much in the core class.But if you strip those four core classes down to essentially nothing--so that they actually can accommodate 16+ classes' worth of design space--it becomes hard to justify calling them "classes" at all. Like...if you're actually free to explore whatever interesting design directions are worth exploring, how much can that base class even actually matter?I get the interest in designing things for newer players. That's very important. But if you design the whole game so that everything is always geared for new players without regard for experienced ones, you get a game that has incredibly high churn--people get in quickly, do everything there is to do, and then get out quickly. It's extremely important to engage with all four critical parts of your audience: neophytes, casuals, ultra-serious hardcore players, and what I'll call "midcore" players who want enough to sink their teeth into but aren't deeply invested into charop or writing 10-page backstories.But you know what else is important? Making sure that the things you design for new players aren't inferior to the things you design for long-term invested players. Supporting a wide range of archetypes, so players can do what they truly love, even if it asks more of them to do so. Supporting a wide range of playstyles. Etc."X classes that branch into Y" is one of those ideas that sounds amazing in the abstract; all the benefits of 16 (or whatever) classes, with none of the "bloat" or "excess". But in practice, it's an extremely difficult needle to thread, and it often fails before it even gets off the ground.For me, this is part of why I completely disagree with the stereotypically antagonistic response to having roles and power sources. Roles help people pick classes based on what they want to DO, as a player. Power sources help people pick classes based on what they want to BE, as a character. By making it so you can quickly, cleanly, and succinctly summarize a class's thematics and mechanics with a two-word phrase, or a two-sentence description if you want to be specific, you can easily communicate what players need to know.But of course, roles are "straightjackets" and oh so terrible for the game...</blockquote>

Verification