Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ZombieRoboNinja" data-source="post: 5947179" data-attributes="member: 54843">In the Redditt thread yesterday, Mike Mearls said that when they're actually trying to determine if e.g. a thief or illusionist is a class or a theme, it partly comes down to just how &quot;thick&quot; the mechanics are, and whether they'd fit in a theme. (He used monks as an example whose unarmed and unarmored fighting specialization would probably be too complex to fit into a theme.)I like Gorgoroth and Hussar's approach here, and I think it matches what WOTC has to do (in broad strokes): recognize which concepts are iconic enough to merit being a class, and then design the mechanics to make that work. One idea for paladins that Pathfinder kind of stole from WoW is the idea of auras: because paladins are so inspirational, they passively enhance nearby allies (within 10' or so) in a variety of ways. (For example, you could make nearby allies immune to fear and charm effects, or make them deal more damage to evil enemies.) In Pathfinder, I think the auras stack, but you could just as easily go WOW-style and have the paladin switch between auras as a free action on his turn. Between holy weapons, smite, and auras, that's probably enough mechanical oomph to make an exciting class, which could be further narrowed depending on theme, race, and background. What are the unique ranger mechanics we can come up with? Favored enemies, animal companions (bleh), and tracking are the biggest in 3e, I'd say. My problem is that of these three, tracking is the only one I associate with actual rangers from fiction (Aragorn, Drizzt, etc). I can also see rangers as masters of their terrain, setting traps and gliding through rough terrain with aplomb.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ZombieRoboNinja, post: 5947179, member: 54843"] In the Redditt thread yesterday, Mike Mearls said that when they're actually trying to determine if e.g. a thief or illusionist is a class or a theme, it partly comes down to just how "thick" the mechanics are, and whether they'd fit in a theme. (He used monks as an example whose unarmed and unarmored fighting specialization would probably be too complex to fit into a theme.) I like Gorgoroth and Hussar's approach here, and I think it matches what WOTC has to do (in broad strokes): recognize which concepts are iconic enough to merit being a class, and then design the mechanics to make that work. One idea for paladins that Pathfinder kind of stole from WoW is the idea of auras: because paladins are so inspirational, they passively enhance nearby allies (within 10' or so) in a variety of ways. (For example, you could make nearby allies immune to fear and charm effects, or make them deal more damage to evil enemies.) In Pathfinder, I think the auras stack, but you could just as easily go WOW-style and have the paladin switch between auras as a free action on his turn. Between holy weapons, smite, and auras, that's probably enough mechanical oomph to make an exciting class, which could be further narrowed depending on theme, race, and background. What are the unique ranger mechanics we can come up with? Favored enemies, animal companions (bleh), and tracking are the biggest in 3e, I'd say. My problem is that of these three, tracking is the only one I associate with actual rangers from fiction (Aragorn, Drizzt, etc). I can also see rangers as masters of their terrain, setting traps and gliding through rough terrain with aplomb. [/QUOTE]

Verification