RefinedBean
First Post
EDIT: I can't give MR any xp, someone help please?
Covered.
All this talk makes me wish that the next edition of D&D is, at the very least, classless. I doubt that will ever happen, though.
EDIT: I can't give MR any xp, someone help please?
While maybe not entirely classless I wouldn't be surprised if we saw what makes up a class get divided up into multiple different aspects we pick from at character creation. Sorta a "make-your-own" class concept.Covered.
All this talk makes me wish that the next edition of D&D is, at the very least, classless. I doubt that will ever happen, though.
All this talk makes me wish that the next edition of D&D is, at the very least, classless. I doubt that will ever happen, though.
While maybe not entirely classless I wouldn't be surprised if we saw what makes up a class get divided up into multiple different aspects we pick from at character creation. Sorta a "make-your-own" class concept.
See, to me, classes are part of what makes D&D D&D. I'd hate for it to go classless.
This is the limitation of class-based systems. As soon as you start taking PC characteristics and grouping them into packages, you're going to run into situations where a certain packet of features comes saddled with one or more features that don't fit what you're looking for. The two solutions are 1) come up with a class for each concept that repackages abilities in exactly the way you want; or 2) use a classless, point-buy system where all of the abilities and features come ala carte. 3e is less restrictive than many other systems because a good chunk of each character is "buy system" based (skills, feats, freely multiclassed levels, prestige classes, etc.), but it's still more limited than a completely point-based system that doesn't use classes at all.
or 3) use something like the generic classes from Unearthed Arcana
Pick your class abilities, pick your skills, pick your good and bad saves. Only BAB, number of good saves, HD, number of skill points, and spell ability is determined by class.
Ourph said:As soon as you start taking PC characteristics and grouping them into packages, you're going to run into situations where a certain packet of features comes saddled with one or more features that don't fit what you're looking for.
Until such activities are overshadowed by magic, sure.I don't care much for the whole rogue archetype in its recent incarnations at all.
I like the concept of a stealthy scout type of character who is good at "thief" type technical skills. I think that such characters can be valuable to a party.
The archetype of a quick, agile, deadly, stabbity-stabber is hardly unique to D&D. The D&Dism is conflating that kind of combatant with the non-combat role of scouting, traps, and pick pocketing.What I don't like is the concept of a melee combatant that thats constantly fighting "concealed" without the aid of magic or that appears to be trained to inflict greater damage with weaponry than the martially specialized fighter.
Why does the fighter have to be the clumsy thug while the rogue gets to be the shrewd combatant that actually knows how to employ weapons to thier best effect? There are of course game balance issues but are any of them useful for anything other than justifying the existence of this archetype?