Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 9353066" data-attributes="member: 7006">For me it is the three &quot;generic&quot; classes that have no identity on their own-- IE &quot;narrative&quot; behind them.&nbsp; That being the Fighter, Rogue, and Sorcerer.All three of these classes are merely umbrella terms for their actual identities, which is all their subclasses.&nbsp; Their subclasses have identities and stories and narrative as to who they are and how they became what they are.&nbsp; But the classes themselves do not, in my opinion.&nbsp; (And heck, even two of the Fighter subclasses have no identity either-- the Champion and the Battlemaster.)Now people try and say the same thing about the Wizard, but I do not believe that is true.&nbsp; Because the Wizard class have a very definitive narrative on its own-- it is those spellcasters that have to scientifically learn the ins and outs of magic-- things that are so complicated that they have to write them down in spellbooks and can't even keep track of the magic in their heads... having to study and re-learn their magic every morning when they wake up.&nbsp; Learning how to cast magic is hard and the Wizards have to be very smart and very meticulous to acquire and use it.&nbsp; And they get all this magic learning how to tap into the leylines of arcane power called The Weave.&nbsp; And their subclasses do not change or redefine who Wizards are, they are merely different flavors of Wizards that tell us what types of magic they specialize in.&nbsp; That's a narrative and story.&nbsp; That's an identity to me.Whereas the Sorcerer class identity is merely &quot;innate magic&quot;.&nbsp; That's it.&nbsp; A Sorcerer has magic.&nbsp; But the class itself doesn't tell us what innate magic is or how they acquire it.&nbsp; Any narrative or flavor as to the type of magic they have or where it came from or how they tap into this magic all comes from their subclasses.&nbsp; So their subclasses have all the identity, but the class itself does not.&nbsp; A Wild Mage is a very flavorful sorcerer type.&nbsp; A Draconic sorcerer tells us all we need to know about what this character's story is.&nbsp; But Sorcerer itself?&nbsp; Nada.And as far as Fighters and Rogues... we all know that their identities come from their subclasses-- Samurai, Rune Knights, Assassins, Masterminds, Scouts, Cavaliers, Swashbucklers etc.&nbsp; Every single one of these archetypes could be a class entirely on their own (and many of them HAVE been so in the past), and the only reason they are not is because they all use the same game mechanics for ease-of-use.&nbsp; So they group all these former classes under two umbrella terms-- the Fighter and the Rogue-- and do what they do.&nbsp; But those umbrella terms are just generic and give us nothing about how they are on their own.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DEFCON 1, post: 9353066, member: 7006"] For me it is the three "generic" classes that have no identity on their own-- IE "narrative" behind them. That being the Fighter, Rogue, and Sorcerer. All three of these classes are merely umbrella terms for their actual identities, which is all their [I]subclasses[/I]. Their subclasses have identities and stories and narrative as to who they are and how they became what they are. But the classes themselves do not, in my opinion. (And heck, even two of the Fighter subclasses have no identity either-- the Champion and the Battlemaster.) Now people try and say the same thing about the Wizard, but I do not believe that is true. Because the Wizard class have a very definitive narrative on its own-- it is those spellcasters that have to scientifically learn the ins and outs of magic-- things that are so complicated that they have to write them down in spellbooks and can't even keep track of the magic in their heads... having to study and re-learn their magic every morning when they wake up. Learning how to cast magic is hard and the Wizards have to be very smart and very meticulous to acquire and use it. And they get all this magic learning how to tap into the leylines of arcane power called The Weave. And their subclasses do not change or redefine who Wizards are, they are merely different flavors of Wizards that tell us what types of magic they specialize in. That's a narrative and story. That's an identity to me. Whereas the Sorcerer class identity is merely "innate magic". That's it. A Sorcerer has magic. But the class itself doesn't tell us what innate magic is or how they acquire it. Any narrative or flavor as to the type of magic they have or where it came from or how they tap into this magic all comes from their subclasses. So their subclasses have all the identity, but the class itself does not. A Wild Mage is a very flavorful sorcerer type. A Draconic sorcerer tells us all we need to know about what this character's story is. But Sorcerer itself? Nada. And as far as Fighters and Rogues... we all know that their identities come from their subclasses-- Samurai, Rune Knights, Assassins, Masterminds, Scouts, Cavaliers, Swashbucklers etc. Every single one of these archetypes could be a class entirely on their own (and many of them HAVE been so in the past), and the only reason they are not is because they all use the same game mechanics for ease-of-use. So they group all these former classes under two umbrella terms-- the Fighter and the Rogue-- and do what they do. But those umbrella terms are just generic and give us nothing about how they are on their own. [/QUOTE]

Verification