Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Crimson Longinus" data-source="post: 9154869" data-attributes="member: 7025508">Assuming roughly 5ish core rules instead of a total redo from scratch.Definitely in:Fighter. We of course have our trusty fighter, embodying a soldier or trained martial combatant that is fighting with skill. This can also include being a master of war on broader sense, such as tactics and inspiring others. There should be a bespoke subclass that focuses on those areas. Barbarian. We keep barbarian as a separate class. It is distinct enough from fighter being a primal and and not relying on armour. Spiritual side of the class could be emphasised more for further distinction. Rogue. This is  conceptually and mechanically solid class and of course is included. Monk. With its unarmed fighting and spiritual focus this is a class that best works as its own full class. The class should learn more on the mystical powers, perhaps even going as far as making it a half caster. Cleric. We could also call this priest. This is a solid concept and has a clear mechanical role. However move a way from bit from the Christian inspired crusader aspect to make representing more varied priestly concepts easier. And whilst it should be decent in melee, let's leave heavy armour to the fighter; light as default, some subclasses upgrade to medium.Wizard. Hate them or love them, they need to be in D&D. This is a caster who learns their magic by studying. They understand the magical formulas and patterns. Subclasses need an almost complete redo, and while we are at it, let's just ditch the unintuitive schools of magic from spells as well. Warlock. Or sorcerer? People already love sorlocks, lets make it official; we just combine these two. This is the intuitive caster who has innate source of magic, be it via birth right, a magical accident or by being transformed via a pact. Has always-on magical features similar to invocations and dragon scales etc. Bard. Everyone's favourite! We continue our pruning of full-casters here and make bard a half-caster. Let's focus on two defining features of the class, being jack-of-all-trades and inspiring other. Half-caster is enough for such a concept, we don't want the class to focus on magic too much and become a sorcerer with a lute. We also boost the weapon combat capabilities to make the class more viable on that are. And then to inspire others they gains "songs," auras that they can activate to provide benefits allies and nuisance to the foes. Then to the maybe category:Druid. This could of course easily be folded to the cleric. What is wildshape but a primal channel divinity? Then again, to fully take advantage of animal friendship and wildshape aspects probably works better as a full class. If it is included, is should be distinguished from cleri by focusing on animism, communing with animals and nature spirits and shapeshifting. Also the shapeshifting should me moved away from using MM profiles, but it should still provide profiles that reflect the shapes assumed. The shapes should have distinct roles such as tanky, stealthy, striker etc. This ability to assume different roles makes druid unique.Ranger. Conceptually this makes sense as a full class. Being the master of wilderness and thus the exploration pillar should be worth dedicating a class to it. The issue is that mechanically this seems hard to do. If enough decent mechnics (be they magical or mundane) can be amassed on that area ranger should be its own class, if not, then it should be folded into another class. Oh, and not into fighter, rogue is actually a better home for a lightly armoured skirmisher that often relies on stealth.Paladin. This could be its own class, but also works just fine as a subclass of the fighter. It depends on how magical we want it to be. If we are okay with a knightly characters with perhaps some limited magic, fighter is a good home for it. If we want to focus on magic more, it needs a separate class. But personally I never found these highly magical knights as compelling concept, so I could do without it being a full class.</blockquote>

Verification