Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Why deciding to round down multiclassing spellcaster levels was stupid
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="FrogReaver" data-source="post: 7559012" data-attributes="member: 6795602"><p>Thanks, I don't think you were intentionally doing that. I also took your words to the furthest extremes they could have been taken to and I apologize for doing that. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>In probably the most basic concept of an RPG you tend to have 3 designations. The warrior, the skilled, and the magic user. Then you have hybrid designations of these etc. In a game where all warriors are mechanically identical I think most players are happy just roleplaying differences between various warriors. The same with skilled and magic users. However, in a game where multiple classes fall under the warrior designation and each have their own special abilities that give them a certain playstyle distinct from other classes that fall under that same warrior designation, I think it's only natural to desire and expect other concepts to have mechanical support for their distinct playstyles as well. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Then I'm not sure what we are discussing anymore. If you don't think options of any kind can be added to the base game then at that point everything is just an optional preference for whether it gets included or not. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't follow this part at all</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The simple answer for 5e in it's current state is by introducing more classes and ignoring mutlclassing altogether. You don't need millions of classes to cater to a wide variety of specific playstyles, but you do need maybe double or triple the number of classes that are currently in the game and some additional overlap on subclass concepts between classes.</p><p></p><p>If designing a game from scratch you would probably be better off sticking to the primary warrior/skilled/mage designations and their half and half hybrids and developing a single class to represent each of those things. Give each class choices like weapon proficiencies, skill proficiencies etc. Then have character differences between members of a certain class be roleplayed. Once you get into mechanically differentiating some concepts and playstyles beyond the core designations and their hybrids then you really place yourself in a position where you will need to mechanically differentiate most options.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="FrogReaver, post: 7559012, member: 6795602"] Thanks, I don't think you were intentionally doing that. I also took your words to the furthest extremes they could have been taken to and I apologize for doing that. In probably the most basic concept of an RPG you tend to have 3 designations. The warrior, the skilled, and the magic user. Then you have hybrid designations of these etc. In a game where all warriors are mechanically identical I think most players are happy just roleplaying differences between various warriors. The same with skilled and magic users. However, in a game where multiple classes fall under the warrior designation and each have their own special abilities that give them a certain playstyle distinct from other classes that fall under that same warrior designation, I think it's only natural to desire and expect other concepts to have mechanical support for their distinct playstyles as well. Then I'm not sure what we are discussing anymore. If you don't think options of any kind can be added to the base game then at that point everything is just an optional preference for whether it gets included or not. I don't follow this part at all The simple answer for 5e in it's current state is by introducing more classes and ignoring mutlclassing altogether. You don't need millions of classes to cater to a wide variety of specific playstyles, but you do need maybe double or triple the number of classes that are currently in the game and some additional overlap on subclass concepts between classes. If designing a game from scratch you would probably be better off sticking to the primary warrior/skilled/mage designations and their half and half hybrids and developing a single class to represent each of those things. Give each class choices like weapon proficiencies, skill proficiencies etc. Then have character differences between members of a certain class be roleplayed. Once you get into mechanically differentiating some concepts and playstyles beyond the core designations and their hybrids then you really place yourself in a position where you will need to mechanically differentiate most options. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Why deciding to round down multiclassing spellcaster levels was stupid
Top