Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 7330520" data-attributes="member: 29398">Cool.I've always assumed there's what amount to stay-at-home non-adventuring versions of most classes: cloistered clerics, lab mages, street thieves, town militia, etc.&nbsp; I've never seen much point to writing them up (and certainly not as their own separate classes) as they don't adventure in the game sense of the term, and if one did it'd just become the normal version of its class.Sounds like these could easily be folded into one. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Yes there's lots of ways to differentiate classes if one looks for them...but I'd rather kinda do the opposite, and look for ways - particularly for the casting classes - in which they can be blended, such as the Witch-Shaman example above.&nbsp; In short I'd rather see a fifteen-class game than a 40-class game.Also, I'll ban this drum one more time: not every differentiation between characters or even archetypes needs a baked in game-mechanical reflection.&nbsp; Consider a hypothetical Shaman class - it's a primal medium (i.e. neither divine nor arcane in its magic sourcing) but can be played as a spirit guide, a mystic, a fortune teller or diviner, or any number of other things depending on the personality and characterization (and spell selection?) its player gives it.&nbsp; Much like the way one can currently play a Fighter as a heavy tank or a swashbuckling duelist or a back-line archer - they all run on the same chassis but all play very differently.Lan-&quot;then, depending on whether a particular DM sees Druids as divine (Nature Clerics) or non-divine (primal media) the Shaman class could then be melded into Druid&quot;-efan</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 7330520, member: 29398"] Cool. I've always assumed there's what amount to stay-at-home non-adventuring versions of most classes: cloistered clerics, lab mages, street thieves, town militia, etc. I've never seen much point to writing them up (and certainly not as their own separate classes) as they don't adventure in the game sense of the term, and if one did it'd just become the normal version of its class. Sounds like these could easily be folded into one. :) Yes there's lots of ways to differentiate classes if one looks for them...but I'd rather kinda do the opposite, and look for ways - particularly for the casting classes - in which they can be blended, such as the Witch-Shaman example above. In short I'd rather see a fifteen-class game than a 40-class game. Also, I'll ban this drum one more time: not every differentiation between characters or even archetypes needs a baked in game-mechanical reflection. Consider a hypothetical Shaman class - it's a primal medium (i.e. neither divine nor arcane in its magic sourcing) but can be played as a spirit guide, a mystic, a fortune teller or diviner, or any number of other things depending on the personality and characterization (and spell selection?) its player gives it. Much like the way one can currently play a Fighter as a heavy tank or a swashbuckling duelist or a back-line archer - they all run on the same chassis but all play very differently. Lan-"then, depending on whether a particular DM sees Druids as divine (Nature Clerics) or non-divine (primal media) the Shaman class could then be melded into Druid"-efan [/QUOTE]

Verification