Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tigris" data-source="post: 9823477" data-attributes="member: 7043270">Well I dont need a "Human", but many people need their bland vanilla.  (Same as some people need their bland "I only basic attack" fighter...) Human in D&D is still the most played race and not having something similar at least could drive many people away. Even computer games still need to have this normal race even in games where it feels off because everything else is strange.Also I am not that much fan of "small race" (and to a lesser degree "big races"). You can be small or long, thin or thick as a "human" as well. I prefer having this variety in normal races as well. If we go small then pixie thats really different. About "simple classes", as said some people need them, and I think having some is a good idea, but I think its important that they are distributed through several power fantasies. So I think these 4 base classes could be all complex to show that each power source and each role can have a certain depth.Then for making simpler classes I would do things like- Elementalist Sorcerer as a simple caster using elements as a striker- Hunter ranger as a ranged arrow using controller- A paladin defender could also be made to be more or less simple.- as a simple leader A skald bard could fit although I would simplify that further compared to the 4e skald versionIts kind of a bit similar to the shifter. I want something for people liking vanilla, but I would still make sure there is some interesting about them.</blockquote>

Verification