Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting
Honestly, I'd much rather have just a few classes: Wizard, Rogue, Cleric, and Fighter, or whatever and have each class be flexible enough to become each type of the subtypes. Actually they already seem to be moving to this method which will be odd when they start bringing in classes like the Paladin (which already seems pretty well covered by the Cleric War archetype)
Now if Combat Superiority becomes as fantastic a combat resource as the devs seem to want to make it (based on them talking it up rather than it's actual usefulness), then it makes far more sense to me to use that whole specialization/background mechanic to create the barbarian/monk classes than to try and strike gold again and again.
'Cause really, to me a Barbarian is really defined as prioritizing damage and having a rage mechanic. Damaging CS do this already, and Rage can be a quick add to a background ability. And a monk uses their fists and has some sort of mass of attacks ability. Well, again mass of attacks can be done by CS and Unarmed Combatant ability can allow their fists to act like finesse weapons.
Now as to Thieves Cant, I don't really hate it. But it does make far more sense as a Background ability maybe for Professional Criminal background or something.
Last edited by Dienekes : 08-18-2012 at 11:58 AM.