Arelith

Provided it's balanced well, more options give more opportunities to mechanically reflect the character you want to create.

Class lore is, in most cases, only relevant to RP when you're granted power by an NPC (Deities, Planar Entities, 'nature' etc.) or you physically change yourself (Strap an undead arm to yourself or sprout some wings).

These are the only things a DM is going to care about to maintain the setting, and the only things you should care about.

If you want to make a vigilante who doesn't really care about freedom, a ranger that takes no ranger levels, or a nature oath paladin that has no concept of the nature oath but otherwise is roleplayed as a paladin, who cares?

Whatever mechanical tools you're given, even if they're 5ed or completely new, you can make your own 3e/3.5e fitting lore around them.

I agree with OP and I’ll leave it at that.

Android Sufferer wrote: Tue May 23, 2023 10:49 am

Provided it's balanced well, more options give more opportunities to mechanically reflect the character you want to create.

Class lore is, in most cases, only relevant to RP when you're granted power by an NPC (Deities, Planar Entities, 'nature' etc.) or you physically change yourself (Strap an undead arm to yourself or sprout some wings).

These are the only things a DM is going to care about to maintain the setting, and the only things you should care about.

If you want to make a vigilante who doesn't really care about freedom, a ranger that takes no ranger levels, or a nature oath paladin that has no concept of the nature oath but otherwise is roleplayed as a paladin, who cares?

Whatever mechanical tools you're given, even if they're 5ed or completely new, you can make your own 3e/3.5e fitting lore around them.

The problem is having to learn these new mechanical tools. More and more they’re drifting from anything recognizable as D&D and are complicated and unique to Arelith. Documentation is all over the place and the wiki may or may not be up to date or correct. It’s overwhelming, there are many micro-systems now that aren’t intuitive and aren’t following the same logic as other micro-systems much less any game I’ve played before.

Spriggan Bride wrote: Tue May 23, 2023 7:06 pm

The problem is having to learn these new mechanical tools. More and more they’re drifting from anything recognizable as D&D and are complicated and unique to Arelith. Documentation is all over the place and the wiki may or may not be up to date or correct. It’s overwhelming, there are many micro-systems now that aren’t intuitive and aren’t following the same logic as other micro-systems much less any game I’ve played before.

I can agree with that. Things aren't new player friendly in the slightest.

Android Sufferer wrote: Tue May 23, 2023 9:27 pm

Spriggan Bride wrote: Tue May 23, 2023 7:06 pm

The problem is having to learn these new mechanical tools. More and more they’re drifting from anything recognizable as D&D and are complicated and unique to Arelith. Documentation is all over the place and the wiki may or may not be up to date or correct. It’s overwhelming, there are many micro-systems now that aren’t intuitive and aren’t following the same logic as other micro-systems much less any game I’ve played before.

I can agree with that. Things aren't new player friendly in the slightest.

Or "returning player" friendly . I had to read a dissertation worth of mechanical change updates to even relevel and play current characters that had forced relevels, let alone chart a new build.

Spriggan Bride wrote: Tue May 23, 2023 7:06 pm

the wiki may or may not be up to date or correct

anyone can help

I think that one of the reasons that Arelith keeps attracting new players (and returning old ones) is precisely the continual development and changes to classes and their abilities. Sure, it will periodically render established characters suboptimal in the new meta, and while it may suck for the individual player it may be good for the server as a whole by keeping stagnation at bay.

As for departure from 3.5 mechanics I do not think that is a problem at all. While I am old enough to remember and be nostalgic about 2e, I play 5e today in my tabletop games, and this I believe is where most new players meet D&D for the first time. D&D 3/3.5 as a mechanical system and source of lore is no longer the "default" for many players, myself included, so I think that sticking to it just because is a dead end.

I for one am excited about the monk rework, and will probably return more regularly just to see how it is to play one.

magistrasa wrote: Sun May 21, 2023 12:20 pm

• More PRCs would be welcome as an alternative to base classes

Ehhh. I disagree with this one in particular, especially when it comes to spellsword and hexblade. I think it's vitally important that players be able to play the character the way they envision right from level 1, rather than forcing them to play as a caster with a sub-optimal stat spread for x number of levels before being able to transition into a gish only when they take the prestige class. Imagine if ranger was a prestige class for druid. That'd be silly.