In the past couple of iterations of D&D there may have been individual classes that had writeups that captured the essence of the class well, such as the Paladin writeup in 3.0.  However, I have to admit that I'm really impressed by the overall quality of the class writeups in the PHB.

Hell, reading the entry for the Barbarian got me excited to actually try one out, and that was a class that really never captured my attention at all.

This highlights the effort that went into the PHB to make the text really evoke the essence of the game; it's one thing to write up classes and say that you can do X at such-and-such a level, but it's another to actually spark interest and want to go off adventuring.

I haven't felt this sort of connection to an iteration of D&D, where it actually makes you say "damn, I want to play that!", since 1e.

I basically agree. I was a bit bitchy about the poor quality of fluff text in modern D&D books, generally, the last time this subject was discussed. But having read the 5E PHB, I have to admit it is all flows pretty well. Most importantly, there is very little of it. My point of comparison is C&C, which I regard as a well crafted pastiche of 1E, and generally presents a pretty tight set of rules. But the class- and race-associated fluff text in 5E is actually smaller in volume and better written.

I've actually asked my players - veterans of 30+ years of D&D - to read the class descriptions for their PC classes. I've never done that before. I especially appreciate the questions you're to ask yourself about your background and why you chose to become that class.

Quote from: Larsdangly;784436I basically agree. I was a bit bitchy about the poor quality of fluff text in modern D&D books, generally, the last time this subject was discussed. But having read the 5E PHB, I have to admit it is all flows pretty well. Most importantly, there is very little of it. My point of comparison is C&C, which I regard as a well crafted pastiche of 1E, and generally presents a pretty tight set of rules. But the class- and race-associated fluff text in 5E is actually smaller in volume and better written.

One thing that 5e did use to maximum effect was to take those short blurbs from the novels and place them into game context. It helped to temper the Half-Elf quite a bit from the 4e version of "yay, everybody likes me!" to "Well, yeah, but...."

Quote from: Haffrung;784457I've actually asked my players - veterans of 30+ years of D&D - to read the class descriptions for their PC classes. I've never done that before. I especially appreciate the questions you're to ask yourself about your background and why you chose to become that class.

I know that in my case the answer to those questions would be metagamey --well, we needed a Cleric-- but that doesn't really cut it in game terms.  Those questions make you think.  I remember the Pathfinder Beginner Box's version of this, and it was "Play this class if you want to do X".  5e turns that on its head by asking what it is you want to do.

I've never been very interested in warlocks until this PHB.

Then again, I'm a nut for Lovecraft so a company having the clout to name Cthulhu, not to mention the coolness of the idea, really hit me.

Notably, most of Cthulhu Mythos has passed into public domain years ago, but groups claiming ownership harass anyone trying to use it. WotC is big enough to go 'ha ha fuck you' to frivolous C&D letters.

You know what? WotC totally could and should reprint the ORIGINAL AD&D Deities and Demigods, with Cthulhu Mythos.

Or, better yet, a version for 5e...

Quote from: flyerfan1991;784484I remember the Pathfinder Beginner Box's version of this, and it was "Play this class if you want to do X".  5e turns that on its head by asking what it is you want to do.

Yes, that's why it's so inspiring. Stop thinking of an Arcane Trickster as a collection of widgets, and instead consider what the role and purpose of an Arcane Trickster is in the game world, and what makes a person into an Arcane Trickster.

Whenever I've created a character, I've always envisioned what I want my character to do, what they look like, etc.  Usually inspired by a person from a book or movie.  Then I look at which class is easiest to emulate that.  I very rarely ever look at classes first and say, "Oh!  This is a cool power!" when choosing to create a character.

For example, I've got this urge to play someone like Garet Jax from the Shannara books.  I think starting as a fighter (to get prof in all weapons and fighting style) and the rest a monk (to take advantage of the movement and unarmored benefits) would be able to do that well.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;784704Whenever I've created a character, I've always envisioned what I want my character to do, what they look like, etc.  Usually inspired by a person from a book or movie.  Then I look at which class is easiest to emulate that.  I very rarely ever look at classes first and say, "Oh!  This is a cool power!" when choosing to create a character.

For example, I've got this urge to play someone like Garet Jax from the Shannara books.  I think starting as a fighter (to get prof in all weapons and fighting style) and the rest a monk (to take advantage of the movement and unarmored benefits) would be able to do that well.

The "this is a cool power!" exclamation is what I thought when I read 4e's classes. The ironic thing is that 4e actually wrote up some good flavor text for the generic game world (never bothered to pick up the Dark Sun or FR books), but then ruined it with the tactics-first approach to characters and enemies.

Pathfinder is stuck somewhere in the middle, where they do have interesting flavor text and well crafted presentations, but the presentation itself is more akin to a textbook.  My kids may love to play Pathfinder, but even they will say that the books will make their eyes glaze over every so often.

Quote from: Will;784488I've never been very interested in warlocks until this PHB.

Then again, I'm a nut for Lovecraft so a company having the clout to name Cthulhu, not to mention the coolness of the idea, really hit me.

Notably, most of Cthulhu Mythos has passed into public domain years ago, but groups claiming ownership harass anyone trying to use it. WotC is big enough to go 'ha ha fuck you' to frivolous C&D letters.

You know what? WotC totally could and should reprint the ORIGINAL AD&D Deities and Demigods, with Cthulhu Mythos.

Or, better yet, a version for 5e...

I would SO be on board for a Deities and Demigods copy --the original version-- that didn't smell like some weird funk, as the used copies at game stores seem to have.

Hmm, my 1E first printing is basically perfect. All the melnibone and cthulhu; no funk.

Quote from: Larsdangly;784876Hmm, my 1E first printing is basically perfect. All the melnibone and cthulhu; no funk.

Yup mine too and I am really glad i nicked that adhesive transparent plastic stuff from school to cover it with

Very wee Will was blown away by the cool stuff in Deities and Demigods and did all he could to buy it. When he finally managed it...

Yeah. I think it took me years to find out (pre-internet) what had happened.

Quote from: Larsdangly;784876Hmm, my 1E first printing is basically perfect. All the melnibone and cthulhu; no funk.

I'm jealous. Every time I've seen a copy at a game store, they all, well, smell.  Not of catpissmen, but of mildew and storage.

Quote from: flyerfan1991;784948I'm jealous. Every time I've seen a copy at a game store, they all, well, smell.  Not of catpissmen, but of mildew and storage.

I didn't realize how lucky I was. I picked mine up for something like $25 and it is totally cherry 1st print.