interesting 5e PC concepts

I don’t think that is part of the SRD.

As a note, found this online, it pretty clearly spells out the Entzara as sorcerers, and since they are the apex of shaman, I would assume is largely a statement on shaman. Seems weird since in 3.5 shaman were a divine class, and not sorcerers.

Now we’re on our way to our first Stretch Goal, increasing the page count of the book to a meaty 180 pages! The additional pages will include many new magic items as well as the aforementioned Rune system, new weapons and new Archetypes like the mystic Ehtzara.

Here’s a short write up of the Ehtzara to whet your appetite:

The Ehtzara are the tribal sorcerers of the Hinterlands, gaining power and learning spells as well innate knowledge of the natural landscape and its denizens from summoned spirits. They are a mix of three ancient traditions; the original Yhing hir beliefs of ancestor worship, the pagan elemental practices of the indigenous Pengik tribe, and amalgamations of southern magic, superstitions and religious beliefs.

Like all sorcerers upon Arcanis, the Ehtzara suffer under the bias and superstition that they deal with demons and devils to grant them power and are blamed for every malicious act or freak occurrence around them for miles. Unlike other practitioners of the arcane arts, the Ehtzara embrace this preconception and use their frightful presence and ominous reputations to intimidate others and chase off would be attackers or angry mobs.

The training and discipline for the Ehtzara is as rigorous as a monk’s, and an initiate into this group must accept that they will no longer be treated as normal, and often not even as natural. However, they will command respect and fear from all they encounter, and are imbued with many useful and devastatingly effective capabilities in trade for normality and order.

The equivalent of Shaman in 5e is Warlock, an Arcane class.

That seems pretty reasonable to me, but the post above from Henry seems to indicate that the Ehtzara (who have always been shaman) are a type of sorcerer. That seems really odd to me though, since the Ehtzara are pretty open and obvious in the Hinterlands, and thus apparently are not being hunted by the sorcerer king. If they are a type of sorcerer, that seems problematic to me thematically.

Sorcerers act openly in Nishanpur too, and they are reasonably ‘safe’ from Harvesters. I don’t think there has been anything said in canon that Ehtzara are NOT hunted.

Yes, but a big deal has been made about why sorcerers can act openly in Nishanpur. It is a well explained event. I agree that I haven’t seen anything saying explicitly that Ehtzara are not hunted, but it was clear in the last campaign that they were not, since back then shaman were classified as divine casters. It’s been one of the unclear things in the new system that suddenly they may be of interest to the sorcerer king, but it is my understanding that shaman are very low on his interest list. (but still on the list, right above sorcerer-priest) Additionally, there is the issue of the Ehtzara operating openly in the Hinterlands when that is one of the nearest nations and common ports for the black fleet, and there has been no listed cooperation between the Ehtzara and the Sanctorum, something you would think would be more likely if they shared a common enemy.

All in all, the change of Ehtzara from one gaming system to the next to the next from divine to arcane (shaman) to arcane (sorcerer) is very complicated. To make them sorcerers (the most sought after party for the sorcerer king) in 5e really changes the dynamics from one extreme to the other. If they are classified as warlocks, and the sorcerer king has little to no interest in warlocks, than that doesn’t really change things from the current status.

Honestly, I like shaman as its own class, and really look forward to a 5e players guide for the campaign, something that is really desperately needed if they are going to try to operate a 5e campaign. There are so many things that need to be handled

– domains for specific gods, ideally with new domains
– shamans
– honestly a clear specialty for knights and centurians in the fighter class would be best
– racial stuff – dwarves, elorii, and ssressen
– sex-linked requirements
– what types of characters are hunted by harvesters
– psionics

I can’t see actually having a competent transition to 5e without a players guide that is a stand alone book like it was in the last campaign. Shaman are really a teeny-tiniest tip of the iceberg.

Again, I’m nobody official but here’s my take (not having played Arcanis under 3.x).

Shaman = Druid (second choice would be Sorcerer). Thematically, Shaman could work as Warlock but Warlock is hugely limited on casting in 5e. Mechanically (but not thematically), about the only ones I see as working as Warlocks under 5e are the newly limited casters (female Illiir, male Saluwe, and male Ss’ressen Templars).

To capture the feel of ARG in 5e will definitely require a lot of new class paths and backgrounds. It may also require a new class or two and disallowing some existing class paths.

In the 3.X days Druids were used to represent the followers of Jeggal Sagg, some followers of elorii /elemental pantheons, and male followers of Saluwe. They were considered divine followers of a God. Druids were not used to represent the Ehtzara of the Hinterlands.

It could be true that the warlock class is not mechanically equal to the true caster classes (I haven’t played a lot of 5e, I don’t know)…but I agree with Cody that thematically it’s a good fit for where Primal powers are supposed to originate from.

Further … I don’t know how the 3rd edition campaign will influence decisions for conversation to 5E. I know Henry has said in several places that he felt the tropes of D&D forced him to include some material even though it didn’t perfectly fit into his idealized mental image of Arcanis. An example of this might be (half) orcs and (half) hobgoblins which have been folded into the Gar.

On the other hand elves (elorii) and gnomes (half-dwarves) have never matched their D&D archetypes.

I hope that this time round Henry & Company do not feel the need to make allowances for material that contradicts their vision. I would rather see a conversion that is thematically faithful rather than something that is mechanically faithful.

Again, I’m nobody official but here’s my take (not having played Arcanis under 3.x).

Shaman = Druid (second choice would be Sorcerer). Thematically, Shaman could work as Warlock but Warlock is hugely limited on casting in 5e. Mechanically (but not thematically), about the only ones I see as working as Warlocks under 5e are the newly limited casters (female Illiir, male Saluwe, and male Ss’ressen Templars).

To capture the feel of ARG in 5e will definitely require a lot of new class paths and backgrounds. It may also require a new class or two and disallowing some existing class paths.

Shaman was introduced under 3.x as its own class, not as an offshoot of druid. That makes it very…flexible about where they should fit in the new system. After all, they were different enough from druids to warrant their own class previously, so they probably still should be. Thematically, I think the connection of Shaman=Warlock is strong because of the pacts, which is why I was so surprised to see that the Ehtzara (previously a prestige class of shaman, essentially- since like shaman they were divine casters) as a subset of sorcerer. I don’t know if this is one of the things that should be reviewed before the production of the magic item book.

But while I think that thematically they are a close link, I would really prefer it be its own class. Largely because it is the most unique version of caster from the ARG, and thus the most specific to the world (besides maybe sorcerer-priest) so it helps bring more of the arcanus flavor to the rules. Secondly, because I generally find warlocks boring. The have the eldritch blast which is what they do 90% of the time, and then some little flavor powers around the edges. Maybe that could be fixed with giving them a specific patrons/pacts and invocations unique to shamans, but its starting from a pretty boring template.

Maybe that is just me though. I like the ARG system because there are choices to make every tier, even if it is just a choice of “do take +2 to all defenses this rank or next?” Sure, you are going to take that option some time in the tier, but you can always explore options. I like that because I like working on characters. I find 5e to be an OK system, but pretty boring because almost all of your character decisions are made by 3rd level. I don’t know about character class power balance, but generally, the characters are just too darn easy/boring to make!