I think that while faithfulness to the 'feeling' of 'classics' is a big part of Card Hunter's aesthetic, it's not the only factor in its design. After all, Chainmail didn't have move cards or orc assassins in suits with briefcases. Wizards are unlikely to get any major class-specific damage reduction or healing because one of the key tensions in Card Hunter is figuring out what combination of classes to bring to a fight. Priests already get tremendous amounts of healing and some of the best damage reduction in the game. Warriors get good damage reduction as well (but fewer ways to share it with others). There are a few class-independent toys that provide both (the healing cards mentioned above, as well as cards like Forcefield). If we gave every class similar amounts of every tool, there'd be no gameplay-based reason to use one over the other. That could be ok in some games, but Card Hunter's deckbuilding mechanics—as well as its encounter design—are based on the idea that you have to make some decisions about which tools you want in your toolkit. Of course, we could give wizards one staff with 1x greater heal and it wouldn't completely upend the game. So surely we could give them a heal card here or there, or a mana shield card here or there (though again there's no gameplay concept of mana in this game so the top-down design might be a bit tricky there). But I don't think it would add much to the gameplay. Requiring priests for good healing is a fun and interesting part of Card Hunter in my opinion. There's a lot of stuff we could add to the game just to have it in the game. We only have 3 races, after all—you could make the argument that because early D&D had more than 3 races, we should have more than 3 as well. A common request that we're unlikely to do is archers. How are archers different, gameplay wise, from lightning wizards in our game? Two somewhat easy tests exist for whether or not an idea is a good addition to Card Hunter: 1. is it distinct from what's already in Card Hunter 2. does it avoid muddying the existing class/race/slot distinctions that make deckbuilding interesting/challenging Not everything that we add to the game is a perfect 100% on both counts, but that's a basic rubric, and it serves us pretty well.