General RPG DiscussionDiscussion of all RPGs and non-system-specific topics. DM/GM/player issues, settings, etc. Rules discussion belongs in one the forums below.
View Poll Results: Which class do you want to vote off the list?
Well, my sorcerer would leap and jump through melee combat, use thunder leap to get out of one sticky situation and into another (you do a Matrix jump, blasting everyone near you, then fly a short distance and blast everyone near where you land), turn into lightning and sprint through people to electrocute them, and shift everyone around because of my Mark of Storm feat.
The ranger? He just stays out of reach and shoots arrows.
Are you kidding? The Ranger has at least as many mobility powers as the Sorcerer- probably many more. And more reason to use them due to Prime Shot.
The dragon sorcerer is really the only one that doesn't stand in the back and cast spells over and over.
Nope. Never seen anyone play a Fighter or Fighter equivalent in *any* game that didn't dumpstat INT and CHA or the equivalent thereof and have a character personality less engaging than a slab of rotten meat. It has been, consistently, the bastion of people who don't want to RP or think.
Which in 3.5, the latter especially hurt, since fighters that weren't powergamed to hell sucked horrifically.
4e makes them suck less, but they're still boring concept-wise, and I'm sick of hearing about how they're the best Defender because omg damage there is nothing else in the game but damage.
4e makes them suck less, but they're still boring concept-wise, and I'm sick of hearing about how they're the best Defender because omg damage there is nothing else in the game but damage.
Odd that, my fighter builds tend to focus on becomming a mini black hole in the combat. Damage is for the glory hounds.
Why are people voting Ranger? People keep saying that they're voting the Ranger off because he's mechanically boring- he sits in the back and fires arrows. Haven't you noticed that the Sorcerer is still around? If that's your issue, shouldn't he be a higher priority target?
I voted Barbarian. I have disliked the elmental powers and the names of several others since day one of its preview. The only reason that I have not voted the barbarian off is that it was possible to ignore or ban the elemental powers if I were going to run 4e and there were other classes that I liked less- it just took this long for them to, finally, be voted off.
Hopefully, the Barbarian goes this round so I can help vote the sorcerer off in the next. Once these two go, it will leave the remaining classes that I wouldn't mind including in a campaign.
__________________ "The designers of the newest edition built so much reliance on rules right into the game, to make it easier to play. As one of those designers, I occasionally think to myself, 'What have we wrought?' " -Monte Cook
" If the DM has to make a lot of judgment calls, the game is more difficult to learn. However, it's my belief that it's also more satisfying." -Monte Cook
"Don't let rules replace good DMing skills"- Monte Cook
Last edited by Greg K; 17th October 2009 at 03:56 AM..
Looks the the ranger will yet again put down another foe, and live another day
__________________ Remember kids whisky will not put out flaming mages ,but it will confuse the deathknight
"The Soul of D&D? It's rolling a natural 20 when you're down to 3 hit points and the cleric's on the floor and you're staring that sunnavabitch bugbear right in his bloodshot eye and holding the line just long enough to let the wizard unleash a fireball at the guards who are on their way, because they're all that stands between you, the Foozle and Glory." - WizarDru
Thank you Gary Gygax, for everything.
"Rock on, Paizo, for you rock mightily".- dragonlordofpoondari
Wizard this time. They're the first controller, sure, but the lack of actual class features that make them a controller of doomed the role to a list of powers, rather than the class roll. The Invoker is about the closest to actually being a controller, while the wizard and the druid both just offer lots of controller powers and a lot of flexibility.
__________________ "I took a risk... and I ended up in the bag of holding" -the player of Ian Whitefire (deceased)
Last edited by Destil; 17th October 2009 at 05:49 AM..
Nope. Never seen anyone play a Fighter or Fighter equivalent in *any* game that didn't dumpstat INT and CHA or the equivalent thereof and have a character personality less engaging than a slab of rotten meat. It has been, consistently, the bastion of people who don't want to RP or think.
Which in 3.5, the latter especially hurt, since fighters that weren't powergamed to hell sucked horrifically.
4e makes them suck less, but they're still boring concept-wise, and I'm sick of hearing about how they're the best Defender because omg damage there is nothing else in the game but damage.
Zzzzz.
Feel bad for you then, the players at your table suck. Fighters are one of my favourite classes because they tend to be the most open to interpretation, being possibly the most realistic classes (incl. rogue here as well). Sure, they tend to have a dump stat, so does every other class how many 18 STR wizards are there, or 18 Int rangers or barbarians, or 18 Cha monks? Seriously, its part of the game, unless you roll for your stats in order (which is great fun).
Fighters can be myrmidon warriors, roman legionnaires, japanese samurais, pirates, bowman (less so in 4e), etc. I can go on forever because the RL examples are so deep.
Hopefully, the Barbarian goes this round so I can help vote the sorcerer off in the next. Once these two go, it will leave the remaining classes that I wouldn't mind including in a campaign.
Uh, there are only four classes you'd include in a campaign? You have very strict tastes.
Can't agree with the sentiment of barbarians being ruined in comparison to 3.x. Totem powers make the barbarian interesting in its own right, instead of just being a subclass of fighter. It is evocative of the animal skin wearing Norse Beserkers, or the Jaguar and Eagle Knights of the Aztecs.
Barb for the same reason as last round. Even though it seems like a mechanically solid and fun class, I'm still not entirely down with the magical fluff of some powers.
The decision is getting harder and harder. Next up for me is the wizard, and I say that with experience playing one it's alright and I enjoy the cantrips, but they could done better, the sorcerer is more fun IMHO. After that though, I don't know.
__________________ Oni
"Each man, one way.
Each horse, one stance.
Each church, one buddha.
Each master to his own technique."
Barb for the same reason as last round. Even though it seems like a mechanically solid and fun class, I'm still not entirely down with the magical fluff of some powers.
I think the Battlerager and Tempest fighter and Ranger and even warlord give me my non-spirit empowered barbarians add in a tribal feat... it works incredibly well...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluenose
Barbarian is a cultural description, not a character class.
very true... but people seem to forget a class is an imaginary thing with no counter point in reality it isn't a profession even...
Now here is where I see the Barbarian Class: The ancient celtic berzerk warriors like Cuchulain, trained by battle witches... with black blood spout attacks spraying from their heads and feats like running on the ends of swords and berserks with distorted the heck out of them... were very much like the 4e barbarian... very much possessed by spirit world and changed literally by the rage in very mystic ways... I cent wait for primal power to see how they have explored it further.
“A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.”
- Lazarus Long via Robert Heinlein.
Last edited by Garthanos; 17th October 2009 at 04:59 PM..
I think the Battlerager and Tempest fighter and Ranger and even warlord give me my non-spirit empowered barbarians add in a tribal feat... it works incredibly well...
That is very true, and like I said I don't think its a bad class. However the powers for the class define the feel of the class, and personally I'm not a fan of the overtly magical tone of some of the powers. It was enough of a reason to vote for the barbarian over the other classes still present.
__________________ Oni
"Each man, one way.
Each horse, one stance.
Each church, one buddha.
Each master to his own technique."
Sad that we are seeing the classes slowly wittled down to the classic Fighter, Rogue, Wizard ... only one missing is the cleric. I wondered what would have happened if you had included Elf and Dwarf as classes. I guess it takes all sorts of colours to make a rainbow... but its disappointing to see such a bland spread of classes heading to the final.
__________________ 'I am a predator...the predator improves the race...I kill but not out of hate.' Frank Herbert: Emperor God of Dune
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
