Search results

As I said over on the wizards forums, I don't think these theme or background choices are meant to lock you in and keep you on rails as your character grows and levels. I'm certain that if you don't want a certain feature as you level, you can trade it out for something else and I would be...

On the importance and use of presets vs the custimizability (because it's a cooler non-word than customization, that's why!): I don't think the basic package that is presented for a core class needs to have extra cool things to make it interesting that you couldn't get by building your own...

I think in Rob's example, each one of those is the fighter class. So you have a typical fighter soldier, a fighter with a thiefy past based on the (thief) background, or a fighter with some magicky bits with some kind of (magic) background. Note I used the ( ) in a similar way to how I thought...

Reposting from another thread as it seems most appropriate here: I know that the guys are aware of some of the notable issues that cropped up with 3/3.5 multiclassing, and I'm confident that they'll address those as best as they can, and that we'll be able to playtest the crap out of that...

I know that the guys are aware of some of the notable issues that cropped up with 3/3.5 multiclassing, and I'm confident that they'll address those as best as they can, and that we'll be able to playtest the crap out of that stuff once that portion of the public playtest gets going. Remember...

I know a lot of you are as excited as I am (and some/many even more excited) so I wanted to make sure you had the most recent info on the 1E book release. To keep it short, the process behind "re-mastering" the original materials unfortunately pushed back the release date a bit. But have no...

To clear up any lingering confusion - no, Rob is not saying that there won't be any tougher monsters to fight, or that that next iteration of D&D will only have orcs, goblins, kobolds or whatever other lower level monster you can think of. Rob is simply expressing a desire that the design team...

I guess I'm just not seeing this guys. From what I can see Rodney didn't blast anything in the article, he was even being complimentary about many of the things in 4E, including monsters. Addressing the question of 4E mechanics alone doesn't make the article bashing, and I'm sorry if it came...

The point Rodney was making was that being a defender isn't endemic to the fighter class, and thus does not serve as a defining mechanic of the class. Rodney knows very well what other classes have defender mechanics, as he designed several of them :)

This is just patently untrue. Rodney played tons of 4E games, and ran them. I was in a Wednesday night game with him. He's made content for 4E as well, and I know he's had a lot o fun playing with 4E games.

Yeah, I dropped it from my most recent post because of some similar thinking. I think it's important, though, to have some kind of schtick for the ranger, but that's covered with the details that you go into. So the bow thing isn't necessary, or wanted by some. Give the ranger some nature...

I getcha. I do also want super easy multiclass and character options so you can piece together the idea of the character/roll/class that you envision if it's not a cookie cutter class. In this case, the simple hunter/tracker ranger seems to me like the best start for a ranger class. Want magic...

I think it's important that someone familiar with any core D&D book from any edition be able to flip open the core books in whatever comes next, and find the class they're looking for. Some base class should be called "Ranger" and something should be called "Paladin" because those are iconic and...

With the modularity as a big part of this, it's possible that the ranger could be, at it's core, a nature-based archer guy. So maybe we see some favored enemy type stuff, and some tracking type stuff along with the usual "I kill it with my bow" kind of thing. For those of us who want something...

Fun-killer is the translation of my Fremen name, which coincidentally, is a killing word that only works on fun things. In all seriousness though, I did want to point out that yes, that was me, and no, that didn't appear to be the material from our playtest. To kimble - I believe the material...

I missed this last week but I wanted to chime in. Dave has it right - we didn't exclude people who work at Paizo or other publishers/game makers, but when employees of one game company are asked to sign an NDA for another game company, I'm sure things get wonky legally so we sometimes miss out...

Ah yep, I gotcha now. I don't think they want to give you a fighter that can't contribute to exploration or roleplay, or that can't open up his options and do more during combat. However, when it comes to combat, I think the base fighter they're working from now focuses on hitting things and...

Okay, there's a lot of great stuff in here but I'm going to try to respond to just a few things that I might be able to clear up. Here's my obligatory bit about how we're still playtesting and designing and any of this stuff could change. So ability scores are important, but I don't think maxing...

One last clarification before i move on to another thread. No plans for an elf or dwarf class. Those are covered with the way races are split out from class now.

(note to self - ask team to remove war bunnies) (note to the mods and everyone else - sorry for the machine gun of posts. I was taking notes and responding to posts as they came up. I though it would be better than just a big wall of text but it pretty much has the same effect. If you'd like...