Search results

Prefer it as a class. As a theme it means that any barbarian character is going to come with the mechanical baggage of the base class, and it also means that you can't have for example a barbarian slayer. Make it a class, with some associated themes that other classes can use to make...

I just wish they'd switch from 'ki' to 'chi'.

I don't think it is hunchbacked, it is just flaring its feathers out. You can clearly see the line of the back goes in a more bear-like shape behind the feathery bit. Also note, some bears look pretty darn hunchbacked themselves at times:

Look at all the different ranger types in 4e. The two weapon guy and the archer guy and the beast guy and the essentials guys play differently than each other. Look at the billions of options for Pathfinder rangers. There are lots of ways to fit different things into the ranger "space". I'm not...

Here's where my disconnect with you is: why do you think a sword and shield fighter and a greataxe fighter are more different from each other than a ranger who uses a bow and a ranger who fights with two weapons? I mean literally your examples of all those 'different' fighters are just weapon...

You get more combinations with more classes. Let me expand on this: you seem to think that a ranger with say, a bandit theme and a ranger with the slayer theme will be less different from each other than two fighters with those two themes. I see no reason to make this assumption. Scenario 1...

I want it as a class. I want lots of classes. 4 classes with 30 themes is 120 possible combinations. 14 classes with 20 themes is 280 possible combinations. I want lots of combinations.

But prior editions have those same monsters - witness those 1 hit point rats and 1/2 hit die kobolds that fighters can 'sweep' through in 1e. 4e just codified them mechanically.

We have no indication that the cleric of Moradin will be able to use a two-handed weapon proficiently, do we? It only gets basic weapons + warhammer on the character sheet. Again it seems to me like people are leaping to a lot of unsubstantiated conclusions about what class capabilities will...

The real issue is you're creating a meaningless comparison, because 4e simply does not use level in the same way the other editions do. While your argument may be literally true - a 1st level minion is indeed the same "level" as a 1st level character - it isn't especially relevant because...

You need to go read one of the 8 billion threads about bad gaming experiences over on RPG.net (they crop up more frequently there). Start with one of the ones where female gamers talk about their DMs forcing rape scenarios onto their characters, and then think about your assumption about...

Erm, I was responding to your point about early editions of the game; yes, the cleric can do those things in later editions of the game, but then the paladin has other different abilities. I think you moved the goalposts on me a little.

And yet, for example, the cleric never got multiple attacks; the paladin did. The cleric was limited to a few less effective weapons; the paladin could swing around a two-handed sword and do 3d6 damage to large creatures if he wanted. The cleric could wade into that horde of Saracens, but he'd...

Show me someone who never changes their opinion on anything and you're showing me someone who is close-minded and inflexible, and that's exactly who I don't want designing a new edition of D&D.

Hmmm. No, not to me. I see the breakdown sort of like this: Cleric - requires investiture into a church, by own choice Paladin - may or may not be member of an order of knighthood but is not an invested priest, dedicates himself to a god or gods or holy cause by own choice Favored...

The problem here is I don't think we should be separating the fluff out. Fluff matters immensely - not least because it can inform the design decisions!

The simplest explanation is probably that it can restore used hit dice.

Eh, that may be true of the top level of events, but the game materials are rife with changes caused by novels as well. Compare and contrast to Eberron novels, which do not change the game canon at all. I find this preferable from a DMing standpoint, in part because I don't have to read crappy...

Sure, but that does involve some amount of work. If I want to run a premade setting, and I sit down with Golarion or Eberron (at least currently) I can be sure that any supplement I grab from any edition that setting exists in will be compatible with any other supplement I grab from that setting...

It actually goes well beyond just the name characters from the novels though; every little 2 line village description seems to include some level 23 wizard/archmage/odd multiclass combo person who just happens to live there.