Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 4420805" data-attributes="member: 996">I'm  a little disapointed in all the split-primary classes (Cleric, Paladin, Warlock, and, well, ranger not so much).   While it's theoretically possible to invest in both primaries and raise them both every level, thus being able to have a good power selection, the impulse to choose one or the other is understandibly strong.  Doing so gives you a restricted character.  It's especially evident with Cleric and Paladin.  If you go heavy into STR and don't invest much in the other primary, you have few power choices.  If you go the other way, your poor basic attacks hurt your versatility in combat, especially melee.  I guess I notice this because I like playing the warlord who hands out free basic melee attacks - and I notice the WIS Cleric and CHA paladin just don't benefit.The Warlock has the obvious power-selection problem, too, ameliorated somewhat by the existance of the Star pact, which adds some choices to it's more stat-specialized cousins.The ranger mostly gets away from the problems, though.  An archer-ranger just ignores melee, so doesn't worry about not being able to make a decent OA or charge.  The TWF ranger hurts a little for AC, but is otherwise OK.  Both benefit because so many ranger powers are split-stat to match the class:  DEX for ranged, STR for melee.  So, the ranger has some decent variety of power choices, and the STR-focused ranger doesn't find itself lacking choice like the STR Cleric or Paladin.Split-secondary classes, OTOH, seem to work fine.  You can invest in two secondaries if you want the versatility and expanded power choices.  Even the Warlock and Rogue, which limit the value of one of your secondary stats aren't too bad in restricting your choices - even the 'gimped' verisions of thier powers are occassionally viable.</blockquote>

Verification