NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="LostSoul" data-source="post: 6077459" data-attributes="member: 386">I think you overestimate the Fighter's defining combat style.  Of those that you listed, only archery isn't a mechanically optimal build.  (I don't think - it could be.)  That said, I understand the dislike.  I'd have preferred the Fighter to be a little more effective in ranged combat.  I can understand why they did that - they wanted to give the Fighter class a stronger archetype than it had before.  I think that's a reasonable decision to make in a class-based system, even if it takes away flexibility from the class that was there in previous editions.I think the same goes for the Paladin.  They wanted the Paladin to exemplify a specific set of virtues - valiant, self-sacrificial, that sort of thing.  I don't think the Paladin from the PHB is a good fit for all the different sorts of gods out there (or the Cleric, for that matter), and I agree that this causes some dissonance - why does my Paladin of Zehir (god of darkness) shoot light and colour?  Again, I can see why they made that decision and I think it's a reasonable one (though less so than what they did with the Fighter).  (For me, the issue lies in the definition of "Radiant" damage.  I have changed "Radiant" damage in my game to be a manifestation of the divine character's belief system - so your Paladin of Zehir would inflict "blinding darkness" (0 HP = permanently blind).  This requires me to work out exactly what each power is doing with the player of that PC, but I enjoy that.  I do the same with the other classes anyway.)</blockquote>

Verification