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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 6078348" data-attributes="member: 82106">I'm sorry, I have to disagree with this logic. ALL PCs in 4e do some things better and other things worse. It is just a basic reality of the design of characters in an RPG which is making any attempt to balance PCs, they will each have areas of greater and lesser strength. The wizard is being 'punished' for using a melee weapon and wading into battle, and the paladin is being 'punished' for using a bow. This is trite, they are each just showing a weaker aspect of the character, and they each also show a stronger aspect. Even if you insist on calling this 'punishment' it is not unique to ANY one PC or type of PC, they all get it equally. If every person in the country has to pay a 10% income tax is one of them being punished for not emigrating? No, the same rule applies to all of them. Its the same way here, paladins are no more punished than wizards, rogues, clerics, and every other class in 4e.NOW, in 1e the situation is CLEARLY different. A 1e paladin IS being rewarded simply for being a paladin. The character is superior in EVERY SINGLE RESPECT to a fighter. HOWEVER the paladin is also punished for violating his alignment in a way that is FAR more severe than for any other character.Moreover, semantics of reward and punishment aside, the nature of the mechanics in each case is QUALITATIVELY different. The 4e paladin might not fight as well when the player chooses to act against type and be a coward or use a bow. The 1e paladin loses ALL of his abilities permanently and without any hope of redemption the instant he carries out one of a vast and undefinable category of actions that the DM may label as evil. These are drastic qualitative differences. One character has some small strengths and weaknesses which are in line with those of all the other characters he can choose to play to or against using well-defined mechanics, the other character has an absolute rule which eviscerates the character if he violates some open-ended set of very specific rules.This should be wrapped at least back into the more general topic of how 4e handled design issues and how that differs from say 1e. Obviously the paladin's mechanics aren't unique. In 1e there are 11 classes, Thief, Assassin, Cleric, Druid, Monk, Fighter, Ranger, Paladin, Magic User, Illusionist, and Bard. Of these SEVEN have alignment restrictions. ALL of these classes also have severe racial restrictions and/or level limits. ALL characters are subjected to serious negative effects for, in the DM's judgment, violating their alignments (and many could lose their sub-class). There are other explicit restrictions on use of armor, weapons, poison, and oil, as well. Clearly AD&D has a significant amount of constraint-based design. Even 3.5 retains some of this. It is virtually non-existent in 4e (and where there are a few minor exceptions they are actually more based on simulationist logic than anything else, such as halfling weapons).1e's design was definitely 'building fences', 4e's was definitely handing out carrots.</blockquote>

Verification