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="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 6078529" data-attributes="member: 87792">The 1e Ranger is Aragorn - and just about no one else.  To me, that's not a class.The 4e Rogue isn't an also-ran.  What they are is fiddly with a lot of unstated assumptons - chiefly that they are going to get combat advantage almost every round in combat.  (The 4e Thief is a lot better this way - if you just want combat advantage, spam tactical trick; the other tricks are for going above and beyond).  If they'd actually bothered to mention this in the PHB far fewer people would have had bad experiences.  Out of combat they are, of course, more comptent than in any other edition due to the narrowing of the skill lists (in particular the folding of hide and move silently into stealth, and open lock, pick pockets/sleight of hand, and disable device into thievery) and due to utility powers.The fighter doesn't narrow as noticeably as he appears to - he shifts.  Fighter used to be a catchall class - in 4e it's "Melee Badass", pure and simple.  But within that the 4e fighter is covering territory that no other edition will - even before the splatbooks did what 4e splatbooks do and added additional breadth rather than power to the classes.  And honestly, I find the ranger the blandest and most boring class in the entire PHB.I think if I were redoing it, I'd take a leaf out of the 13th Age books.  Armour is classified as light or heavy and AC is by class - and weapon damage dice is by class, modified by one handed or two.</blockquote>

Verification