Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="3catcircus" data-source="post: 4353926" data-attributes="member: 16077">The difference is that earlier editions fighters and rogues could use their &quot;powers&quot; pretty much whenever they wanted to while wizards and clerics were limited in their &quot;powers&quot; to a few times per day.&nbsp; The martial classes had the ability exercise their chosen options more frequently.Weapon specialization?&nbsp; You could use it in every combat.&nbsp; Want to specialize in mace too (per your example), take a feat at the next available level (which for fighters happens fairly quickly).&nbsp; Rogue who specialized in diplomacy and now needs to invest in disable device?&nbsp; Yep - next skill level add points.&nbsp; Or buy masterwork tools or magic items.&nbsp; The wizard and cleric were stuck with x amount of spell slots.&nbsp; Their options are their choice in spells and the ability to switch them out each day.In 4e, martial classes have the same options as the caster classes - pick your powers each level.&nbsp; The difference is that martial classes are more versatile than casters.&nbsp; They can still just plain old attack with a reasonable degree of success.&nbsp; The at-will wizard's Magic Missile is no longer a guaranteed hit.&nbsp; What does he get to do if he keeps missing?&nbsp; Waste his encounter and daily powers - those aren't guaranteed successes either.In my very first try of 4e (Tuesday night), I played a cleric.&nbsp; It pretty much consisted of me attempting to use Sacred Flame every round.&nbsp; Because now, everything has been least common denominatored into attack vs. defense.&nbsp; The fighter uses strength to attack.&nbsp; The cleric uses wisdom to attack.No longer do we have a situation where everyone was somewhat useful in combat with the fighter-types being most useful and everyone except the fighter being somewhat useful out of combat.I don't mean to sound negative, but 3.5 spells provided many more options outside of combat than 4e does - due to the versatility of picking a day's worth of spells from a huge cache available to you.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="3catcircus, post: 4353926, member: 16077"] The difference is that earlier editions fighters and rogues could use their "powers" pretty much whenever they wanted to while wizards and clerics were limited in their "powers" to a few times per day. The martial classes had the ability exercise their chosen options more frequently. Weapon specialization? You could use it in every combat. Want to specialize in mace too (per your example), take a feat at the next available level (which for fighters happens fairly quickly). Rogue who specialized in diplomacy and now needs to invest in disable device? Yep - next skill level add points. Or buy masterwork tools or magic items. The wizard and cleric were stuck with x amount of spell slots. Their options are their choice in spells and the ability to switch them out each day. In 4e, martial classes have the same options as the caster classes - pick your powers each level. The difference is that martial classes are more versatile than casters. They can still just plain old attack with a reasonable degree of success. The at-will wizard's Magic Missile is no longer a guaranteed hit. What does he get to do if he keeps missing? Waste his encounter and daily powers - those aren't guaranteed successes either. In my very first try of 4e (Tuesday night), I played a cleric. It pretty much consisted of me attempting to use Sacred Flame every round. Because now, everything has been least common denominatored into attack vs. defense. The fighter uses strength to attack. The cleric uses wisdom to attack. No longer do we have a situation where everyone was somewhat useful in combat with the fighter-types being most useful and everyone except the fighter being somewhat useful out of combat. I don't mean to sound negative, but 3.5 spells provided many more options outside of combat than 4e does - due to the versatility of picking a day's worth of spells from a huge cache available to you. [/QUOTE]

Verification