Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mort" data-source="post: 4357124" data-attributes="member: 762">You seem to have some big misconceptions about 4e designEveryone has healing surges but that does not make everyone an effective healer. The fighter has a few tricks that can get himself a few HP's he can't affect the healing of others. Saying this makes him as good a healer as the cleric is ludicrous.Again a misconception. Everyone has a role to play in combat - but some are much better at dealing damage, some are better at soaking and preventing others from taking damage and some are better at controlling the terrain and the area. Saying everyone does everything equally well is totally inaccurate.The 4e designers decided the old &quot;balance tool&quot; of having some classes good in combat and some out of combat led to a lot of thumb twittling (and of course the problem that some were good in and out of combat and some good at neither).This is completely wrong. a party of halfling rogues (a party of strikers in 4e parlance) is going to do some things quite well - such as hit and run. But is going to have some glaring weaknesses such as no staying power, no ability to control the field, and most importantly no ability to heal others when they are in trouble except with outside help.Funny I played the same sample and the classes played completely differently. That said, one sample (for you or me) does not a play experience make.There are a lot of valid criticisms of 4e - I don't think saying that the classes all have the same focus, the same strenghts and weaknesses is one of them however.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mort, post: 4357124, member: 762"] You seem to have some big misconceptions about 4e design Everyone has healing surges but that does not make everyone an effective healer. The fighter has a few tricks that can get himself a few HP's he can't affect the healing of others. Saying this makes him as good a healer as the cleric is ludicrous. Again a misconception. Everyone has a role to play in combat - but some are much better at dealing damage, some are better at soaking and preventing others from taking damage and some are better at controlling the terrain and the area. Saying everyone does everything equally well is totally inaccurate. The 4e designers decided the old "balance tool" of having some classes good in combat and some out of combat led to a lot of thumb twittling (and of course the problem that some were good in and out of combat and some good at neither). This is completely wrong. a party of halfling rogues (a party of strikers in 4e parlance) is going to do some things quite well - such as hit and run. But is going to have some glaring weaknesses such as no staying power, no ability to control the field, and most importantly no ability to heal others when they are in trouble except with outside help. Funny I played the same sample and the classes played completely differently. That said, one sample (for you or me) does not a play experience make. There are a lot of valid criticisms of 4e - I don't think saying that the classes all have the same focus, the same strenghts and weaknesses is one of them however. [/QUOTE]

Verification