Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 4208583" data-attributes="member: 2067">To clear up the Alignment issue first, it seems 4e will have alignments that require you to *commit* to it. So you aren't just Evil because you don't play nice with others -- you are Evil specifically because you CHOOSE to be evil.Secondly, the beating-and-healing clerics are probably more related to the Leader role than to anything specifically Cleric-y. 4e wanted to make sure that you could do more on your turn than just heal, and they wanted to encourage leader players to go do something instead of standing there like an HP factory, so they linked it to attack mechanics. I'm pretty sure the Warlord is the same way.Self-interested or arrogant spellcasters might be better represented by the Warlock, or some as-yet-hidden class. It might take some house rulin' ("divine pacts" or whatever), but there's definately room for it in the game (just probably not as a "leader." Which makes sense -- if you're interested mostly in your own good, you're not going to get a lot of followers.I'm very confident 4e will support, in general terms, the "nonheroic" archetype. In many ways, it's exactly what the Tiefling is described as -- unpleasant and self-interested without being throughly evil by necessity. There's also the idea of things like the Paladin being opened up to evil characters and the like. And the fair liklihood of a 4e Book of Vile Darkness style tome. Also works with the Warlock class.It just might not be the best fit for the Leader role.</blockquote>

Verification