Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 9216169" data-attributes="member: 29398">Part of the issue there was, I think, that in at least one major instance the role of a class was changed from what it had long been seen as to something else.  That instance was the Fighter, long seen as both the main damage dealer AND tank being changed to "defender", with its damage-dealing side stripped off to other "striker" classes; one of which (Rogue) was mostly seen prior as an occasional damage-dealer and otherwise non-combatant.So yes, they codifed the roles...but also changed some of them in ways that might not have been as popular as expected.Another awful role definition, but this one's a 2e error that perpetuated.If you're gonna have roles (and I'm not sure they add much if anything) they absolutely have to encompass things other than just combat.The Ranger's role should be something like "explorer".  The Bard's, "talker".  The Rogue's, "scout" or "looter".  Etc.</blockquote>