Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5627470" data-attributes="member: 82106">Yeah, I think in a sense that's true. I sort of see the existing 4e situation as one where you have a group of highly generic super flexible base classes, which offer a lot of options and a lot of ways to pull in elements of other classes but require a lot of fiddling. They're great for building very specific options that are either not common enough or currently supported. Then you have your 'e-classes' which provide a specific focused build in an easy to implement package. They are just aimed at filling different needs. I know it is fashionable to assume that the newer classes represent some kind of abandonment of the concepts embodied by the original generalized classes, but I don't think that's really a good way of looking at it. The Essentials style classes by themselves can't really provide a complete D&amp;D, not in the post 3e multi-classing world at least. The 4e devs know that. They rely on the fact that the game already has these flexible generalized 'classic' classes. This allows them to be free to narrow their focus. It makes perfectly good logical sense that they now concentrate on these niches. After all, there are infinite little niches you can fit in the cracks between the classic classes broad concepts.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 5627470, member: 82106"] Yeah, I think in a sense that's true. I sort of see the existing 4e situation as one where you have a group of highly generic super flexible base classes, which offer a lot of options and a lot of ways to pull in elements of other classes but require a lot of fiddling. They're great for building very specific options that are either not common enough or currently supported. Then you have your 'e-classes' which provide a specific focused build in an easy to implement package. They are just aimed at filling different needs. I know it is fashionable to assume that the newer classes represent some kind of abandonment of the concepts embodied by the original generalized classes, but I don't think that's really a good way of looking at it. The Essentials style classes by themselves can't really provide a complete D&D, not in the post 3e multi-classing world at least. The 4e devs know that. They rely on the fact that the game already has these flexible generalized 'classic' classes. This allows them to be free to narrow their focus. It makes perfectly good logical sense that they now concentrate on these niches. After all, there are infinite little niches you can fit in the cracks between the classic classes broad concepts. [/QUOTE]

Verification