Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 6330253" data-attributes="member: 87792">None of which means that your 3.X rogue is other than a murder machine in combat when they dare use it.  You have a lot of combat skill there.  You've medium BAB and a lot of extra damage both at range and in melee.  Being a glass cannon is very different to being actively incompetent at combat.But this is not the mirror to your deliberately crippled 3e Rogue.  You are setting out to ensure that your rogue has no movement abilities and not doing so for the 4E one.  I have yet to see a system with meaningful choices where you can't anti-optimise.Feats are pretty important in 4e.  As for skills, there is one skill in 3.0/3.5 that's a combat skill with no mirror in 4E.  Is your argument really "Because Tumble is no longer a skill you can not cripple a rogue's innate melee ability in the same way"?You're confusing effectiveness with damage.  And then you're throwing in misconceptions about archetype and optimisation.A naively built 4e character is going to be significantly closer to an optimised character than in 3e.  It is very possible, contrary to your assertions, to build a 4e character that sucks in combat.  A rogue with Dex 8 is going to be a mess whatever you do.  The core difference is that 4E is going to tell you that you are doing this and suggest you do something else.  3.X lets you shoot your foot off.  So does 4E.  4E will just warn you first that this is what you are about to do.  There's a world of difference between that and making it impossible to do it.No.  You picked two examples.  The Sorcerer and the Rogue.  The Sorcerer is literally the only example among the 13 3.0/3.5 PHB classes for which your claim is accurate.  Your Rogue example is just simply wrong.  You can cripple people in just about any game.  But out of the box all classes in 3.X are designed to be good at combat and you can't actually take most of their combat ability away.Now if you want to say Commoner 20, Commoner 1/Survivor 5, or some multiclass mash with no BAB and first level spells, that I can't disagree with,</blockquote>

Verification