no, it is just a logical extrapolation if the paladin is the crusader why not have a hashshashin with the gifts of god as well?
But that wasn't really the core of the Avenger idea. Yes, there is some connection to it, as I said with Ezio. But the core 4e idea was that the Avengers were not the gods'
assassins, but rather their
internal police. Less CIA and more FBI: policing heresy, ending subversive infiltration, and keeping the empowered accountable.
And, as stated, making a cloth-wearing heavy weapon user who focuses on dex and has crazy high AC is basically impossible in 5e. Allowing a Zealot Barbarian to use Dex with a greatsword would come relatively close, but every time I've suggested that it's gotten a
hugely negative reaction, so I've just accepted that the Avenger is not part of 5e's alleged big tent.
a fair point but what of clearly non-combat features or things so situational they are not normally combat in nature how does that stack up?
or fantasies that overlap but are also different.
"Clearly non-combat features" are covered by:
- Various baseline class features (e.g. Bards being able to infinitely multiclass, Wizards getting controls)
- The broad utility and applicability of 4e skills (seriously, skills in 4e are mighty, at least if used as intended)
- Utility powers
- Rituals (and "Martial Practices" which are basically mundane things in the same wheelhouse as rituals)
- Item powers and consumables
- Boons and other forms of magical "reward" that aren't treasures proper
As for "fantasies that overlap," I'll need you to be more specific. E.g. the Wizard being able to do
everything is out, because that's not good class design. But (for instance) the Wizard and Invoker
do overlap in many ways, with the former being somewhat more reckless and scholarly, while the latter is much more party-friendly and very "Moses calling down the plagues," heavy on intuition and proselytizing.