Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="the Jester" data-source="post: 5471058" data-attributes="member: 1210">I agree with this. Option overload is a huge factor in 4e, especially if you don't use the Character Builder. Making the runepriest a 2-in-1 is bad enough; making a 4-in-1 elementalist would be horrendous.The way I have considered designing an elementalist class (which has a long tradition in my campaign) would be to have each build focus on one element, have two 'secondary' and one 'opposed'. Each element would have an associated at will and you could choose the other from the rest of the list of elementalist at wills; however, you couldn't choose a power of the opposed element. Then, for encounter, daily and utilities, each power would have an associated element. Each level would have at least one power associated with each element. Again, you could take one from any non-opposed element, but you would have to have at least as many powers of a given type from your element as from any other given element (so a fire elementalist would have to have 2 fire encounter attack powers before getting a second air or earth one, and wouldn't be able to take water at all).Of course, that's for one overall elementalist class in the model of the one I've used for years in 2e and later; it would probably be either a defender or a striker, and there is certainly room to fill out the roles with this power source.</blockquote>