Arkhandus said:
Yeah. Never you mind that the 3.0 PHB had fewer pages and allowed for several different kinds of rogue, fighter, ranger, cleric, wizard, sorcerer, druid, monk, etc. :\
Several different kinds of each class, through class feature choices/spell choices and feat or ability score choices. Rogues could sneak attack with whatever the heck they felt like wielding, even if it was just a handy rock or broken bottle. They could be sneaky or not. They could be thieves or not. They could be spies or not. Fighters could be better archers than rangers, better two-weapon fighters than rangers, or better sword-and-boarders than rangers, or better two-handed weapon wielders than rangers. Etc.
4e so far seems to pigeonhole the classes more.
Really? This must be a joke.
Player chosen class features in 3.0:
Skills
Feats
Spells(maybe)
Domains/School Specialization(maybe)
Equipment - limited, sort of, by proficiency and cost
Player chosen class features in 4.0:
Skills
Feats
Spells/Rituals(maybe)
Domains/Warlock Oaths(maybe)
Equipment - limited, sort of, by proficiency and cost
At-Will Powers
Per Encounter Powers
Per Day Powers
Tactics(maybe)
Weapon Specialization(maybe)
etc.??(maybe??)
You can argue in some arbitrary sense that 4.0 classes are more limiting, but it is empirically wrong to argue that players have fewer choices in determining their class features or builds. Just because some choices for two classes - fighter and rogue are the only things where I see people crying foul just yet - have been (arguably) deselected doesn't mean that the player has fewer choices as a whole or fewer builds to choose from.
At least, it's wrong to argue that at this juncture. Maybe there will come a point when the PHB comes out that we can actually enumerate the trade off in skills, feats, spells, equipment, and other choices between the two editions of the PHB and maybe at that point 4.0 will come out behind.
But categorically, the 4.0 class building system offers players more options and choices.