Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 4071745" data-attributes="member: 2067">Can I get an Amen?AMEN.I think that's where the legitimate debate is, yes. How flexible should one class be? The 4e designers say &quot;not very -- the focus helps define the role and tells you what you need to know about the class.&quot; Many disagree with this.But then we have a school of thought that says that those in the first school just aren't seeing the big picture, and so they shouldn't be talking about their criticisms yet, before they see it all. This school seems to hold that the designers didn't say that, and that the flexibility is there, it's just obscured because it's incomplete, that the rogue really will be as flexible as it was before, we're just not seeing it all, the first group is just looking for something to criticize. And that any flexibility that is gone deserves to be gone because these characters aren't very good D&amp;D characters anyway because D&amp;D is about medieval fantasy combat and that's it. I like non-flexible classes. I don't think that the 4e rogue will be as flexible as the 3e rogue was. I still want the archetypes it's leaving behind supported. And I think those who are saying that we just don't have the information, that it will be that flexible, and that D&amp;D shouldn't be supporting those archetypes anyway, are kind of putting their heads in the sand.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="I'm A Banana, post: 4071745, member: 2067"] Can I get an Amen? AMEN. I think that's where the legitimate debate is, yes. How flexible should one class be? The 4e designers say "not very -- the focus helps define the role and tells you what you need to know about the class." Many disagree with this. But then we have a school of thought that says that those in the first school just aren't seeing the [I]big picture[/I], and so they shouldn't be talking about their criticisms yet, before they see it all. This school seems to hold that the designers didn't say that, and that the flexibility is there, it's just obscured because it's incomplete, that the rogue really will be as flexible as it was before, we're just not seeing it all, the first group is just looking for something to criticize. And that any flexibility that is gone deserves to be gone because these characters aren't very good D&D characters anyway because D&D is about medieval fantasy combat and that's it. I like non-flexible classes. I don't think that the 4e rogue will be as flexible as the 3e rogue was. I still want the archetypes it's leaving behind supported. And I think those who are saying that we just don't have the information, that it will be that flexible, and that D&D shouldn't be supporting those archetypes anyway, are kind of putting their heads in the sand. [/QUOTE]

Verification