Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Sylrae" data-source="post: 4351714" data-attributes="member: 48520">It's true 4e has much more balanced classes.Unfortunately all the classes have neatly defined roles, and that I don't like.There's also no multiclassing. the stuff they call multiclassing doesn't work enough to count. it's less multiclass than 2e's dual classes, and those weren't multiclassing either.the more balanced classes in 4e are on of the few things it has going for it in my opinion (besides a few specific mechanic changes which are easily adapted to 3.5, and a shortened skill list similar to the one i have house rules into 3.5 anyways.I'm not trying to balance caster classes against melee ones, because it really isn't possible cause of the different style in which theyre designed. Melee classes are ahead for maybe the first 12 levels, then the caster classes stat to outshine them (assuming you didnt multiclass or take a +la race or a prestige class, that is) what I'm suggesting is that the caster classes should be balanced against eachother.and you say they aren't supposed to be balanced against eachother. not that i disagree, there is certainly evidence to support your opinion, but what specifically would you recommend to balance it myself?anything not already mentioned, besides the phb 2 wildshaping? (which i have not yet looked at)get back to me.and im not going for perfect balance, that would be damn near impossible. if theyre close to the same power level, spread out over all their abilities (combat and otherwise) thats good enough for me.the wizard is say for example, the exponential curve. the fighter the line, and the cleric is what you get when you take 75% of the fighter and add it to 100% of the wizard.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Sylrae, post: 4351714, member: 48520"] It's true 4e has much more balanced classes. Unfortunately all the classes have neatly defined roles, and that I don't like. There's also no multiclassing. the stuff they call multiclassing doesn't work enough to count. it's less multiclass than 2e's dual classes, and those weren't multiclassing either. the more balanced classes in 4e are on of the few things it has going for it in my opinion (besides a few specific mechanic changes which are easily adapted to 3.5, and a shortened skill list similar to the one i have house rules into 3.5 anyways. I'm not trying to balance caster classes against melee ones, because it really isn't possible cause of the different style in which theyre designed. Melee classes are ahead for maybe the first 12 levels, then the caster classes stat to outshine them (assuming you didnt multiclass or take a +la race or a prestige class, that is) what I'm suggesting is that the caster classes should be balanced against eachother. and you say they aren't supposed to be balanced against eachother. not that i disagree, there is certainly evidence to support your opinion, but what specifically would you recommend to balance it myself? anything not already mentioned, besides the phb 2 wildshaping? (which i have not yet looked at) get back to me. and im not going for perfect balance, that would be damn near impossible. if theyre close to the same power level, spread out over all their abilities (combat and otherwise) thats good enough for me. the wizard is say for example, the exponential curve. the fighter the line, and the cleric is what you get when you take 75% of the fighter and add it to 100% of the wizard. [/QUOTE]

Verification