Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="gamerprinter" data-source="post: 5682035" data-attributes="member: 50895">Because its easier to explain without over fiddly details. I've created alternate versions of all the classes for use in Kaidan. While the setting doesn't exclude certain classes, there are a couple I have yet (and may not) detail for the setting, as they don't belong flavor-wise, including the Summoner. But pretty much all the classes are represented. In fact in the Tengu book, where I was explaining my build of the light armored fighter, there is a cavalier, a magus, and a paladin. I've got other race books with builds on sorcerer, cleric, druid, etc. But I picked a light armored fighter in my example, because its easier to explain in a short post on a forum - not for any other reason. Another difference between 4e and PF, is that in PF I have a limited number of classes that through archetypes creates many flavors (dozens of options), while in 4e, I have dozens of classes that all fit the same four roles. Kind of looking at the same problem from opposite points of view. I don't need dozens and dozens of classes to achieve the variety of character builds. A dozen is fine for me, really, I could live with a lot less (I really don't need most of the new classes from the APG.) Archetypes allow me to build anything that I'd possibly want to play with, within the socalled limit of the classes. While 4e's direction is certainly viable, it isn't the fix that I prefer. PF does it for me better.</blockquote>

Verification