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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imaro" data-source="post: 4544266" data-attributes="member: 48965">I love how so many people have played levels 1 -30 in every class, and thus are assured that the game's classes are perfect at every level... <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/ponder.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":hmm:" title="Hmmm    :hmm:" data-shortname=":hmm:" />I also love this fallacy that, if you aren't loving everything about 4e... well you musta played a spellcaster before... <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/ponder.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":hmm:" title="Hmmm    :hmm:" data-shortname=":hmm:" />Yet a fighter could multiclass, with other warrior types in 3.5 to become more diversified...I mean what does the fighter do in 4e that he didn't in 3.5 with the right feat selection and multi-classing choices?  Especially once later splats are introduced?  He sure can't do more damage than a Ranger or Rogue now...but he could in 3.5...Or you might like the Rogue in 3.5 better because he can actually be a specialist in certain thievery-based skill...instead of being basically the same in all of them...but wait a character's enjoyment  is only measured by combat effectiveness in the new D&D paradigm... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f615.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":confused:" title="Confused    :confused:"  data-smilie="5"data-shortname=":confused:" />As is your hyperbole...stunning in how it both exaggerates to absurdity, yet still misses the point.  I'm saying when you can look at other rpg's by smaller companies and their games give you just as much or more bang for your buck...or designers come out and basically say... "Yeah, we knew you guys wanted this in core...and we knew it was popular and a staple of D&D...but we are going to purposefully hold it back so you have to buy another book to get it, not because we need more development time to do it right or don't have it ready."... Honestly was this attitude ever espoused by the designers or developers of previous editions?  Because I sure don't remember it.</blockquote>

Verification