Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Dark080matter" data-source="post: 4108734" data-attributes="member: 61269">This.&nbsp; Just say no to attention-hogging Wizards.&nbsp; Better still, let's nerf-bat them all into Evokers and scatter all of their ridiculously multi-focused utility belt abilities to the four corners of the wind (ie. an actual Illusionist class, actual Necromancer, give Psion his own unique playground of mind-control etc.) so that all the classes get similar amounts of <s>cool</s> impressive, mechanically interesting abilities.I like the Wizard and his arcane buddies, really I do.&nbsp; But then again I like other classes too. In 3.5,&nbsp; I had to consistently multi-class and feat dip out of 3 or 4 different books just so I could have a warrior-archetype who felt like he had 1/3 of the variety of battlefield options of a similar-level spellcaster (Bo9s of course made this task more manageable).&nbsp; And then of course it sucked due to lack of focus!The argument that I've seen made that &quot;well it's simple really, you should just pick a Fighter if you want to roll dice and not think too hard about things, and a Wizard if you don't mind massive bookkeeping.&nbsp; We won't look down on you at all, sir.&quot; always felt a little disingenuous to me.&nbsp; So I'm happy to see what was begun with Bo9s come to completion with 4e setting things straight on this score.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Dark080matter, post: 4108734, member: 61269"] [B]This.[/B] Just say no to attention-hogging Wizards. Better still, let's nerf-bat them all into Evokers and scatter all of their ridiculously multi-focused utility belt abilities to the four corners of the wind (ie. an actual Illusionist class, actual Necromancer, give Psion his own unique playground of mind-control etc.) so that all the classes get similar amounts of [S]cool[/S] impressive, mechanically interesting abilities. I like the Wizard and his arcane buddies, really I do. But then again I like other classes too. In 3.5, I had to consistently multi-class and feat dip out of 3 or 4 different books just so I could have a warrior-archetype who felt like he had 1/3 of the variety of battlefield options of a similar-level spellcaster (Bo9s of course made this task more manageable). And then of course it sucked due to lack of focus! The argument that I've seen made that "well it's simple really, you should just pick a Fighter if you want to roll dice and not think too hard about things, and a Wizard if you don't mind massive bookkeeping. We won't look down on you at all, sir." always felt a little disingenuous to me. So I'm happy to see what was begun with Bo9s come to completion with 4e setting things straight on this score. [/QUOTE]

Verification