Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="TheCosmicKid" data-source="post: 6790115" data-attributes="member: 6683613">The only class that really clearly approximates a 4E role as a part of its core design is the rogue.&nbsp; (Possibly because the 4E striker role was most clearly designed around 1E-3E rogue design.)&nbsp; Clerics and bards can be &quot;leaders&quot;, but they don't have to be.&nbsp; (A bard can be literally anything.)&nbsp; &quot;Defender&quot; and &quot;controller&quot; are much more 4E-specific concepts than &quot;striker&quot; and &quot;leader&quot;; you'll find that there are tough guys who stand at the front and squishy guys who cast spells, of course, but they don't do the same things mechanically that they did in 4E because 5E places so much less emphasis on tactical positioning.&nbsp; There's nothing like a mark, for instance.PS:&nbsp; The ranger can be more 4E-striker-y than you might think at first glance.&nbsp; The quarry ability is just called hunter's mark and hidden in the spell list instead of being a class feature.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="TheCosmicKid, post: 6790115, member: 6683613"] The only class that really clearly approximates a 4E role as a part of its core design is the rogue. (Possibly because the 4E striker role was most clearly designed around 1E-3E rogue design.) Clerics and bards can be "leaders", but they don't have to be. (A bard can be literally anything.) "Defender" and "controller" are much more 4E-specific concepts than "striker" and "leader"; you'll find that there are tough guys who stand at the front and squishy guys who cast spells, of course, but they don't do the same things mechanically that they did in 4E because 5E places so much less emphasis on tactical positioning. There's nothing like a mark, for instance. PS: The ranger can be more 4E-striker-y than you might think at first glance. The quarry ability is just called [I]hunter's mark[/I] and hidden in the spell list instead of being a class feature. [/QUOTE]

Verification