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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MrMyth" data-source="post: 5659801" data-attributes="member: 61155">Er... no it's not. They are explicitly allowed to choose from the normal list at any point where they are given a power of a listed level.    How many design resources were wasted? The new powers are also usable by the cleric. It let them provide the cleric in the Essentials book that used 95% of the same design of the standard cleric, trading out ritual casters for, as you note, some preselected rituals, and a bunch of 'default' choices. That seems pretty much perfect as an offering for new players.    What would you have done to alter the 4E fighter or barbarian to provide the same benefits as the Slayer?  Remember, folks like the stances and power strike and find them simpler than the at-will/encounter/daily system. I'm confident you could have built a customized Fighter that you found easier to use than a Slayer - but clearly not one that would have helped me, or the various players I've seen who have concerns when dealing with the power system.   It's absolutely true. But many folks didn't like Psionics, either - did that mean they shouldn't have produced it, since that took design space away from supporting existing options?  By this logic, they should have put out the PHB and just supported those classes, never adding anything new at all. No thanks.  Many folks like the Slayer, and it very directly answers concerns they had with the game. I get that you don't like it, but you seem to be going out of your way to try and insist that those WotC should not try and produce material for those folks, just because you don't like it.   ... I'm not sure I've seen this. We've had all of one PC book come out since Essentials, right? (Which hasn't supported the Slayer at all). It did support some Essentials classes... but, honestly, offered as much (or more) support for the PHB Cleric and Wizard.  I'd be absolutely fine with some more support for the Slayer, myself - though I don't think it needs it. What I don't want to see is more support for the Fighter or Wizard, who have buckets and buckets of feats, powers, etc. Yes, I'd like more material for some less-supported classes, but I don't think you can blame Essentials alone for that. Yes, I'd like to see WotC ramp up the content again in general - but, again, that hardly is something somehow caused by the Slayer.   Well, again, it is an issue of the system. I think absolutely the ideal would have been to rebuild the system from the ground up so that transition is a smooth one. But that would have been even more disruptive.  As it is... those 'parent classes' exist. WotC can totally say, "Hey, want a more complex Knight? Check out the PHB! Or DDI! Or this <a href="http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/dra/201104fighter" target="_blank">free article</a> on our website!" But what is wrong with them producing new options that can support the new material and the old? For example, for those who like a middle ground? Or for those who like the Essentials classes or structure, and are happy to see more options with them, without expanding to the option inundanation of a Fighter with hundreds and hundreds of feats and powers?</blockquote>

Verification