Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ulthwithian" data-source="post: 4157541" data-attributes="member: 60612">Derren: Well, I guess my point is that in 3.X, unless you specialized in archery, you couldn't be a 'good archer'.I believe your counterpoint is that you could do this in 3.X, correct?&nbsp; You then acknowledge that apparently you can do this in 4E, but must do so using Ranger abilities, correct?Well, so far as we know currently, it would seem you are correct.&nbsp; However, we have seen very few Feats in 4E.You seem to be unenthusiastic about the much tighter class/power ties in 4E rather than 3.X.&nbsp; In 3.5, you could read the Fighter and Ranger class descriptions and immediately pick up that they had Ranged specializations available.&nbsp; However, this is not true in 4E (presumably).I think it might help to slightly decouple the 'Ranger' class from the 'Ranger powers'.&nbsp; If anyone can (for example) take a feat to gain a 'Ranger power', then specialization is still possible, even if you have to use 'Ranger powers'.&nbsp; This is a guess, but it would seem that you would have preferred something more akin to the Bo9S approach where the powers were not explicitly tied to classes, yes?At this point, whether or not your concern is addressed would depend on how easily it is to take powers from other classes.&nbsp; Or would this not effectively help the situation?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ulthwithian, post: 4157541, member: 60612"] Derren: Well, I guess my point is that in 3.X, unless you specialized in archery, you couldn't be a 'good archer'. I believe your counterpoint is that you [i]could[/i] do this in 3.X, correct? You then acknowledge that apparently you can do this in 4E, but must do so using Ranger abilities, correct? Well, so far as we know currently, it would seem you are correct. However, we have seen very few Feats in 4E. You seem to be unenthusiastic about the much tighter class/power ties in 4E rather than 3.X. In 3.5, you could read the Fighter and Ranger class descriptions and immediately pick up that they had Ranged specializations available. However, this is not true in 4E (presumably). I think it might help to slightly decouple the 'Ranger' class from the 'Ranger powers'. If anyone can (for example) take a feat to gain a 'Ranger power', then specialization is still possible, even if you have to use 'Ranger powers'. This is a guess, but it would seem that you would have preferred something more akin to the Bo9S approach where the powers were not explicitly tied to classes, yes? At this point, whether or not your concern is addressed would depend on how easily it is to take powers from other classes. Or would this not effectively help the situation? [/QUOTE]

Verification