Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ximenes088" data-source="post: 4157572" data-attributes="member: 59899">A 3.5 fighter who resolutely plowed everything into bow feats and Dexterity would become a light-armored, highly effective bow fighter that had no meaningful use for sword-and-board heavy armor fighting. In 4e, we write &quot;ranger&quot; instead of &quot;fighter&quot; in the class blank and produce the exact same character.Rogues were miserable bow snipers in 3.5. They'd get one shot from ten paces away, and good luck killing anything that matters with one sneak-attack arrow.Clerics could be splendid archers with their buff spells and domain powers. Clerics could be splendid _anything_ with their buff spells and domain powers, and that's why they've been intentionally nerfed in 4e. Playing a holy archer in 4e is intended to demand more than a simple opportunity cost in domain picks.Barbarians could use their strength increase with thrown weapons, yes. Exactly like fighters, warlords, or any other class can do in 4e, to my understanding.In 4e, if you want to be the _best_ archer, you pick the class specifically designed to be that. Unless you find some objective value in spreading bow skills more equally among the classes, this is exactly how it ought to be. I find no value in having two perfectly-balanced archer PCs that differ only in class name, and I find positive harm in having one of them be a great archer while the other's a great archer and great defender too.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ximenes088, post: 4157572, member: 59899"] A 3.5 fighter who resolutely plowed everything into bow feats and Dexterity would become a light-armored, highly effective bow fighter that had no meaningful use for sword-and-board heavy armor fighting. In 4e, we write "ranger" instead of "fighter" in the class blank and produce the exact same character. Rogues were miserable bow snipers in 3.5. They'd get one shot from ten paces away, and good luck killing anything that matters with one sneak-attack arrow. Clerics could be splendid archers with their buff spells and domain powers. Clerics could be splendid _anything_ with their buff spells and domain powers, and that's why they've been intentionally nerfed in 4e. Playing a holy archer in 4e is intended to demand more than a simple opportunity cost in domain picks. Barbarians could use their strength increase with thrown weapons, yes. Exactly like fighters, warlords, or any other class can do in 4e, to my understanding. In 4e, if you want to be the _best_ archer, you pick the class specifically designed to be that. Unless you find some objective value in spreading bow skills more equally among the classes, this is exactly how it ought to be. I find no value in having two perfectly-balanced archer PCs that differ only in class name, and I find positive harm in having one of them be a great archer while the other's a great archer and great defender too. [/QUOTE]

Verification