Tony Vargas
Legend
There /wasn't/ a class for every source/role pair. There was, for one instance, no Martial Controller. There was also no … er … well, there was no Martial Controller.I can't speak for everyone, but 4E for me had a lot of class bloat. I personally disliked the approach of making a class for every source/role pair
Let me try that again: There wasn't /a/ class for every source/role pair. There were /two/ Martial Strikers, /two/ Arcane Strikers, /two/ Arcane Leaders, /two/ Primal Controllers, and /two/ Divine Leaders... and that's before getting into E+ sub-classes with mixed sources and/or alternate roles, like Ranger(Hunter), Warlock(Binder), Druid(Sentinel), etc...
...yeah, that held up better. Though, it also drove home that there was class (or at least sub-class) bloat.
...OK, to be fair, Shadow & Elemental also weren't proper Sources.
There were a lot shared in 1e, too. And, they were all /spells/, no distinction between spells/prayers/invocation., and I disliked powers being by class instead of being largely shared (for example, look at how many spells in 3E/5E are shared between classes).
I do think it'd've been a cool evolution of 4e if powers had been by Source, and Features had been by Role, with class being primarily conceptual, or perhaps about role in other pillars. So a Ranger is a guy who runs around in the woods, he is /probably/ using Martial powers, and may well pick a Striker Feature, but Controller or Defender is hardly out of the question - Primal powers might be on the table, too.
Last edited: