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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7612412" data-attributes="member: 996">Nope.  The tempest fighter's signature at-will ("Dual Strike" IIRC - I actually played a Brawling fighter build that took several tempest-intended powers, they could be pretty cool) could only target two separate enemies, not focus on one.  Since fighters mark anyone they swing at and Rangers got their damage buff from Hunter's Quarry by hitting, just like that, it became a solid Defender power, while Twin Strike stayed the Ranger's striker bread-and-butter.  In an evolved 4e, you /could/ meld them into a single double-attack power, with Role changing exactly how it worked to suit. It'd be elegant, but also less accessible to new players.One thing 1e and 4e got right, and one of the few things I'll venture 5e got wrong, for new players and old goats like me, alike, was grouping spells and powers by class.It's very friendly and intuitive to just look at the options available to your class, at your level, without filtering through every other spell that starts with the same letter.Not only that, but there's a precious, fleeting "immersions" experience you get when you know what your class can do, but everyone else at the table is a mystery.  3e/5e alphabetical unified spell list kills that the moment you build a caster (and thats almost everyone in 5e, too).So, it's be a mixed blessing to consolidate powers, whether by Source or some other criterion. BM Manuevers are like a taste of what a 5e Warlord might reasonably be built around.  The way an EK would be a taste of what a Wizard'd be like if there were no Wizard - just much less so.  Like, if an EK only ever learned 6 spells in his whole career, and they were all 1st level.</blockquote>

Verification