Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 8871355" data-attributes="member: 6704184">I strongly disagree.level 1-2 isn't a comparison, level 3 is. So lets actually compare. (also, I didn't put anything at level 3 except the subclass, because it's an off the cuff concept draft, so one or even two of those could be level 3)Same number as the Monk, one more than Artificer (but arti gets early half-casting and strong subclasses), 1 less than Paladin, and the Ranger was meant to have 5 and only doesn't have 5 because they messed up on both level 1 abilities. If we are combining Spellcasting and Divine Smite (we aren't, because that's nonsense), then we can also combine the Mark and Aegis because they work directly together.No, it doesn't. Your post illustrates part of the problem of trying to have discussions about it on these forums. People absurdly insist on taking off the cuff ideas for a class, act like it's a final draft, and then pretend that whatever problems they find with it in that context have absolutely anything to do with the discussion in general.It isn't even difficult. There are dozens of them already done, and done well, all over the internet.  Nevermind that my ideas weren't even trying to replicate the 4e class, it literally isn't even bound to being a defender.</blockquote>