Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jeff Carlsen" data-source="post: 5808365" data-attributes="member: 61749">I think that the four roles have a place in design, insofar as it's good to have certain bases covered in any group.But I don't think it should be a strongly one class = one role as it was in 4E, and I don't think that the roles should be a forward part of the language of the game.The four roles, really, are Cleric, Fighter, Rogue, Wizard. What each of those means is rather complex. Other classes can fulfill aspects of each of those roles, but should be their own thing as well. For example, the Bard can stand in for some of the elements of the Cleric, but also does his own thing.So, sure, each class should conform a little bit to one of those four, but let's not make it too explicit.</blockquote>