Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 5809521" data-attributes="member: 22779">Well, ok.&nbsp; Then where's the problem?&nbsp; Specialization at all is bad?&nbsp; Every edition had classes specialized at certain things.&nbsp; Where it went off the ranch somewhat was that the casters could out specialize everyone else because of the spell system.&nbsp; Roles simply added a bit of niche protection.Again, if roles are straight jackets, then where is the problem?Meh.&nbsp; I like the idea of niche protection.&nbsp; If all classes can be anything, then why bother having classes at all?&nbsp; Go all the way and make the game point based a la HERO or GURPS.&nbsp; Classes, depending on your point of view, are either strong archetypes gathered around a common theme, or a bag of mechanics gathered around a common theme.&nbsp; Either way, they're gathered around a common theme.If another class can jump in and do your schtick as well as you can, why bother with class at all?A wizard doesn't out do the strikers in single target damage because that would put strikers out of a job.&nbsp; OTOH, you can build a wizard that does a pretty darn good job emulating a striker, although, he's not quite as good as the best strikers.&nbsp; Fantastic.&nbsp; We have differentiation between classes - that answers the whole &quot;homogenous classes&quot; thing.&nbsp; A rogue can't out do the wizard in mass effects, but, he can take a number of area attacks and status debuffs which put him in the same ballpark as the wizard.&nbsp; Again, he's not as good as a wizard, but, he gains some other things in return (better armor, more hit points, etc).&nbsp; If roles aren't a straight jacket forcing you into specifics, they also aren't so open that they allow you to ride roughshod over another class' schtick.A striker wizard or a controller rogue is still a wizard or a rogue, with all the basics that that entails.&nbsp; However, they can do the other roles well enough that they are making valuable contributions to the group and aren't riding the pines because they are completely inneffective.I mean, try making a defenderish thief in AD&amp;D and watch what happens.&nbsp; Or try straying outside of role with any non-magic class in 3e.&nbsp; At least the classes are versatile enough in 4e that they can actually operate outside of their niche without having to patch on a magic system to do so.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 5809521, member: 22779"] Well, ok. Then where's the problem? Specialization at all is bad? Every edition had classes specialized at certain things. Where it went off the ranch somewhat was that the casters could out specialize everyone else because of the spell system. Roles simply added a bit of niche protection. Again, if roles are straight jackets, then where is the problem? Meh. I like the idea of niche protection. If all classes can be anything, then why bother having classes at all? Go all the way and make the game point based a la HERO or GURPS. Classes, depending on your point of view, are either strong archetypes gathered around a common theme, or a bag of mechanics gathered around a common theme. Either way, they're gathered around a common theme. If another class can jump in and do your schtick as well as you can, why bother with class at all? A wizard doesn't out do the strikers in single target damage because that would put strikers out of a job. OTOH, you can build a wizard that does a pretty darn good job emulating a striker, although, he's not quite as good as the best strikers. Fantastic. We have differentiation between classes - that answers the whole "homogenous classes" thing. A rogue can't out do the wizard in mass effects, but, he can take a number of area attacks and status debuffs which put him in the same ballpark as the wizard. Again, he's not as good as a wizard, but, he gains some other things in return (better armor, more hit points, etc). If roles aren't a straight jacket forcing you into specifics, they also aren't so open that they allow you to ride roughshod over another class' schtick. A striker wizard or a controller rogue is still a wizard or a rogue, with all the basics that that entails. However, they can do the other roles well enough that they are making valuable contributions to the group and aren't riding the pines because they are completely inneffective. I mean, try making a defenderish thief in AD&D and watch what happens. Or try straying outside of role with any non-magic class in 3e. At least the classes are versatile enough in 4e that they can actually operate outside of their niche without having to patch on a magic system to do so. [/QUOTE]

Verification