Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ferratus" data-source="post: 5998988" data-attributes="member: 55966">You are confusing the Wizard (with charm monster on the purple worm) with the Ranger, and Cleric (the main healer and buffer) with Paladin here.&nbsp;&nbsp; Nobody is doubtinbg the Cleric's and Wizard's place at the table.&nbsp; They are called the big 4 for a reason, in that they have a defined role in the game.&nbsp;&nbsp; The rogue is the skilled one, the Cleric is the healer and buffer, the Wizard is the spellcaster, and the Fighter is the defender and slayer.If WotC wants to convince me of that, they have to do a better job than people have done so far.&nbsp;&nbsp; Because a ranger and paladin are just minor tweaks in D&amp;D.&nbsp;&nbsp; With backgrounds and specialities available for minor tweaks now, there is a lot less for classes to do.&nbsp; So they better start justifying their existence and coming up with something better.&nbsp;&nbsp; I can already play the Ranger that is just a minor tweak of a fighter.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ferratus, post: 5998988, member: 55966"] You are confusing the Wizard (with charm monster on the purple worm) with the Ranger, and Cleric (the main healer and buffer) with Paladin here. Nobody is doubtinbg the Cleric's and Wizard's place at the table. They are called the big 4 for a reason, in that they have a defined role in the game. The rogue is the skilled one, the Cleric is the healer and buffer, the Wizard is the spellcaster, and the Fighter is the defender and slayer. If WotC wants to convince me of that, they have to do a better job than people have done so far. Because a ranger and paladin are just minor tweaks in D&D. With backgrounds and specialities available for minor tweaks now, there is a lot less for classes to do. So they better start justifying their existence and coming up with something better. I can already play the Ranger that is just a minor tweak of a fighter. [/QUOTE]

Verification