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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Darkthorne" data-source="post: 4480473" data-attributes="member: 60783">Mallus,You and I agree on how to build it 100% and for combat purposes it's mostly dead on. I do agree the reasons I gave may not be good ones, but for some people they are valid reasons whether or not you & I disagree with them (not all goups are lucky to have good DMs). For 4E you look at combat abilities/powers first to build your concept then tweak from there. I think part of some people's issue with how 4E feels "off" in regards to character gen is that the concept someone has in mind does not match up with how the classes have been rewritten/overhauled completely. I think simply renaming a couple of the classes would have made a huge stride in overcoming people's mindset. A fighter now is only a tank/damage soak device nothing more (also not there is anything wrong with that). The wizard should have been renamed as they are now a tweaked specialist class (evoker/transmuter someone mentioned previously) they are not close to overall caster type they once were. Anyone that meets the prereq can do rituals so it's not a huge value add to that class specifically. Previous editions I believe you could do concept to a class immediately "I want a fighter that does...." w/o having to be optimized or stuck into needing a specific stat (fighters now NEED to have a high STR, min of 16 before they hinder the group). I can easily see that WotC designed this to balance w/ maxed out required stats for the class in question. It's nice to play a character type that isn't as optimized as it can be, or does things differently due to that non-optimization. I wish they set the bar a bit lower in regards to this for balance</blockquote>

Verification