Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hellcow" data-source="post: 4123112" data-attributes="member: 15800">Fair 'nuff. And there's nothing wrong with that. Everyone has different tastes, which is why there's so many different systems. For me, 4E is a change, but it's a positive change. But I respect the fact that others liked things just fine as they were (or are only looking for minor tweaks) and aren't looking for this level of change in core mechanics. I will point out that 3E isn't entirely free from this. Assuming that you don't use NPC classes, a wizard can choose all noncombat spells - but a fighter MUST take his bonus feats from a set list, meaning that he WILL have a certain amount of combat ability. A monk's hands are deadly weapons, even if he doesn't focus on combat. All rogues know how to sneak attack and use hand crossbows, even if you're seeing your rogue as a con artist who hates to fight. All rangers take a combat style at 2nd level; you can't decide to take a "noncombat style" instead, at least by the core rules. Likewise, it's true that in 4E all fighters WILL have a set number of combat powers - but nothing's stopping you from making a fighter with a 10 Strength and spending all your feats on Linguistics and Skill Focus in noncombat skills. Again, if you want a true escape from class roles, you're better off playing a system like GURPS or Hero, IMO - though you could certainly play an expert or a commoner.</blockquote>