Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="(un)reason" data-source="post: 6274656" data-attributes="member: 27780">Best of Dragon Magazine 4part 2/6The duelist: The new fighty classes continue to come out better than the spellcasters with the duelist, which does look slightly overpowered compared to regular fighters, but in a fun way, like Paladins and Rangers, adding on a bunch of little tricks while never reaching the sheer versatility primary spellcasters can muster. I suppose that's an indictment of just how little vanilla fighters can do, which makes inventing new classes that overlap with them much easier, and needed to fulfil many people's character concepts. With wizards, people just added new spells to the existing class if they want to do something new. With fighters, they'd have to wait until kits were introduced next edition to make little changes like that easy. The jester: Now love or hate them, I think we can agree that Jesters don't overlap much with any of the existing classes, so while you might not want them in your party, if you did, you couldn't just say "reskin a rogue" and get a satisfactory result. And while annoying, they certainly are effective with their bag of tricks in both surviving and making enemies look foolish. The trick, of course is realising you still have to work with the other members of the party, and know when to temporarily get serious. They're one that I definitely appreciate more coming back, knowing just how much more serious the magazine became over the years. Their best april contributions combined humour and usability, and this fits the bill on that count, so it's good to see it again. The scribe: Now, if the death master is somewhat underpowered when compared to regular PC's, the scribe is downright weedy. It is substantially improved mechanically from the version in the second best of, in that it is an actual class rather than an insult to our intelligence and excuse to bilk PC's out of money. But even Ed Greenwood can't make it interesting, or desirable to include in our games in anything but the most peripheral way. Weak. I do not know why they bothered to include it. The smith: Smiths, on the other hand, still seem quite interesting, even if they use their own system of multiclassing that breaks the rules. (but then, with bards and ninjas, they're in fine company) While not really suited as a primary adventuring character, they're useful enough that they'd work as part of an ensemble party, and save the other PC's a good deal of money in the process. After all, Scotty rarely went on away missions, but he was still both an important member of the team, and interesting in his own right. You can definitely manage that kind of dynamic, especially if each player has more than one character.</blockquote>

Verification