Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 5488645" data-attributes="member: 2067">To get under the skin of the value of simplicity here (and why the choice between "simple or options" is a false choice):"Every fighter works the same" is a problem when you only have one Fighter. When there's no other option."Every fighter works the same" is a lot less of a problem when you have 12 different things that could be called "fighters."Barbarians. Swordmages. Rogues. Warlords. Monks. Paladins. Rangers.Furthermore: Tempests. Knights. Slayers. The more classes you have (and I'd argue that each 4e build is largely functionally the same as a class), the less variety within a class you need, since if you want to play a different sort of fighter, you can just pick up a different class, and if you want to blend styles, you can multiclass (which is also easier when there's lots of classes).  If you have a lot of different "classes," it frees up each class you have to do something specific, and do it well. This means you can customize outside of a class. You're less concerned with being a different-looking fighter, and more concerned with your particular character's abilities and experiences. It's very likely, because of the large number of classes, that you will have no problem looking different from other fighters, without having to have fighters themselves have a lot of internal options.</blockquote>