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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MadMaligor" data-source="post: 4232312" data-attributes="member: 66102">If you approach the class as originally created, and want to stick to that option only, its certainly not restricted in 4E.  In fact its supported.  Creating a list of available class/race combinations in any given setting is the first thing I do, and it changes from setting to setting.  That the beauty of the modular system.Class trees have branched tremendously from the fighter, mage, thief, clerics of old (toss in some dwarves and elves if you want to go back further).  D&D has always been about change and expanding or shrinking the rules to create a more flexible system.  4E is no different.  I can see where some of your arguments are trying to stress that 4E is somehow changing things that shouldnt be changed...and you certainly have some good points.  The problem with your arguments is that a minimal amount of house rules covers just about every problem you have, and those rules are supported with the modular style of "Put this in, take this out" rules that 4E is proposing.There is no reason you cant run both a campaign with classic paladin types only, or a campaign where paladins follow a code of conduct set by their god (loosely based on aligment, but more strictly adhering to the mythos and its values), you can even open up the paladin class to allow for a hybrid cleric/fighter type of holy warrior that is less restricted on "do's and don'ts".I see this as a very strong point of 4E.  Cirno, I get where your coming from, but I think your looking at it from a bit of a rigid viewpoint.Mal</blockquote>

Verification