Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="GoodKingJayIII" data-source="post: 3290200" data-attributes="member: 13804">I'm a big fan of flexibility too.&nbsp; I love options.&nbsp; I wish they'd do for Paladins what Monte did for Champions.&nbsp; Likewise, if I had to pick between the mage blade and the duskblade, I'd pick the former every time.&nbsp; But I don't necessarily find the DnD versions lacking.&nbsp; I think they're more generic, and I believe that's intentional.&nbsp; I also don't necessarily have a problem with a class that has a clearly defined role.&nbsp; Beguilers are a new take on illusionists (an interpretation I think was very good).&nbsp; Duskblade's cast spells and beat the tar out of things.&nbsp; The dragon shaman I could take or leave (really, a prestige class stretched out over 20 levels), but I see no inherent issues with the class, so if a player wanted to play one, I'd be fine with that.&nbsp; Knights are weird... the best comparison I have is Iron Heroes' armiger (in terms of role).&nbsp; But I don't see the issue with class abilities that encourage a player towards a specific role.&nbsp; After all, isn't that the whole point of a class in the first place?Ulric, I don't know what your specific purpose is, but I think if you want to a DnD only game, go with the PHBII.&nbsp; If you're looking to spice up your game, implement unqiue classes, magic, and so forth, AE's your ticket.&nbsp; Neither is perfect.&nbsp; PHBII can just cause more inflation, and AE is like the &quot;3.5&quot; of Arcana Unearthed; basically the same game, but full of unnecessary changes, additions, and revisions.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="GoodKingJayIII, post: 3290200, member: 13804"] I'm a big fan of flexibility too. I love options. I wish they'd do for Paladins what Monte did for Champions. Likewise, if I had to pick between the mage blade and the duskblade, I'd pick the former every time. But I don't necessarily find the DnD versions lacking. I think they're more generic, and I believe that's intentional. I also don't necessarily have a problem with a class that has a clearly defined role. Beguilers are a new take on illusionists (an interpretation I think was very good). Duskblade's cast spells and beat the tar out of things. The dragon shaman I could take or leave (really, a prestige class stretched out over 20 levels), but I see no inherent issues with the class, so if a player wanted to play one, I'd be fine with that. Knights are weird... the best comparison I have is Iron Heroes' armiger (in terms of role). But I don't see the issue with class abilities that encourage a player towards a specific role. After all, isn't that the whole point of a class in the first place? Ulric, I don't know what your specific purpose is, but I think if you want to a DnD only game, go with the PHBII. If you're looking to spice up your game, implement unqiue classes, magic, and so forth, AE's your ticket. Neither is perfect. PHBII can just cause more inflation, and AE is like the "3.5" of Arcana Unearthed; basically the same game, but full of unnecessary changes, additions, and revisions. [/QUOTE]

Verification