Neonchameleon
Legend
[MENTION=94650]RLBURNSIDE[/MENTION],
You seem to be blaming the system for problems with the DM and the rest of the group (and possibly yourself). Forcing you into chain and not allowing masterwork was just incompetence on the DM's part. And you were playing with the worst balanced part of 4e - the Hybrid rules. (The rest is generally fine but good hybrids are hideously abusable and bad ones are ... bad; Hybrids are one of the few things I ban when DMing).
Armour - heavy armour and heavy shield wearing classes are right at the top of the AC league. Next come the people who can catch flies with their bare hands. But the Plate Armour + Heavy Shield Paladin is almost impossible to catch. (It can be done with a dex 20 monk, Unarmoured Agility, and Hafted Defence on his staff - but that's two feats to none and monks are meant to be very hard to hit). But if you start arbitrarily docking the AC of the people in heavy armour, of course everyone else is going to catch up.
And for maneuverability, speed isn't what matters. Shift 1 is shift 1 and that's the main in combat movement. Yes, defenders are less maneuverable than strikers - but defenders make it hard for the enemy to move. The classes need to be seen as a whole package.
I have no idea. But nothing there has anything to do with 4e. Everything you list in that paragraph is down to your DM and the rest of the play group.
Strictly false. A ranger|sorceror has strictly fewer hit points than a ranger|paladin. And can't wear the plate armour it takes one feat for the ranger|paladin to put on and thereby fix his AC (remember that ranger|sorcerors start off with being proficient in no armour - and if you're talking melee, neither primary stat adds to AC; you might as well be wearing concentric circles on your chest). Both hybrids have poor synergy anyway - especially the ranger/sorceror. That doesn't prevent hybrids being the most broken part of 4e - a particularly bad case would be the Wizard|Swordmage with its wizard control powers, a mark, and its swordmage interrupts and warding.
On at wills? This would require them hitting? In melee? Not something you can guarantee - whereas you can guarantee marking with a paladin mark. And the best way to defend others from being hit is to get them to attack someone else - i.e. you. Which is why paladins have the best starting AC in the game as that allows you to give the enemy a bad choice; whether to attack you (and miss lots - while you have powers to heal yourself) or attack someone else (and take -2 to hit and automatic damage).
And if you want crowd control, you can divine sanction every enemy in close burst three every fight as a minor action.
This is either a personal or a group issue because that's not what I've found. To me the dull class to play would be the always-twin-striking ranger.
I know, I played one for a year and it got boring, fast, especially when the warden joined us. Two defenders and a badly played striker meant combat was droning on and on and on. There are real reasons why people want to switch classes, if you use your imagination and don't just assume the worst in people.
At what level could he give that debuff? Because an out of the box level 1 PHB only paladin can follow up a Challenge with the at will Enfeebling Strike. -2 to hit cold on top of your mark. This gives them -4 against anyone else. And still giving them -2 to hit against your heavy armour and large shield. Plus you went hybrid. Plus you are insanely squishy as a Ranger|Sorceror - 4.5 hp per level isn't it? And no armour at all until you spend feats? And I assume you mean a melee ranger here - meaning it's still easy for people to hit you. You need to bump both strength and charisma to hit things - meaning that your AC is going to suck (your best bet is to burn two feats on leather armour then chain).
Allowing masterwork armour, care to justify that? Or is this the unarmoured defence?
That you are blaming the DM for system issues? Flying mounts exist - you just no longer get Pokemounts. As for classes, the most common class in the game and probably the most powerful is ... The Fighter. Who is (a) a defender and (b) wears heavy armour.
And in my 4e game, my monk can use wire-fu to fly from 2nd level.
You are welcome to your opinion. We, however, have statistics - the online character builder allows them. And in 4e the most popular class is the fighter. A heavy armour wearing defender. There are classes I find dull - the ranger is one of them. But that doesn't mean I want it gone. Others like to play the single target damage kings, and good luck to them.
That's a group and RP issue. Not an edition war issue.
DMs have every right to tell people what classes they can't play. As for what they can, that's social convention. And stop blaming the system for issues with the group please.
You seem to be blaming the system for problems with the DM and the rest of the group (and possibly yourself). Forcing you into chain and not allowing masterwork was just incompetence on the DM's part. And you were playing with the worst balanced part of 4e - the Hybrid rules. (The rest is generally fine but good hybrids are hideously abusable and bad ones are ... bad; Hybrids are one of the few things I ban when DMing).
Armour - heavy armour and heavy shield wearing classes are right at the top of the AC league. Next come the people who can catch flies with their bare hands. But the Plate Armour + Heavy Shield Paladin is almost impossible to catch. (It can be done with a dex 20 monk, Unarmoured Agility, and Hafted Defence on his staff - but that's two feats to none and monks are meant to be very hard to hit). But if you start arbitrarily docking the AC of the people in heavy armour, of course everyone else is going to catch up.
And for maneuverability, speed isn't what matters. Shift 1 is shift 1 and that's the main in combat movement. Yes, defenders are less maneuverable than strikers - but defenders make it hard for the enemy to move. The classes need to be seen as a whole package.
I have no idea. But nothing there has anything to do with 4e. Everything you list in that paragraph is down to your DM and the rest of the play group.
Strictly false. A ranger|sorceror has strictly fewer hit points than a ranger|paladin. And can't wear the plate armour it takes one feat for the ranger|paladin to put on and thereby fix his AC (remember that ranger|sorcerors start off with being proficient in no armour - and if you're talking melee, neither primary stat adds to AC; you might as well be wearing concentric circles on your chest). Both hybrids have poor synergy anyway - especially the ranger/sorceror. That doesn't prevent hybrids being the most broken part of 4e - a particularly bad case would be the Wizard|Swordmage with its wizard control powers, a mark, and its swordmage interrupts and warding.
On at wills? This would require them hitting? In melee? Not something you can guarantee - whereas you can guarantee marking with a paladin mark. And the best way to defend others from being hit is to get them to attack someone else - i.e. you. Which is why paladins have the best starting AC in the game as that allows you to give the enemy a bad choice; whether to attack you (and miss lots - while you have powers to heal yourself) or attack someone else (and take -2 to hit and automatic damage).
And if you want crowd control, you can divine sanction every enemy in close burst three every fight as a minor action.
This is either a personal or a group issue because that's not what I've found. To me the dull class to play would be the always-twin-striking ranger.
I know, I played one for a year and it got boring, fast, especially when the warden joined us. Two defenders and a badly played striker meant combat was droning on and on and on. There are real reasons why people want to switch classes, if you use your imagination and don't just assume the worst in people.
At what level could he give that debuff? Because an out of the box level 1 PHB only paladin can follow up a Challenge with the at will Enfeebling Strike. -2 to hit cold on top of your mark. This gives them -4 against anyone else. And still giving them -2 to hit against your heavy armour and large shield. Plus you went hybrid. Plus you are insanely squishy as a Ranger|Sorceror - 4.5 hp per level isn't it? And no armour at all until you spend feats? And I assume you mean a melee ranger here - meaning it's still easy for people to hit you. You need to bump both strength and charisma to hit things - meaning that your AC is going to suck (your best bet is to burn two feats on leather armour then chain).
Allowing masterwork armour, care to justify that? Or is this the unarmoured defence?
That you are blaming the DM for system issues? Flying mounts exist - you just no longer get Pokemounts. As for classes, the most common class in the game and probably the most powerful is ... The Fighter. Who is (a) a defender and (b) wears heavy armour.
And in my 4e game, my monk can use wire-fu to fly from 2nd level.
You are welcome to your opinion. We, however, have statistics - the online character builder allows them. And in 4e the most popular class is the fighter. A heavy armour wearing defender. There are classes I find dull - the ranger is one of them. But that doesn't mean I want it gone. Others like to play the single target damage kings, and good luck to them.
That's a group and RP issue. Not an edition war issue.
DMs have every right to tell people what classes they can't play. As for what they can, that's social convention. And stop blaming the system for issues with the group please.
