NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tallifer" data-source="post: 4915875" data-attributes="member: 84661">Someone has thus far conceded that 4e strikers all play very differently. I assert that defenders play very differently as well. So far I have played a paladin and a fighter and what a paradigm shift! The paladin, relying on his charisma, is the diplomat and interrogator of the party. In combat, he must decide when and how to use his ranged prayers without provokign opportunity attacks. He must figure out how to mark and make it stick with his divine challenge and sanction. Also, he heals. His will is stubborn, his reflex clumsy and his fortitude mediocre. So he is never dominated or afraid, but he can easily be burnt. The fighter is not particulary good at any skills, although his perception is decent. Marking and defending is easy and impressive. But when the dragon flies upwards, he is stuck with throwing a javelin. His will is mediocre, his reflex clumsy and his fortitude like a rock. He is never frozen or slowed, but he burns like toast and sometiems runs away. The paladin is a human. Action surge, an extra feat, an extra at will, an extra skill, needs eight hours and makes a lousy guard. Plus it sucks when the ranger wakes him up to fight and he must put on his armour. The fighter is warforged. Resilience, warforged tactics, never sleeps, wears his armour all the time and guards everyone else. As for "get a feat, get a daily, blah blah." I cannot think how to reply to someone who cannot see how different each class's daily powers are. Yes, soem things have similarlities, but that was the same in every edition. I remember my eyes glazing over as a 1st edition wizard: "Bleah a new level, a new damage spell, a useful spell, and a whole pile of obscure, complicated, remotely useful spells." The other more wizardly players could not understand my lack of enthusiasm. And they were right, just as it is right to dismiss claims of homogeneity in 4th edition.</blockquote>

Verification