Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="SSquirrel" data-source="post: 4921122" data-attributes="member: 5202">So WotC says up front that they have divided the classes into 4 roles and that each role will produce the same results.&nbsp; This means that if you take a Fighter or a Paladin and they pick abilities to let them tank successfully, you should achieve the same level of results.&nbsp; How are you surprised that classes of the same role do the same job?In 3E if you wanted a close fighter that was strength focused you played a Fighter or Barbarian.&nbsp; A close fighter based on Dex you picked a Fighter or Rogue.&nbsp; A ranged fighter you would pick a Fighter or a Ranger.&nbsp; Appropriate feat selection can cover a lot of ground, but one option will likely be better than the other.&nbsp; In 4E You are still making pretty much the same choices.&nbsp; I don't recall if Martial Power added a ranged option to Fighters or not, I know in the base PHB it was basically play a Ranger if you want to be a dual wielder or a ranged attacker.&nbsp; All classes within the same role should produce similar results.&nbsp; Defenders should be the best at keeping enemies focused on you, leaders should provide the best party buffs and heals, etc.&nbsp; Within that sub-category there is a lot of room for variety and I feel we are seeing that in class design.&nbsp; I don't feel that 4E as a whole is homogenous.&nbsp; 4E took all the lessons of 3E, clarified them, cut off corner cases and helped increase balance and decrease &quot;oh crap my character is useless in 80% of the game&quot;, no matter whether you run a mostly combat or a mostly intrigue game.&nbsp; Character creation also takes less time w/the more streamlined approach. Every edition of the game has taken things that worked well and kept them or improved them further.&nbsp; Every edition has taken things that were awful and reworked or ditched them.&nbsp; Every edition has gotten rid of some things completely for no clear reason.&nbsp; Each edition ahs had the words &quot;Dungeon&quot; and &quot;Dragon&quot; in the title.&nbsp; Oh no!&nbsp; Now the editions are homogenous to each other!! heh</blockquote>

[QUOTE="SSquirrel, post: 4921122, member: 5202"] So WotC says up front that they have divided the classes into 4 roles and that each role will produce the same results. This means that if you take a Fighter or a Paladin and they pick abilities to let them tank successfully, you should achieve the same level of results. How are you surprised that classes of the same role do the same job? In 3E if you wanted a close fighter that was strength focused you played a Fighter or Barbarian. A close fighter based on Dex you picked a Fighter or Rogue. A ranged fighter you would pick a Fighter or a Ranger. Appropriate feat selection can cover a lot of ground, but one option will likely be better than the other. In 4E You are still making pretty much the same choices. I don't recall if Martial Power added a ranged option to Fighters or not, I know in the base PHB it was basically play a Ranger if you want to be a dual wielder or a ranged attacker. All classes within the same role should produce similar results. Defenders should be the best at keeping enemies focused on you, leaders should provide the best party buffs and heals, etc. Within that sub-category there is a lot of room for variety and I feel we are seeing that in class design. I don't feel that 4E as a whole is homogenous. 4E took all the lessons of 3E, clarified them, cut off corner cases and helped increase balance and decrease "oh crap my character is useless in 80% of the game", no matter whether you run a mostly combat or a mostly intrigue game. Character creation also takes less time w/the more streamlined approach. Every edition of the game has taken things that worked well and kept them or improved them further. Every edition has taken things that were awful and reworked or ditched them. Every edition has gotten rid of some things completely for no clear reason. Each edition ahs had the words "Dungeon" and "Dragon" in the title. Oh no! Now the editions are homogenous to each other!! heh [/QUOTE]

Verification