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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Remathilis" data-source="post: 4921317" data-attributes="member: 7635">I think KM hits the nail on the head here.Each "role" is synonymous with a classic class (defender=fighter, leader=cleric, striker=thief, controller=wizard). Thus, every class is just a variant on the "original" class. (A paladin is a fighter with a different mark, cha as a high-stat, and a healy power. An invoker is a wizard with more radiant powers and a few more buffs. Etc.) The exception (and perhaps 4e best example of where 4e homogeneity is limited) is the striker role: barbarians don't play like rogues which don't play like sorcerers. There is an easy reason for this: THEY DON"T USE A UNIFIED "STRIKER" MECHANIC! If barbarians were built around the concept of "add Xd6 damage per tier" like a ranger's prime shot or warlock's curse, I think they'd feel closer to each other. (Most likely, they'd feel like rangers who use 2handed wpns instead of a wpn in each hand). Yet a barbarian doesn't feel much like a 2blade ranger or a brutal rogue. Why? Well, they get their extra damage in a unique way (its factored into their powers, which do higher [w] damage). Sorcerers similarly feel different than a warlock because they don't declare a "target" of their Xd6 damage, they just deal 2 ability scores worth of modifier to an area. Even the rogue (who relies on CA) and the monk (whose full-disciplines allow for movement to matter in powers) show a diversity. MECHANICAL diversity. See what they did there? Now, why can't we have a defender that doesn't have to mark his foe? Why not a leader that doesn't have a XX-word healing power? More importantly, the psion showed us that we don't need every class to gain encounters, dailies, and/or utilities at the same rate. Maybe it'll open the door for classes flush with encounter-powers (at the expense of dailies) or one who doesn't get many attack-powers, but SCORES of utilities (a jack-of-all-trades class, anyone?)I guess I feel terrible that these innovations come in year 2-3, leaving the classic classes of PHB 1&2 feeling bland. One wonders if we don't eventually see a "Warrior", "Thief", "Mage", and "Priest" class down the road that feels different from the blander "default" classes we have now...</blockquote>

Verification