Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Reynard" data-source="post: 3908238" data-attributes="member: 467">I don't think it is the existence of roles that turns people off, it is the focus (combat) and the standardization of playstyle that 4E presents (combat).Let's take, for example, 1st Edition AD&amp;D with nothing but the three core books.&nbsp; There are 10 classes in the PHB and 10 roles to boot.&nbsp; There were no &quot;strikers&quot; in AD&amp;D.&nbsp; Fighters were different than paladins and rangers and monks (all &quot;fighter classes&quot;) and filled different roles in the game -- both in and out of combat.&nbsp; Wizards and illusionists were not the same in anything beyond the mechansims of spell prep and d4 hit diece; nor were thieves and assassins.&nbsp; The cleric and druid were also dissimilar in how they functioned mechanically, where they fit into the party structure and their place in the meta setting.&nbsp; 4E, by contrast, has 8 classes and 4 roles.&nbsp; The roles are geared toward the characters' place on the combat/encounter team (as evidenced by the fact of the mantra of &quot;equal time&quot; for all PCs in combat situations and the fact that even sweet fey who take your will with a stolen kiss get a ginormous combat form in 4E).&nbsp; These things are not equivalent.&nbsp; Saying that there's always been fighters in D&amp;D is true, sure, but the nature and role of the various kinds of fighting men have varied within and between editions.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Reynard, post: 3908238, member: 467"] I don't think it is the existence of roles that turns people off, it is the focus (combat) and the standardization of playstyle that 4E presents (combat). Let's take, for example, 1st Edition AD&D with nothing but the three core books. There are 10 classes in the PHB and 10 roles to boot. There were no "strikers" in AD&D. Fighters were different than paladins and rangers and monks (all "fighter classes") and filled different roles in the game -- both in and out of combat. Wizards and illusionists were not the same in anything beyond the mechansims of spell prep and d4 hit diece; nor were thieves and assassins. The cleric and druid were also dissimilar in how they functioned mechanically, where they fit into the party structure and their place in the meta setting. 4E, by contrast, has 8 classes and 4 roles. The roles are geared toward the characters' place on the combat/encounter team (as evidenced by the fact of the mantra of "equal time" for all PCs in combat situations and the fact that even sweet fey who take your will with a stolen kiss get a ginormous combat form in 4E). These things are not equivalent. Saying that there's always been fighters in D&D is true, sure, but the nature and role of the various kinds of fighting men have varied within and between editions. [/QUOTE]

Verification