Roles are so LIMITING!

[Charwoman Gene]

Think of the ideal AD&D adventuring party-you need at least a couple of Fighters to engage monsters and protect the weaker adventurers in combat, a cleric to cast healing spells, a thief to deal with tricks and traps, and a wizard or two to decipher magical clues and provide an extra punch in important battles. If any of these key roles aren't filled, the players are bound to run into trouble; many AD&D supplements were designed under the assumption that all these skills would be available to the players' party.

Roles are so constricting and an example of the WoWification of D&D.

 

[Kuato]

HA! I'm slow on the uptake. I get it now.



As you were.

 

[Jack99]

Oh are we doing quotes? I got one too! I call it - Returning to the roots

In all cases, however, AD&D is designed to be an amusing and diverting pastime, something which can fill a few hours or consume endless days, as the participants desire, but in no case something to be taken too seriously. For fun, excitement, and captivating fantasy, AD&D is unsurpassed. As a realistic simulation of things from the realms of make-believe, or even as a reflection of medieval or ancient warfare or culture or society, it can be deemed only a dismal failure. Readers who seek the latter must search elsewhere.

(DMG, 1979)

 

[TwoSix]

Roles are so constricting and an example of the WoWification of D&D.

Well played. Well played, indeed.

 

[Pinotage]

Roles are so constricting and an example of the WoWification of D&D.

You're failing to see the point of those who make the comments about roles. Yes, the quote you gave indicates that there are roles, but we've all know that. That's been true for every edition of the game there's been. But, 3e vastly expanded on the roles and concepts that one could have, and 4e has now reigned it in significantly, meaning that a single class now only has a few roles rather than many more as in 3e. It's simplication of characters to fit a niche.

Pinotage

 

[Charwoman Gene]

But, 3e vastly expanded on the roles and concepts that

Cleric's or Druids

could have,

Quoted the true bits.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

You're failing to see the point of those who make the comments about roles.

I'm not failing to see anything, I'm way smarterer than you and and you think you see it.

I see it and *gasp* I reject the conclusion as fallacious. *Scandalous*

I'd like some examples of Role expansion. One that actually refers to combat which is all the 4e roles reflect.

 

[Cadfan]

It's simplication of characters to fit a niche.

Pinotage

I see it as more of an expansion of the niches to the size of entire character classes.

 

[Pinotage]

I'm not failing to see anything, I'm way smarterer than you and and you think you see it.

I see it and *gasp* I reject the conclusion as fallacious. *Scandalous*.

So how does you quote above that started this thread justify your unstated position? Roles have been around since the start of the game. They're nothing new. Every edition had them.

I'd like some examples of Role expansion. One that actually refers to combat which is all the 4e roles reflect.

There you go. 4e only has combat roles.

Pinotage

 

[Pinotage]

I see it as more of an expansion of the niches to the size of entire character classes.

Possibly. A niche expanded to a class is still a niche, though.

Pinotage