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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imaro" data-source="post: 5732188" data-attributes="member: 48965">Oh, I get that... what I was moreso saying was that I don't think they should have connected explicit combat roles with archetypes... In other words the Paladin shouldn't have been a Defender... he should have been an archetype with a Defender build, a Striker Build and maybe even a Leader build. IMO, that would've covered the roles I've seen a Paladin take on in previous editions and fit more in tune with the varying examples of the Paladin archetype.    Oh, I agree... but I'm not speaking of expanding the archetypes... 4e created another axis to that when it went with eplicit roles for archetypes. Now not only did it have to include archetypes but it had to include a role for said archetype (which I feel was a mistake, especially since I think way too much effort, early on and even now, was/is put into creating builds that have the same role for the same archetype and thus further pigeonholing archetypes. Now I can have a striker fighter, without a feat tax or multi-classing... but this should have, IMO, been the direction in the first place.     I think you're still confusing what I mean by archetype. In my mind an archetype is the fighter... but I don't feel the archetype of the fighter should have been initially constrained to the role of Defender... it leaves out too many iconic examples of fighters that weren't "defenders". It was role diversity within archetypes that I feel 4e should have focused on earlier in the game. Even now there are at most a couple of archetypes that aren't still pigeonholed into particualr roles... even if that role doesn't cover iconic concepts of said archetype.   Whoops, sorry about that... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f631.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":o" title="Eek!    :o"  data-smilie="9"data-shortname=":o" />  See and that's the problem, a paladin already has all these things... all I want to do is make him a striker as opposed to a defender. So it is a feat tax since I don't want the extra stuff... just a role change. The Slayer is a fighter who doesn't have to spend any feats to be a striker... yet to get a paladin striker I do... As to your second point... I'm going to disagree I don't think the roles were as hardcoded and especially not in 3.x.  Fighters weren't always tanks... they could easily be tweaked as strikers... Cleric's could tank or lead, Wizards could focus on particular spells to make themselves strikers, controllers, or defenders but probably not leaders in the 4e sense... and so on. So no, I don't agree with that   See maybe this is the disconnect... I don't feel they should have expanded archetypes based on roles... I feel they should have expanded the roles within archetypes. Something they're finally getting around to doing... though this could just be test material like Bo9S.   I don't know if it's totally hindsight... I remember quite a few complaints along the lines of... "Why can't my fighter be a striker as opposed to a defender?". These questions tended to be met with the answer of "Go play a Ranger.". When in actuality I feel the answer (which funnily enough it is now) should have been go play the striker build for the fighter. [sblock="Hybrid Paladin/Barbarian"]====== Created Using Wizards of the Coast D&D Character Builder ======Arjhan, level 1Dragonborn, Barbarian/PaladinHybrid Paladin Option: Hybrid Paladin WillHybrid Talent Option: Paladin Armor ProficiencyDragonborn Racial Power Option: DragonfearRedeemer of the Desecrated (+2 to Religion)Theme: Knight Hospitaler FINAL ABILITY SCORESSTR 20, CON 10, DEX 10, INT 8, WIS 11, CHA 16 STARTING ABILITY SCORESSTR 18, CON 10, DEX 10, INT 8, WIS 11, CHA 14  AC: 18 Fort: 16 Ref: 10 Will: 14HP: 25 Surges: 9 Surge Value: 6 TRAINED SKILLSAthletics +8, Intimidate +10, Religion +6 UNTRAINED SKILLSAcrobatics –2, Arcana –1, Bluff +3, Diplomacy +3, Dungeoneering +0, Endurance –2, Heal +0, History +1, Insight +0, Nature +0, Perception +0, Stealth –2, Streetwise +3, Thievery –2 POWERSBasic Attack: Melee Basic AttackBasic Attack: Ranged Basic AttackKnight Hospitaler Utility: Shield of DevotionDragonborn Racial Power: DragonfearPaladin Feature: Divine ChallengeBarbarian Attack 1: Howling StrikePaladin Attack 1: Strike of HopeBarbarian Attack 1: Avalanche StrikeBarbarian Attack 1: Life Thane Rage FEATSLevel 1: Hybrid Talent ITEMSPlate Armor x1Greatsword x1Adventurer's KitTrail Rations====== End ======[/sblock]</blockquote>Cool, though my Paladin now has the primal power source and rages and a host of other things that don't necessarily fit with the archetype I'm picturing... especially depending on the god or ideals I want him to follow.[/QUOTE]

Verification