Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imaro" data-source="post: 5732756" data-attributes="member: 48965">I'm going to disagree here, I feel like in earlier editions "da rulz" gave you much more freedom to decide what role in combat you wanted to take on within the archetype of the class you picked.See now you're talking about expectations of the players. The rules don't force a cleric to be a healer, there are plenty of useful spells pre-4e that allow a cleric to take on a multitude of roles... From defender to controller. Choosing to focus on healing was just one facet.Unless you focused on being a ranged fighter or sacrificed defense for damage output.Uhm... This isn't a combat role and I would venture so far as to say is actually more a part of the rogue archetype.I think you're confusing "combat roles" with archetypical abilities in certain instances of your examples. Combat roles have never been as explicitly hardcoded as you're trying to make them out to be or as I feel they have been with 4e and its power system.No, most people in this thread are sticking to combat... As in the archetype I want has been pigeonholed into a specific role in combat, and all that doing that entails.Total strawman here... What people are saying is why does my selection of the holy warrior archetype auto-regulate me to taking hits and being a blockade... When really I want to be doing damage and striking down my gods enemies like a hot knife through butter.</blockquote>