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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Vyvyan Basterd" data-source="post: 5732776" data-attributes="member: 4892">A warrior that fights like a priest and casts spells like a bard? A sub-optimal character? I don't know the answer to your riddle. And you chose that class most likely because you wanted to fill that role. <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/erm.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":erm:" title="Erm    :erm:" data-shortname=":erm:" />And why did you choose that class if you don't like its function? It really would be like choosing Fighting Man in OD&D and then hanging back trying to cast spells.All 4E did was take a different approach to the same end. Determine your concept first, pick what class suits that concept best. Some of us did that in 3E already instead of choose class then force concept.As the only class that could keep your party alive reliably in prior editions (although Druid became slightly better in 3.5) you're really claiming that peer pressure didn't force one into the healer role? So all those times my group diced off for who was "forced" to be the healer were just my imagination?A ranged Fighter that sacrificed defense for damage output? That sounds REALLY familiar....oh yeah, the 4E Ranger. I know, how evil of them to make it woodlands themed and give you Nature or Dungeoneering as a bonus skill plus another bonus skill of your choice. I know, you're dead set on playing a "Ranger Fighter that sacrificed defense for damage output" and no one will ever talk you into playing another class, nuh-uh!There are two reasons for that. One, no one has ever presented a limited list of non-combat roles. The only common ones seem to be Face, Trapfinder, and Tracker. I believe there are so many more that it would be difficult to codify them into the limited list that 4E combat roles have been. Second, the smaller skill list and folded skills allow you to make your character fit whatever non-combat role synergizes with your characters abilities.But why must you play a Paladin to be the holy warrior archetype?!? That's the same thinking that says every time you enter a chapel in any town that the priest leading the flock is a Cleric. In every edition I've had the equivalent of Commoners, Experts, Nobles, Fighters, Rogues, etc, etc, etc leading a congregation. Cleric is a description that shorthands the ability package you are choosing for your character. It need not limit the concept of what your character actually is.If you want to be a Fighter that doesn't defend, choose a melee class that isn't a Fighter. How hard is that? To me it's like complaining that my 1E Fighter can't enter a Rage. If you wanted to rage you played a Barbarian.</blockquote>

Verification