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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 5734993" data-attributes="member: 22779">Well, AFAIC, roles in D&D have always been tied to the combat roles of the classes.  While it's been explicitly pointed out in 4e, it's something that has always existed and was always right there in the rules.Saying that your character could hire hirelings in one edition doesn't change anything.  Nor does the idea that you could somehow switch your combat role from melee to ranged (which, btw, is not actually a combat role as defined by 4e - you can be a melee or ranged striker and quite often both.)Take my current character - a human warlock in 4e.  He has the at will that lets him use his melee basic attack as a power (I forget the name) and also has Eyebite as an At will that lets him do ranged stuff quite nicely.  My character is constantly going from melee to ranged in every single combat.  Yet, according to you, once a role is codified, I shouldn't be able to do that.  I'm a striker, so, I must only be doing ranged attacks.  But, that simply isn't true.  You can have a character that switches between combat roles quite easily.  While a character might be best at one thing, that doesn't mean he fails at everything else.But, trying to drag combat roles into the larger picture doesn't really work either.  Combat roles are just that - combat roles.  Just because I'm a defender doesn't mean I can't engage in every other part of RP as well, if I so choose.  I can be the knowledge guy and possibly the face guy as well as the defender.It's just that out of combat, there are no codified roles.  That's left entirely up to the player.  Pretty much the way it's always been.</blockquote>

Verification