Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lizard" data-source="post: 4549361" data-attributes="member: 1054">It's so nice when people READ what I write, instead of just responding to what they imagined I wrote...Some classes have this more than others. Ranger is probably the most severe (and the one I know best since I'll be playing one in a few weeks and have thus been studying my options, or lack thereof...I mean, I had to multiclass to Warlord to get a PP that fitted my character concept, though not much else in Warlord does...).I miss the ability to build a character from a wide assortment of pieces, beginning with a concept and ending with something which mechanically fits that concept. Instead, I need to pick a build, and then create a character AROUND the build. To a lot of people, this is just fine, a simpler and cleaner method that reduces the risk of Pun-Pun. To me, it's limiting, and I think that the game designers had a fear of the Character Optimization boards which limited their design choices unnecessarily. 99% of the nonsense from those boards would never see actual play under a halfway competent DM; they're pure number crunching insanity.(I mean, I do see some of the issues with 3e which led to 4e; if I have one more combat where the first thing everyone does is either summon, buff, or summon AND buff, I will scream...)</blockquote>