Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kurotowa" data-source="post: 9844279" data-attributes="member: 27957">There's two design problems with a class built around being able to re-select your role based on your daily power choices. One is that if it's as good at the role as a class that's committed to it, it's hands down the best class in the game, but if it's not as good at at the role, then it's a "jack of all trades master of none" that struggles to keep up. And two is that in practice there's a lot of pressure to commit to a single role, because there's all the other fixed points of a character like ability scores and feats and available gear and party composition.I understand the fantasy of being whatever's needed. In the hero shooter games I play, there are dedicated "flex players" who have mastered six different heroes across all three roles and will happily swap to whatever's needed to fill the party composition. But that works because they still get the full character kit for whatever hero they select, and because they're constantly joining new temporary groups of random players throw together by the matchmaking. Being able to fill a gap in the party composition is useful. In a D&D campaign, you're generally in a fixed party of the same characters. There's no need to constantly be changing what your role is. The group needs a dedicated specialist, not a flex player.</blockquote>