Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Alexemplar" data-source="post: 7252332" data-attributes="member: 6874182">Except that you can't really talk about class design without talking about feel because that's a major contributing factor in how classes get designed.&nbsp;&nbsp; It's why 5e classes are different from 4e classes which are differentry from 3e.&nbsp;&nbsp; Yeah, the feeling that Fighters don't get exploration/social pillar options of the breadth and scale other classes do is just as valuable a discussion as the idea that Rangers have muddied identiry/don't perform distincrinctively enough. Or any other criticism one might have about an existing class/subclass feature.&nbsp;&nbsp; One could dismiss all that as &quot;Well that's just how you feel.&quot; Or &quot;Just be happy with the option they gave,&quot; but that hardly provides a foundation for creating a workable solution.&nbsp;&nbsp; And you can't start looking at workable solutions without first acknowledging that there's an area worth addressing.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Alexemplar, post: 7252332, member: 6874182"] Except that you can't really talk about class design without talking about feel because that's a major contributing factor in how classes get designed. It's why 5e classes are different from 4e classes which are differentry from 3e. Yeah, the feeling that Fighters don't get exploration/social pillar options of the breadth and scale other classes do is just as valuable a discussion as the idea that Rangers have muddied identiry/don't perform distincrinctively enough. Or any other criticism one might have about an existing class/subclass feature. One could dismiss all that as "Well that's just how you feel." Or "Just be happy with the option they gave," but that hardly provides a foundation for creating a workable solution. And you can't start looking at workable solutions without first acknowledging that there's an area worth addressing. [/QUOTE]

Verification