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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="nobodez" data-source="post: 3054422" data-attributes="member: 3970">That's another approach, but like I put in my descriptions, many of the new classes allow you to play a more specific archetype from first level, rather then playing a weaker multi-class combination, perhaps with a prestige class or two. Each of the new classes have a niche that they're good at, better then any of the original 11 (or even the base 4, cleric, fighter, rogue, sorcerer), but when compared to the more general things, they show a lack that the 11 (or 4) can fill better.Yes, there are many classes that are better at certain niches, but none of them are as good in the broad stroke. A warlock is a great blaster, but they can't buff. A healer can heal like none other, but they can't deal a lick of damage (except to undead). A Scout is good in the wilderness, but put him in a dungeon or the city, and it's not nearly as good as a rogue of the same level. It's all about being able to play a niche character that you enjoy. You can still play the rogue or ranger, but some people feel the scout is a better fit for their character.A fighter/rogue or ranger/rogue is good for a combat sneak, but a ninja just does it that much better, but not much else. A warmage can throw out so much damage, and is more versatile then a sorcerer, but they can't buff, or throw a comprehend languages, or anything like that, but a sorcerer or wizard can.Oh, and before I put the sorcerer in for the wizard in my four class spots. That's because in the basic game, the sorcerer is put forth as the easier class, and in reality, it is, it's so much easier then a wizard, I don't know why it's thought as a variant if only because of history (of the game, not in the game).</blockquote>

Verification