Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="[OMENRPG]Ben" data-source="post: 5592270" data-attributes="member: 6677983">There are two elements at work in this situation: the concept of the &quot;class&quot; and the concept of the &quot;role.&quot; In earlier editions, the &quot;role&quot; and the &quot;class&quot; overlapped and to a degree didn't require differentiation, there was enough room (or holes) in the rules to allow unconventional uses of a class to fulfill whatever role was necessary in the party. The fighter could be religious while not wielding any divine powers, and could potentially have as much in character Knowledge: Religion as the party's Paladin or Cleric. But, this is why in 4e the concept of the &quot;role&quot; is separate and more generic than the &quot;class.&quot; The classes add flavor and some more specific elements to create uniqueness and build variety, yet they all essentially fall into several roles: defender, striker, controller, leader, etc.So, one could completely eliminate the convention of named classes, instead describing the function or the role of the character. If one wanted to maintain the concept of a class however, I would recommend that the class should be observed completely without any influence upon the system or setting. Someone up thread used the example of a barbarian, which implies that barbarians are a viable choice and therefore exist in the game setting. If one wanted to make a game setting without the typical &quot;barbarian&quot; tribe/clan/horde, the DM could simply rename barbarian to something more fitting. Perhaps berserker, or rage fighter, or something else. Why, one could even reskin the concept of a barbarian by saying that rages are actually some kind of stance, and that really the barbarian is a highly skilled swordsman with martial arts styles akin to a samurai. So to more specifically answer your question Pinotage, I think you have to ask yourself if you would rather focus as the class and role fulfilling the same position in the game, or if the class will actually have some kind of meaning. Otherwise, yeah I think Warrior, Expert, Mage works just fine.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="[OMENRPG]Ben, post: 5592270, member: 6677983"] There are two elements at work in this situation: the concept of the "class" and the concept of the "role." In earlier editions, the "role" and the "class" overlapped and to a degree didn't require differentiation, there was enough room (or holes) in the rules to allow unconventional uses of a class to fulfill whatever role was necessary in the party. The fighter could be religious while not wielding any divine powers, and could potentially have as much in character Knowledge: Religion as the party's Paladin or Cleric. But, this is why in 4e the concept of the "role" is separate and more generic than the "class." The classes add flavor and some more specific elements to create uniqueness and build variety, yet they all essentially fall into several roles: defender, striker, controller, leader, etc. So, one could completely eliminate the convention of named classes, instead describing the function or the role of the character. If one wanted to maintain the concept of a class however, I would recommend that the class should be observed completely without any influence upon the system or setting. Someone up thread used the example of a barbarian, which implies that barbarians are a viable choice and therefore exist in the game setting. If one wanted to make a game setting without the typical "barbarian" tribe/clan/horde, the DM could simply rename barbarian to something more fitting. Perhaps berserker, or rage fighter, or something else. Why, one could even reskin the concept of a barbarian by saying that rages are actually some kind of stance, and that really the barbarian is a highly skilled swordsman with martial arts styles akin to a samurai. So to more specifically answer your question Pinotage, I think you have to ask yourself if you would rather focus as the class and role fulfilling the same position in the game, or if the class will actually have some kind of meaning. Otherwise, yeah I think Warrior, Expert, Mage works just fine. [/QUOTE]

Verification