Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Sacrosanct" data-source="post: 6503253" data-attributes="member: 15700">Um...yes.&nbsp; Says so right there in the book.&nbsp; I even quoted it for you.&nbsp; Sorry, you don't get to pull a &quot; The PHB is very clear on this.&quot;, and when shown how the PHB is actually very clear on using the term &quot;occupation&quot; and not &quot;role&quot;, act like the PHB isn't clear and your interpretation is the right one.&nbsp; You're the one to put up the PHB text as sacrosanct (no pun intended), so you don't get to hand wave it away when you find out that the actual text doesn't support what you thought it did.Wrong again.&nbsp; Using the analogy, some would be football players.&nbsp; Others would be basketball players.&nbsp; Others would be soccer players.&nbsp; Etc.&nbsp; Within each occupation, there are several roles one can play.&nbsp; That's the point I am trying to make.&nbsp; You could play a rogue that didn't have the role of &quot;striker&quot;.&nbsp; Or a wizard that didn't have the role of &quot;controller&quot;.&nbsp; Or a cleric that didn't have the role of &quot;healer&quot;.And to be honest, I find your statement of &quot;4e is returning to tradition&quot; to be pretty darn odd.&nbsp; 4e was the edition to go most off the rails into a new direction more than any other edition.&nbsp; I don't know how you can say with a straight face that a version of D&amp;D that got rid of vancian magic, introduced healing surges, and a number of other radical changes as &quot;going back to tradition.&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Sacrosanct, post: 6503253, member: 15700"] Um...yes. Says so right there in the book. I even quoted it for you. Sorry, you don't get to pull a " The PHB is very clear on this.", and when shown how the PHB is [i]actually[/i] very clear on using the term "occupation" and not "role", act like the PHB isn't clear and your interpretation is the right one. You're the one to put up the PHB text as sacrosanct (no pun intended), so you don't get to hand wave it away when you find out that the actual text doesn't support what you thought it did. Wrong again. Using the analogy, some would be football players. Others would be basketball players. Others would be soccer players. Etc. Within each occupation, there are several roles one can play. That's the point I am trying to make. You could play a rogue that didn't have the role of "striker". Or a wizard that didn't have the role of "controller". Or a cleric that didn't have the role of "healer". And to be honest, I find your statement of "4e is returning to tradition" to be pretty darn odd. 4e was the edition to go most off the rails into a new direction more than any other edition. I don't know how you can say with a straight face that a version of D&D that got rid of vancian magic, introduced healing surges, and a number of other radical changes as "going back to tradition." [/QUOTE]

Verification