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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="yakuba" data-source="post: 6504939" data-attributes="member: 6698582">Because the philosophy of 4e was design a class for a particular role. (Note that this is different than saying that 4e classes are limited to a certain role.) In 4e a class begins with a combat role and then the powers and class features given to that class are chosen to accentuate that given role. This one way to approach class design in D&D and it is unique to 4e. In 5e classes are designed around (for lack of a better word) competencies. The wizard's compentency is magic spells. A wizard could choose all single target damage spells, all area affect debuff spells, or all area affect damage spells, all buffing spells, or, much more likely, some combination of the above. The available spells and class features are chosen to make the wizard really good with magic spells with little (though not none) consideration of how the available spells accentuate one particular combat role. This does not magically mean that all classes are equally good at all combat roles, but it does mean that the best way to consider combat roles is in the context of a particular character rather than a particular class.In 4e I might have a Weaponmaster, a Slayer, a Ranger and a Warlord. In 5e I could have a sword and board fighter with Protection style, Heavily Armored, and the Sentinal feat; a Champion with Great Weapon Fighting and Great Weapon Mastery; a Dex based Champion with TWF, Mobile, and Dual Wielder; and a Battlemaster with Inspiring Leader and Healer. They are designed for different roles but they all share the same class, and this his highlights that the Fighter is build around the competency with arms and armor, not a particular combat role.</blockquote>

Verification