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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Aribar" data-source="post: 6532615" data-attributes="member: 6777974">Is there any evidence against his assumption that 4E gave classes better tools to do the things they've always done? Mechanically and typically in the combat of past editions, fighters could try and defend their squishier comrades and be a threat on the battlefield, clerics supported and healed their friends, magic users had powerful battlefield-controlling spells, and in some editions rogues had precision damage abilities.In past editions classes could excel at these combat roles (like the wizard), could excel but it could be boring (like the cleric being a healbot), was okay as long as the circumstances were right (like the rogue), or depended on the DM to allow them to perform their job (like the fighter). For example, unlike 3E or 5E, in 4E the fighter had actual mechanics for keeping threats away from the wizard instead of praying the DM's monster didn't just waltz right past and eat a weak attack of opportunity before smashing the wizard.The vast majority of almost every edition's player's handbook has been dedicated to combat (equipment chapters, combat rules chapters, the majority of the spell section...). 4E decided to make well-designed combat rules for the largest mechanical part of the game. It allowed every class to not suck at combat, and made an attempt to let all the classes be equal at social and exploration stuff as well. Your class matters as much or as little as you want it to when it comes to the identity of your character, just like in every other edition.Would it be neat if the social and exploration pillars were well-made in the same way the combat was? Yeah, that'd be awesome! Where can I sign up for that game's rules?No offense, but why are you playing such a mechanic-heavy game like D&D instead of something like Dungeon World then?</blockquote>

Verification