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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Yora" data-source="post: 5946608" data-attributes="member: 6670763">I think a class is entirely defined by its class features. A class feature should be something that automatically expandes, advances, or increases as the character gains new levels, as opposed to feats, which a character should get one at a time confined in itself.A rogue has above average Thief Skills and Sneak Attack. A barbarian has his berserker rage. A wizard has arcane spells. A ranger has favored enemies and above average scouting and tracking skills. A fighter should have numerous special attacks and above average weapon skill.The most problematic "mainstream" class as I see it is the paladin. Because the paladin is lacking a distinctive class feature that defines it as a class. Paladins can use weapons and armor like a fighter, and they can heal and cast some spells like a cleric.You could play a ranger or a monk as a fighter/rogue instead, but they would not have favored enemies or powerful unarmed attacks. When you play a fighter/cleric, there is no class feature that the character would lack to be like a paladin.The same problem affects the Psychic Warrior in 3.5e, with the major difference that the psychic warrior is actually very well balanced and versatile. But it still is just a fighter/psion with a few powers that a fighter/psion has to invest a feat for to get. Not a good reason to have it being a distinctive class.Rangers and barbarians are a different thing. I can not easily emulate all their abilities using other more generic classes.As a fighter/rogue, I would have access to skills to live in the wilds, like Survival and Knowlege (Nature) in 3rd Edition, or the ability to handle animals significantly above the level of other people. And there would also not be a way to specialize in the tracking and fighting of specific classes of creatures.As a fighter, a character would lake the superhuman endurance and stamina of a barbarian, as well as his combat rage. You could make rage a feat, but then you would have to make it a lot of feats to make it become more powerful and versatile as you gain levels. But feats should be nice additions and customizations for your character, not the means to realize a very basic concept of character.Of course, I am biased, because I like the fluff of rangers but don't like the fluff for paladins. But other people might have more insight into what the distinguishing mechanical feature of a paladin are.</blockquote>

Verification