Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 9076893" data-attributes="member: 6801228">Ah yes, because there is no difference between a the power source of a Hellknight who pledged himself to Zriel, a Knight who pledged himself to the Throne of the Elven King, and a Paladin who has simply decided he is too awesome not share how awesome he is. Lorewise those power sources are nearly indistinguishable, right? Mechanically, of course they are similar. They are all paladins. Right now? All Rangers are mechanically similar too. They are all rangers after all. And if you design a new ranger... all those rangers will be mechanically similar too. You can't design a class that isn't mechanically similar with itself.But no one actually wants that? Like, who is asking for us to make the Ranger into five new, slightly different classes? The problem is that some people hate the ranger having spells, and want it to be a full martial. But that isn't what the ranger is. Again, you could design the paladin that way, sure, but no one actually wants it. No&nbsp; one actually wants a spell-less paladin, a normal paladin, a paladin with no spells but divine feature, a paladin that is basically just a cheap knock-off fighter, ect. Just like you could design a wizard that heals, or a fighter that has divine magic, or a barbarian who casts spells. You can design them, but that doesn't make doing so a good idea.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Chaosmancer, post: 9076893, member: 6801228"] Ah yes, because there is no difference between a the power source of a Hellknight who pledged himself to Zriel, a Knight who pledged himself to the Throne of the Elven King, and a Paladin who has simply decided he is too awesome not share how awesome he is. Lorewise those power sources are nearly indistinguishable, right? Mechanically, of course they are similar. They are all paladins. Right now? All Rangers are mechanically similar too. They are all rangers after all. And if you design a new ranger... all those rangers will be mechanically similar too. You can't design a class that isn't mechanically similar with itself. But no one [I]actually [/I]wants that? Like, who is asking for us to make the Ranger into five new, slightly different classes? The problem is that some people hate the ranger having spells, and want it to be a full martial. But that isn't what the ranger is. Again, you could design the paladin that way, sure, but no one actually wants it. No one actually wants a spell-less paladin, a normal paladin, a paladin with no spells but divine feature, a paladin that is basically just a cheap knock-off fighter, ect. Just like you could design a wizard that heals, or a fighter that has divine magic, or a barbarian who casts spells. You can design them, but that doesn't make doing so a good idea. [/QUOTE]

Verification