Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dausuul" data-source="post: 4031884" data-attributes="member: 58197">No, D&D has always had both.In the original version of D&D, class and role were synonymous.  There were only the four classes*, and each was very solidly tied to a specific role.  Fighters held the front line; magic-users laid down the heavy firepower; clerics healed and supported; thieves scouted, dealt with locks and traps, and backstabbed.  That was the whole point of the four classes, a combined-arms system emerging from D&D's wargaming roots... and I don't think it's coincidence that those four classes correspond precisely to the four roles that WotC has defined for 4E.While classes have proliferated over the editions, the roles have remained the same.  2E, for example, divided classes up explicitly between the roles, although they didn't use the term "role" to describe it.  There were the Warrior classes (fighter, paladin, ranger); the Wizard classes (mage, specialist wizard); the Priest classes (cleric, druid); and the Rogue classes (thief, bard).  3E got rid of this and allowed the roles to get fuzzy around the edges, but 4E is clarifying them again.WoW players have simply rediscovered what D&D has known for decades.*In fact, originally there were only three classes/roles; the thief was added in the Greyhawk Supplement.</blockquote>