Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mustrum_Ridcully" data-source="post: 4303813" data-attributes="member: 710">I am not sure I can agree with the cart &amp; horse analogy. The question for me is only if the results meet the thematic goals of each class, and they do.And I actually think that the description of the process is more like this:&quot;Okay, we have these archetype/class. What Role and what Power Source fit it best?&quot;&quot;Hmm. Ranger. Typically fighting with bows. Could be control.&quot;&quot;Nah, bows are usually used against single targets, unless we're speaking about whole archery units. And what's with the two-weapon fighting Ranger. He's popular, and he's fun?&quot;&quot;Hmm. Could be Defense. But it could also be concentrated firepower on a single target.&quot;&quot;Rangers are also good trackers, stealthy and mobile in the wild. I think that points out to skirmisher. I don't really see them as standing long against a single enemy, especially if you think of the 'lone ranger' archetype&quot;&quot;Okay, I think then Striker fits best. But what power source? He casts spells in 3E. Should be divine?&quot;&quot;Ranger spellcasting was never seen as his greatest feature. It felt a little tacked on. I am not sure a Ranger really has to have a strong relation to the gods.&quot;&quot;Rangers usually focus on weapons and skills. Looks very martial to me.&quot;I agree. So, we have it a Martial Striker. Okay, guys, it's time to design a few striker powers now. The attacks hould probably be related to archery and melee combat. Utility powers should have to do with stealth, movement and nature...&quot;And repeat this for every class.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mustrum_Ridcully, post: 4303813, member: 710"] I am not sure I can agree with the cart & horse analogy. The question for me is only if the results meet the thematic goals of each class, and they do. And I actually think that the description of the process is more like this: "Okay, we have these archetype/class. What Role and what Power Source fit it best?" "Hmm. Ranger. Typically fighting with bows. Could be control." "Nah, bows are usually used against single targets, unless we're speaking about whole archery units. And what's with the two-weapon fighting Ranger. He's popular, and he's fun?" "Hmm. Could be Defense. But it could also be concentrated firepower on a single target." "Rangers are also good trackers, stealthy and mobile in the wild. I think that points out to skirmisher. I don't really see them as standing long against a single enemy, especially if you think of the 'lone ranger' archetype" "Okay, I think then Striker fits best. But what power source? He casts spells in 3E. Should be divine?" "Ranger spellcasting was never seen as his greatest feature. It felt a little tacked on. I am not sure a Ranger really has to have a strong relation to the gods." "Rangers usually focus on weapons and skills. Looks very martial to me. "I agree. So, we have it a Martial Striker. Okay, guys, it's time to design a few striker powers now. The attacks hould probably be related to archery and melee combat. Utility powers should have to do with stealth, movement and nature..." And repeat this for every class. [/QUOTE]

Verification