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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="fuzzlewump" data-source="post: 4304977" data-attributes="member: 63214">To Psion, the classes seem to play to their thematic element first. Paladins are using divine powers that heal at level one. What does that have to do with their mechanical role of Defender? Nothing. What about any class being able to do damage except for the striker? How about the wizard being able to cast Light, Ghost Sound, Presdigitation, and Mage Hand? Thematic or mechanical? Yeah. How about a fighter being able to use different weapons with different effects, even if minor. Mechanical or thematic? To the dungeon exploration, it must be a group preference thing. My group was bored to tears when I played the rogue, as I searched every nook and cranny while they sat back, talked about things outside of D&D or grabbed a Mountain Dew. Actually, I wasn't having fun either, I just knew the group would be screwed if I didn't search for traps. In any case, now each class has a selection of skills and each has a reasonable option of filling that sector of dungeon exploration. All you need is perception and thievery. Some classes have them as class skills, otherwise grab the skill training or appropriate multi-class feat. Oh, and, to ExploderWizard, it's not a question of how the game is played, it's how it's designed. 3.5, which is what I can speak for, was designed with having the 4 iconic roles, fighter, mage, cleric, thief, in mind. That's how monsters were balanced, against Regdar, Mialee, Jozan and Lidda. If you can succeed otherwise, holy crap, that's amazing, but the DM is probably pulling some strings and turning the game a bit. If not, I'm awestruck that you are able to get anywhere in a dungeon sans a cleric. Or without a wizard. and  Fighters have bow proficiency in 4th edition. All simple and military ranged weapons. If you want ranger powers with your ranged weapon, multiclass. If you think that is a bad option, which is isn't, really, then be a ranger, and get armor feats and toughness and now you're the fighter basically. If you wanted to be a fighter who is as good at using the bow as a ranger, then that's too good, simply enough. Because then you're covering two roles equally awesomely in one fell swoop. Was that the goal here?Rangers can use all simple and military melee, including the spear. Yep. From the "Archer Ranger" choice in the players handbook. "You are a master of the bow (or, rarely, the crossbow, sling, or thrown weapon)." Well, the spear isn't a ranged weapon, but I thought that was cool. Feel free to throw javelins instead of using a bow and arrow. So is 4E still restrictive? If you want to use a spear, pick two-weapon fighting option, because no where in that section does it say you're required to actually use two weapons. Some powers, however, require that you do. But not all! Some good powers are flexible and say "Melee or Ranged Weapon" as a requirement, including encounter powers and daily powers at first level, so spear fits into that category. If you want to use a two-weapon power, hold a dagger in your off-hand as you swing around your spear. Please research this option before you say 4E is horribly restrictive. If you want to use a board with your sword, sorry, you'll need to spend a feat. One feat. So, those are the two examples given that can be done, quite easily. I hope this gets through to you guys.But I mean, is this going to be it? A back and forth as someone comes up with examples that 4E doesn't seem to support on face so they can eventually be right and prove that 4E in fact has no flexibility, is unpolished, is for 10-year-olds, and all around sucks? I guess people will be set in their ways.Look forward to a response, I have to be off for now.</blockquote>

Verification