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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5592120" data-attributes="member: 82106">I don't really dislike sub-classes so much as I think that you can achieve that level of variety in a more efficient way. Any character can use the big bad axe wielder option, thus you don't really need sub-classes so much. In the case of a character built as a defender it will make you a fairly high damage output defender perhaps, one that relies a lot on beat down. In the hands of a striker it will give you a high damage output but with a bit less consistency than say using a sword. Both options use the same 'option' (whatever you call it, theme, package, feat, whatever). I think you could have a pretty limited class roster this way, and more combinations would be possible. You wouldn't really need 'ranger' vs 'rogue' vs 'fighter' so much anymore as you could be a tough defendery melee character or a strikery one. Other options would let you be more mobile with lighter armor or pick up heavy armor and better defenses at the cost of some mobility. A light weapon, light armor, Stealth, and a 'Sneaky Ambusher' option would give you basically a rogue. Much more reuse of powers and options between these 'classes'. It wouldn't be CLASSLESS, but it would really only require a small number of classes that embody the most basic core of your concept, warrior, mage, or priest would really be enough. Combined with power source choices you'd have pretty much all you need.</blockquote>

Verification