Community

Aug 26, 2012 -- 4:34AM, brap8 wrote:

FireclaveFire clave. I understand what you are saying and agree on most of it...buff functions that used to be exclusive to each class is what made it fun....now everyone can detect and remove traps, or detec magic etc or heal.

Your thinking is way to binary.  Just because a class is able to to something well does not mean that class must be the only way of doing that thing.  Yes, many functions are less exclusive.  Other classes can potentially fill any missing role.  But it not always be easy, but will cost them resources to do so. 

While anyone can attempt to disable traps, it's hard to match the rogue's skil at it.  Rogues use dexterity as their primary, get training in thievery for free, and even have a few powers that capitalize on thievery.  Most other classes have one or the other, usually but not both.  And with the resources you use to catch up to the rogue, the rogue can use to pull himself further ahead.

Anyone can multiclass into a leader class to gain access to healing.  But usually, that healing will be in the form of a daily unless you're willing to spend extra multiclass feats to gain more healing powers, or hybrid instead, which will give you fewer uses of your primary healing power than being singled class.  And even after all of that, you'll not going to out-heal the cleric.  Even other singled-classed leaders can't out-heal a cleric.

And detect magic wasn't even a big thing.  Any spellcaster could do it.  Now, non-spelllcasters can attempt it, but its a trained-only use, so that means spending your background or a feat to get trained.  Additionally, Detect Magic is now less powerful than it used to be, and non-casters will often lack the int to get the most out of arcana.  So you're usually better off letting the primary spellcaster handle detect magic.

So everyone can attempt to disable traps,  and with effort you can do can be very good at it.  But the Rogue will still excel and with less effort.  Everyone can learn how to heal, but the Cleric still dominates.  You non-spellcasters can learn how to detect magic, but the Wizard and Bard are still the best at it.  The iconic skills of the iconic classes are still iconic.  But if, for some reason, no one wants to play any of these classes, you have other options.  And, most importantly, options that work.  Your entire game isn't up the creek without a paddle because the rogue player decided to have the audacity to try something different and play a warlock or fighter or something.

Aug 26, 2012 -- 4:34AM, brap8 wrote:

It like saying. Look a bunch of monsters and the fighter saying ..well your not relying on me are ya ?  

Again, you're thinking is way too binary.  Just because the fighter is not the keystone preventing total party collapse does not mean that is presence does not matter.  Because it does.

While your party does not absolutely, positively need a fighter in order to survive, his presence helps a lot.  The fighter is one of the best overall defenders.  Strong defenses, easy marking, a defender feature that can stop foes in their tracks makes things considerably less dicey for their squishier allies.  And fighters have striker as a secondary, so they can dish out plentiful helpings of damage to end an encounter quicker. 

A fighter doing his thing means that the rest of the party can focus on doing their things, and overall party efficiency increases. 

Now replace "fighter" with any other class and their specialty.

Aug 26, 2012 -- 4:34AM, brap8 wrote:

As for playing with strategy is that not all edition and taking into account (from the Dm) that you may not have a (Mage or rogue or cleric) so you compensate and they find extra potions of healing etc etc. like in any edition

All to often in previous editions, there was no alternative strategy to take.  When only rogues could disable traps, your options were to have someone play a rogue or bumble into and get killed by every trap.  When only wizards could cast the high level, out of combat spells you needed to proceed, your options were to play a either play a wizard or fail any quest that needed wizard spells to complete.  And even with healing, potions and scrolls could become prohibitively expensive pretty fast.  More so if you found yourself need healing during combat or had to remove high-level conditions that only clerics could heal.  So your options were to either play a cleric, or watch your party funds it drunk up like a half keg of ale at a dwarven frat house during spring break.

If your group is perfectly fine playing the same, predictable class, role, and skill setup every single time.  But if any one in your group wanted to play something else, your whole group was SOL. 

Two people want to play a rogue?  Nope!  We need a wizard.  Someone wants to try playing a ranger.  Nope!  We need a rogue.  The cleric player is getting tired of playing Pillz'har McHealbot?  Nope!  We need a cleric. 

I run 0e and 4e. Players have falsely believed you had to play with Class X for years, but its not true. Having a well rounded group has its advantages, but I encourage my players to play whatever they like and then enjoy creating tactics to deal with situations based on their current party make up.

Our 4e group for years was Controller + 3 Strikers and we rocked. We couldn't heal and were a bunch of paper tigers, but we built up our tactics to take advantage of our strengths and minimize our disads. It's just playing smarter and its a lot of fun.

As for old school, I love playing the Cleric. Of course, I'm the cleric who skips the healing spells for the more interesting ones.

Aug 26, 2012 -- 9:06PM, EnglishLanguage wrote:

I honestly can't remember the last time one of our 4e games had a Cleric in it. Last time I fully remmeber one was the first 2 games I ever played in about 2 years ago.

My group just got a cleric recently, but otherwise most of what I see is warlords. People who like divine flare seem to either go Paladin, Avenger, or Invoker.

Aug 26, 2012 -- 12:19PM, Fireclave wrote:

Aug 26, 2012 -- 4:34AM, brap8 wrote:

FireclaveFire clave. I understand what you are saying and agree on most of it...buff functions that used to be exclusive to each class is what made it fun....now everyone can detect and remove traps, or detec magic etc or heal.

Your thinking is way to binary.  Just because a class is able to to something well does not mean that class must be the only way of doing that thing.  Yes, many functions are less exclusive.  Other classes can potentially fill any missing role.  But it not always be easy, but will cost them resources to do so. 

While anyone can attempt to disable traps, it's hard to match the rogue's skil at it.  Rogues use dexterity as their primary, get training in thievery for free, and even have a few powers that capitalize on thievery.  Most other classes have one or the other, usually but not both.  And with the resources you use to catch up to the rogue, the rogue can use to pull himself further ahead.

Anyone can multiclass into a leader class to gain access to healing.  But usually, that healing will be in the form of a daily unless you're willing to spend extra multiclass feats to gain more healing powers, or hybrid instead, which will give you fewer uses of your primary healing power than being singled class.  And even after all of that, you'll not going to out-heal the cleric.  Even other singled-classed leaders can't out-heal a cleric.

And detect magic wasn't even a big thing.  Any spellcaster could do it.  Now, non-spelllcasters can attempt it, but its a trained-only use, so that means spending your background or a feat to get trained.  Additionally, Detect Magic is now less powerful than it used to be, and non-casters will often lack the int to get the most out of arcana.  So you're usually better off letting the primary spellcaster handle detect magic.

So everyone can attempt to disable traps,  and with effort you can do can be very good at it.  But the Rogue will still excel and with less effort.  Everyone can learn how to heal, but the Cleric still dominates.  You non-spellcasters can learn how to detect magic, but the Wizard and Bard are still the best at it.  The iconic skills of the iconic classes are still iconic.  But if, for some reason, no one wants to play any of these classes, you have other options.  And, most importantly, options that work.  Your entire game isn't up the creek without a paddle because the rogue player decided to have the audacity to try something different and play a warlock or fighter or something.

Aug 26, 2012 -- 4:34AM, brap8 wrote:

It like saying. Look a bunch of monsters and the fighter saying ..well your not relying on me are ya ?  

Again, you're thinking is way too binary.  Just because the fighter is not the keystone preventing total party collapse does not mean that is presence does not matter.  Because it does.

While your party does not absolutely, positively need a fighter in order to survive, his presence helps a lot.  The fighter is one of the best overall defenders.  Strong defenses, easy marking, a defender feature that can stop foes in their tracks makes things considerably less dicey for their squishier allies.  And fighters have striker as a secondary, so they can dish out plentiful helpings of damage to end an encounter quicker. 

A fighter doing his thing means that the rest of the party can focus on doing their things, and overall party efficiency increases. 

Now replace "fighter" with any other class and their specialty.

Aug 26, 2012 -- 4:34AM, brap8 wrote:

As for playing with strategy is that not all edition and taking into account (from the Dm) that you may not have a (Mage or rogue or cleric) so you compensate and they find extra potions of healing etc etc. like in any edition

All to often in previous editions, there was no alternative strategy to take.  When only rogues could disable traps, your options were to have someone play a rogue or bumble into and get killed by every trap.  When only wizards could cast the high level, out of combat spells you needed to proceed, your options were to play a either play a wizard or fail any quest that needed wizard spells to complete.  And even with healing, potions and scrolls could become prohibitively expensive pretty fast.  More so if you found yourself need healing during combat or had to remove high-level conditions that only clerics could heal.  So your options were to either play a cleric, or watch your party funds it drunk up like a half keg of ale at a dwarven frat house during spring break.

If your group is perfectly fine playing the same, predictable class, role, and skill setup every single time.  But if any one in your group wanted to play something else, your whole group was SOL. 

Two people want to play a rogue?  Nope!  We need a wizard.  Someone wants to try playing a ranger.  Nope!  We need a rogue.  The cleric player is getting tired of playing Pillz'har McHealbot?  Nope!  We need a cleric. 

To be honest it makes sense for everyone to possibly be good at things. Humans, and demi-humans are fairly intelligent. People can learn things because they are intelligent. Just because a guy swings a sword doesn't mean he can't cast a spell, or make potions.