|
7 months ago ::
Nov 29, 2012 - 2:11PM
#51
|
Date Joined:
Jun 27, 2004
|
should be capable of damage output, if one wants to go that route, and equally one should be able to build a less lethal, but equally effective [whatever] with [options] that do more interesting things.
I'd say that (with the slight edits for clarity's sake) really is how I'd like to see most classes.
Feedback Disclaimer
Show
Yes, I am expressing my opinions (even complaints - le gasp!) about the current iteration of the play-test that we actually have in front of us.
No, I'm not going to wait for you to tell me when it's okay to start expressing my concerns (unless you are WotC).
(And no, my comments on this forum are not of the same tone or quality as my actual survey feedback.)
A Psion for Next (Playable Draft)A Barbarian for Next (Brainstorming Still)My 4e Projects
Show
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 29, 2012 - 2:40PM
#52
|
|
|
should be capable of damage output, if one wants to go that route, and equally one should be able to build a less lethal, but equally effective [whatever] with [options] that do more interesting things.
I'd say that (with the slight edits for clarity's sake) really is how I'd like to see most classes.
Fair enough. Although, I think some classes should have different focuses. For instance, fighters should be less versatile in some ways. by which I mean, the fighter options should be mostly pretty direct stuff.
More sex and gender equality and racial equality shouldn't even be an argument--it should simply be an assumption for any RPG that wants to stay relevant in the 21st century.
I could say anything in D&D is silly though, because it's a silly game and we are silly people.
|
