kadelyn.the.dragon

In reference to the Josh Sawyer quotes from Prometheus' post above, I think the idea of flexibility presented is going in the wrong direction. Going 50% Fighter and 50% Wizard will not make an effective Fighter/Wizard, it will make a confused character build. For flexibility to work, there has to be fluidity between the mixing of classes. For example, if a Wizard's spells are inhibited by armor, why would they level in a class that prefers Heavy Armor? Perhaps the Talents will clear this up. I recall in IWD2, characters could take points in Armored Arcana to reduce the spell failure chance

I like the idea of unkillable summons. I don't think there's an effective method of implementing summons otherwise, they provide too much versatility. The reason why summons are usually used at higher levels in 3E/Pathfinder are because they're an indirect form of healing (would you rather heal 1 to 8 points or a static 6 points?) and they provide extra attacks (invaluable at every level, regardless of the actual attack bonus). I don't know about anyone else, but to me, summons are too valuable, especially in a Vancian system where spells are typically prepared ahead of time. As it is, sum

What are your thoughts on the diversity of roles that any given class can take? Should classes be more linear in their character choices, focusing on a specific role, or should they be more diverse, capable of taking a variety of roles based on choices made? I realize there is already a topic similar to this, but if I remember correctly, the topic is about a year old. So instead of bumping an old topic, I wanted to start anew and open the topic with some ideas of my own in regards to roles, classes, and party dynamics. The point of this topic is to throw around ideas for how classes should