A 4E player character has a class “fueled” by a power source that fills a role. There are multiple builds within a class that provide a player with a template that optimizes their abilities for a certain playstyle. As more classes are added to fill holes in the role/power source matrix, and more builds are added to existing and new classes, the player is confronted with an overload of choice and options, putting them right back in the quandary that the implementation of roles and builds were meant to answer.

Instead of using classes to fill roles, why not use builds to fill them. Classes become “power sources”; you have one per type (martial, arcane, divine, primal, psionic, ki, etc.). Then provide a build for each role: controller, defender, leader, and striker.

It might sound like I’m arguing semantics, but I’m really questioning the design philosophy behind the 4E implementation of classes. In previous editions, most classes were able to fill more than one role. Fighters tanked and doled out large quantities of damage, at least to individual opponents. Wizards could be controllers and strikers. Clerics could be defenders, leaders or controllers. The natural evolution, in my mind, would have been to delineate these roles through builds for each class.

I’m less than inspired by the 4E builds. They’re an optimization of a new PC based on one or two ability scores. They don’t provide any guidance past the first level. Anyone who has visited an MMO forum or read a gamefaq for a CRPG could tell you that builds provide a step-by-step progression through every level.

What do you think about builds? Have you used a class build from one of the 4E source books for one of your characters?