Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Razz 06-27-05, 01:43 PM	I personally am sick of them for a few reasons: WotC makes them and drops them. They forget about them and leave it for us to pick at only to move on to more new classes. They need to expand on the current new classes: Healer, Hexblade, Favored Soul, Marshal, Ninja, Psion, Psychic Warrior, Samurai (CW version sucks to all hell), Scout, Shaman, Spirit Shaman, Shugenga, Sohei, Soulknife, Spellthief, Swashbuckler, Warlock, Warmage, Wilder, Wu jen. These classes alone need new PrC based for them, new spells, new feats, epic material, psionic material, and more for expanded play on them. Not created, dropped, and forgotten so they can make 20 billion more new classes :mad:
Gray stranger 06-27-05, 01:54 PM	Well, the psion and psychic warrior are good, because most books incorporate a bit of psionic material in their books and as to the other classes, well, the complete classes are a bit too narrow. A rogue can be a ninja, he just needs to use ninja equipment... a fighter can be a swashbuckler just use a rapier and take weapon finesse... you can´t easily make a prestige class for the warlock, because the warlock already sticks to a default theme (Demon Blood). the core classes have very diverse theme's That's the reason the classes will never be expanded upon, they ARE essentially expanded classes. I completely agree with the soulknife being left out though. He is already gravely underpowered, and the SK is IMHO the coolest class around :D I otherwise wholeheartedly agree with you, They should've made the samurai, the ninja, the scout and what-have-you PrC, make the warlock core and throw out the sorcerer. :D Gray
CzarGarrett 06-27-05, 01:57 PM	A fair number of them can double into already existing PrCs. Healer can go for a fair number of Cleric and divine based PrCs, Swashbuckler into rogue/fighter PrCs, and Psionic classes have several PrCs themselves. Yes, a few classes due to RAW can't get PrCs. Like the Warlock. The invocation system for them excludes them from most PrC's. And remember, when lacking, make it up yourself.
Kyy'Dakh 06-27-05, 04:07 PM	I agree with the overall theme of this thread: When the Complete books came out, I was perfectly fine with all the new base classes. But we've got enough base class concepts to last us a while. We need support for these concepts to keep them attractive, though. Otherwise players will gradually shift to tried, true, and potentially boring takes on the core classes.
Trevan0 06-27-05, 04:43 PM	I'm pretty sure they've been expanding the Hex Blade's spell list since it's creation.
Alvaric 06-27-05, 05:46 PM	Uh ... what new classes have they made at the expense of material for the "Complete" classes? It seems like you're worrying about something that hasn't even happened yet. [Oop. Just read the "Horror" thread. Point taken.] I've actually been very impressed that they often remember to add to the Hexblade spell list in new books; heck, they didn't even bother to do that for the assassin for quite a while. In the end, I'd rather have and not need than need and don't have. It's not like Richard Baker or whoever is sitting at my gaming table, yelling, "USE THE NINJA! USE THE NINJA!"
the black knight 06-27-05, 07:11 PM	Hmmm. Let us begin this response by acknowledging that the creation of 'new' classes is first and foremost a really great way to sell supplemental books to those who are only too happy to keep forking over their hard-earned dough to Wizzers. Secondly, let us further acknowledge that the 3e system is a god-send for whomever wishes to cook up 'new' classes (not to mention the several hundred prestige classes) for the purpose of selling such books. Now let's look at the actual numbers with a little quiz. Who among us has played one of these so-called new classes? Did it satisfy you as much as the core classes? If not, did you play another one or did you revert to the original eleven? How about your friends? Do you detect any trends that suggest people are flocking to the new stuff, or is it the opposite case? Now, how many of you have ever taken a prestige class during your 3e/3.5 career? Did you find it enjoyable/playable? Have you continued playing prestige classes since that time or have you stuck to the core offerings? What about those around you? Now, look over your answers, and then turn to look at that ever-growing stack of books you have purchased over the past five years. How do you feel?
Futeki_kishi 06-27-05, 08:26 PM	I want my mommy :weep:
Artexerxees 06-27-05, 09:22 PM	I have not tried to take on many of the new classes. There is a little confusion I have in determining which prc class works best with which expanded core class to take. I'm kinda waiting to see what other people play to determine which new expanded class is the bomb and which class to avoid. So far, I have mixed Bard with a level of Marshal and have not been stung. It seems to work well together. In another campaign I am trying a Warmage with Earth Dreamer to see the results. So far, I have seen a few people mix a new core class with another of the original core classes to expand the characters abilities. :)
RogerWilco 06-27-05, 09:31 PM	I agree about the lack of support for the new classes, I've seen very little of them in the Races books for example. I am sticking with the core classes, but do use PrC's. I think their main purpose should be to define balanced combinations of the base classes that are otherwise underpowered, the Eldrich Knight and Mystic Theurge come to mind. I like some druid in the mix, so Daggerspell Shaper, Fochucan Lyrist and Arcane Hierophant are my kind of thing. The only thing I would still like to see is a Druid/Rogue PrC that focusses on sneak/stealth instead of the ever present combat focus. Something that's a mix between Spy Master and Master of Many forms. I don't want another PrC that's basically just basic_class_but_on_mount in all it's variety. I basically ingore all the new classes, and consider only the PrC's that are interesting combinations of core classes' abilities.
MerricB 06-27-05, 09:36 PM	I've seen played: Favoured Soul, Hexblade, Swashbuckler, Warmage, Soulknife, Psychic Warrior, Samurai, Ninja, and Scout. I've used a Warlock as an NPC. I think they've been great additions to the game. :) Cheers!
Nazzareth 06-27-05, 09:45 PM	I think that almost all of the new classes should be made into PRCs and several of the core PHB classes as well. I like the ideas of the generic, PRC core classes & paragon classes from unearthed arcana, mixed in with the d20 modern's concept of advanced & ability trait (hero) classes. Advanced classes are like PRCs but are more general scope (like archers, or unarmed fighters) and can be entered at 4th level. Advanced classes could be used for some core classes like ranger, paladin, druid, bard. Trait (Hero) classes focus on your ability scores and give you skills, feats and traits (class abilities) based around that ability. I have also considered making the wizard a PRC for the sorcerer in that it allows for the sorcerer to use a spell book to change their spells known each day. Warlocks can easily become a PRC for sorcerers as well.
Mouseferatu 06-27-05, 10:00 PM	Well, perhaps I am in the minority, but here it is. I like new core classes. In fact, I like new core classes far more than I like new prestige classes. I'm more interested in them, and I'm more inclined to play them. As far as what I've played, or seen in play: Scout, spellthief, warlock, war-mage, wu-jen, hexblade, swashbuckler, and favored soul. And I like all of them, and feel that each of them has its own place. It's true, I wouldn't mind seeing more about some of these classes (the warlock in particular). But remember, WotC's policy is never to require someone to buy a supplement to use a supplement. Expanding these classes would require reprinting them.
Dark Voivode 06-27-05, 10:01 PM	What they really need to do is a cross-referencing index similar to the new Class Index & Prestige Class Index. List each class and sublist the PrCs that class qualifies for. That, at least, would serve for most of the classes. 2 new classes is always better than 50 new PrCs in my opinion. I like new core class ideas, but if you're not going to support them, I feel gypped. If those 50 PrCs are for under-supported classes like the Soulknife and the Warlock then I'm much more interested in the PrCs than the classes. Give me PrCs for Warlocks. Give me PrCs for Psionic Classes. So, I mostly agree with Razz. I don't mind the occasional new class. Two per expanded setting book is cool by me. Just make sure you support them with PrCs, items, adversaries and <choke> feats (but only when absolutely necessary).
Mirikon 06-27-05, 10:08 PM	Who among us has played one of these so-called new classes? Me, and several of them, actually. To date, i've played the Warlock, Ninja, and Swashbuckler. Did it satisfy you as much as the core classes? Yes. Love the swashbuckler and ninja is great in high levels. But I'm a Warlock addict now. How about your friends? I've seen Favored Souls, Samurai, Spirit Shamans, Shugenja, Ninja, Warlocks, Swashbucklers, and Hexblades played by others. Do you detect any trends that suggest people are flocking to the new stuff, or is it the opposite case? I find that people are at least trying the new stuff. If they like it, they continue on with it. If not, they try something else. Now, how many of you have ever taken a prestige class during your 3e/3.5 career? Me Did you find it enjoyable/playable? Yes. Have you continued playing prestige classes since that time or have you stuck to the core offerings? I usually incorporate at least one PrC in my characters. What about those around you? Same. Now, look over your answers, and then turn to look at that ever-growing stack of books you have purchased over the past five years. How do you feel? Just fine.
Razz 06-28-05, 12:12 PM	I love the new classes too. So do my players. In fact, I have one plaing a Hexblade, another playing a Warlock and another playing a Spellthief. The problem I say is these players are going to want "specific" qualities for their characters, mainly a prestige class that would fit their character or a feat that would enhance their class' abilities. For example, Sandstorm offers a feat made for barbarians that gives them the fire subtype when they rage. I realy would like to see the new classes be expanded upon like this. A feat just "made" for Swasbucklers, or Ninja (like improved ki use) and also Spellthieves. And let's not forget epic material. If prestige classes like Dwarven Defender gets to have a couple of their own unique feats, I think epic feats that would be perfect for Ninja, Spellthieves, Swashbucklers, Healers, and all the rest of them is needed. Because what you get is unsatisfied players. They will sit and watch all this new material come out for the base 11 classes and feel left out and eventually move on back to one of the original core classes anyway. I had to inform my Warlock player that there is news of a book coming out next year with new invocations just to keep him from quitting his Warlock because of lack of options for him feat and invocation wise.
Jaid 06-28-05, 01:17 PM	to me, it depends on the class. for example, some of the new classes simply shouldn't be around. as was pointed out, a rogue can be a ninja, a fighter can be a swashbuckler, etc. a lot of some of these classes are pure RP. OTOH, some of them i feel are justified. like the warlock, for example, sounds different enough to justify being a core class. some of them i would be fine with, as PrCs. for example, the spellthief, swashbuckler, and scout. some of them i would be fine with, in a different campaign setting. for example, if you are playing in an Asian-based campaign, then by all means, ditch the fighter and rogue and bring on the Samurai and Ninja. toss out those silly wizards, sorcerors, clerics, and druids, and put it in the classes that fit. but i don't see the need for Samurai, Ninja, Sohei, Wu-Jen, etc in a more western setting. i would say either/or is fine, but i don't see the need for both. but that's just how i see it.
SnipingRanger07 06-28-05, 02:02 PM	With the prestige class problem, I know for the warlock at least, it has PrCs, they are in the Complete Arcane book. They have caster level reqs, so they can go into them. There is a chart in the beginning of the section. so please don't tell me they don't have PrCs. Also you can always adapt older PrCs for the new classes. Slight augments work. But yes, we do need support on them. I would like new warlock invocations. That would be great. And in complete arcane at least, there is a thing in the back that has epic info. So if you don't think you have feats for your class, create/augment. That is the answer to most problems. This is DnD, it is supposed to be more open, not an open and shut law book. Think of the books as guide lines, not the word of god that is written in stone.
Me, Myself, & 101 others 06-28-05, 02:03 PM	Some I like, others I don't, and still others I don't really know. I like, and if I had a chance, would play: Hexblade, Psion, Soulknife, Swashbuckler & Spirit Shaman. These classes seem balanced, playable, and (to me) fun. I don't have any problems with ninjas, scouts seem fine but they're not something I would play. Healer is nifty, too. Favored soul is kind of wierd, I'm ok with the progression and the abilities up until the wings show up. And, I can't stop myself from saying, "Wings? Why wings?" it just seems like something odd thrown in to me. Psychic Warrior and soulblade could be improved on, but are still playable. Wu Jen is cool, and flavorful. Spell thief, from what I've seen, isn't too bad. Samurai seems, except for the ancestral weapon, to be just a fighter so I think that could be replaced by a feat or two... I don't like the wilder as much as the psion, but it seems ok to me, so far. Marshal, Shaman, Shugenga, and Sohei I haven't really read too much, so I don't have much of an opinion. Warmage and Warlock I've banned. I just started my current campaign a couple months back, the first day we met to play after deciding to start D&D up one of my players showed up and said he wanted to play a warlock. I said, 'Not a chance, that things banned.' to which he replied 'awww, that's the most broke thing I've ever seen!' which, really, was why I banned it. The warmage isn't much better, it's a sorcerer that trades in a familiar for more hitpoints, the ability to wear armor, and sudden metamagic. While I admit the sorcerer is a bit lacking, the warmage takes things too far. But, I would like to see more in the way of feats, PrC's, level substitutions, or other options for the new core classes. Maybe they should make like a Complete Other handbook, just for the various 'new' core classes.
Knights_Disciple 06-28-05, 02:41 PM	Just so you know, the warmage also drops all utility spells. With no way, other than multiclassing or PrCs, to get them. That's a huge thing to consider. They're a specific class: blaster caster. I haven't played one yet, but I'm planning to. My DM banned the sudden metamagics (I'm kinda torn: I see his point, but they were only once a day, and I hesitate to do too much to the way things are written) and let me have the class. Warlock also has limitations. I don't have to book yet, but from what I understand, it get the equivalent of 12 spells, most of which are buffs, debuffs, and utilities. Its damage comes from the blast. Now, considering all of the mechanic, and several of its abilities, I might call it very powerful. But broken? I hesitate to say that. I tend to think that no class, in and of itself, is truly broken. I think the people at Wizards have just a wee bit o' sense, and can avoid that. But that's just me.
allenchan 06-28-05, 02:50 PM	To the OP: Wow, you're an idiot. WotC has stated they try to keep new material enclosed in their own books on purpose. Therefor, if I buy one supplement, it wont have a bunch of PrCs for classes in another supplement I dont have, thus making half the book useless to me. And I love the new classes. I've played a Ninja, Warlock, Warmage, Swashbuckler, and Marshall. I think they'll stop with base classes for awhile now, though. They seem to be focusing on substitution levels now (which are hawt) As for Me, Myself, & 101 others: Warlock is actually one of the most balanced classes I've seen in a long time, and I wish people did more research before making claims like this. Try playing a druid or a cleric before tlaking about broken :rolleyes: Warmage is weak, and if you dont beleive me, check out the Character Optimization board. The only thing warmages are good for is being a force missile mage.
Mirikon 06-28-05, 03:48 PM	Warmage and Warlock I've banned. I just started my current campaign a couple months back, the first day we met to play after deciding to start D&D up one of my players showed up and said he wanted to play a warlock. I said, 'Not a chance, that things banned.' to which he replied 'awww, that's the most broke thing I've ever seen!' which, really, was why I banned it. The warmage isn't much better, it's a sorcerer that trades in a familiar for more hitpoints, the ability to wear armor, and sudden metamagic. While I admit the sorcerer is a bit lacking, the warmage takes things too far. Trust me, the Warlock isn't broken, though it may seem to be without actually looking the class over much. I compare them to an arcane version of the Fighter class. Things to consider. Even their dark invocations don't measure up to the power a high level mage can put out. And at level 20, 9d6 damage is not that much. Warlocks are weaker than the Wizard or Sorcerer in terms of raw power or utility, but they have Endurance in spades. What does this mean? It means that a warlock will never be able to top a caster in terms of power over a short haul, but they have staying power. The Warlock is far more powerful than the Wiz/Sorc at level 1, but by level 5 the Wiz/Sorc is about even. By level 10, he's pulling ahead. By level 15, he's far stronger. By level 20, the warlock is far and away less powerful than the wizard, but he can keep doing his tricks until the cows come home. It is actually more fair to compare the Warlock to the Bard than the Wiz/Sorc. I think of them as the Anti-bard. The bard buffs himself and others, and has a limited number of spells at his disposal. The Warlock buffs himself, and blasts things. Both get simple weapons and light armor. Both are far weaker than the wiz/sorc at high levels. The Warlock is only unbalanced if you don't read the class. Likewise, the Warmage is only broken if you don't take more than a cursory glance at the class. As has been mentioned, the Warmage is a blaster caster. Nothing more. Which means that he doesn't have access to the truly powerful arcane spells, which are the save or dies, or other things of that type. In addition, he suffers from MAD much more than any arcane caster other than the bard. In terms of raw damage dealing power, the Warmage is more powerful than the sorcerer. In terms of actual power, the sorcerer is more powerful. For the sole reason that they can learn things like Anti-magic field.
Me, Myself, & 101 others 06-28-05, 03:49 PM	As for Me, Myself, & 101 others: Warlock is actually one of the most balanced classes I've seen in a long time, and I wish people did more research before making claims like this. Try playing a druid or a cleric before tlaking about broken :rolleyes: Warmage is weak, and if you dont beleive me, check out the Character Optimization board. The only thing warmages are good for is being a force missile mage. Warlock is not balanced, it can keep doing it's eldritch blasts and effects constantly, without having to close into a dangerous area, without running out of spells, or ammo. Archers have arrows, wizards and sorcerers have limited spells, a warlock has...? Yes, it has a limitted selection of spells and effects, so what? Anyone who picks it doesn't -want- utility, the same goes for the warmage, so losing utility isn't a hinderance, it's a cheap way to justify brokeness. The main reason warmage isn't on more builds in the character optimization forum is because it has slower spell progression, so most go wizard if they want arcane builds. The exceptions are the gish builds, the gish builders -love- warmage. And, for the record, I wouldn't allow anything even resembling a creation from the character optimization board. As for clerics and druids, they're not broken in the player's handbook. There, they're actually balanced. I only allow PHB stuff to be taken by default, any other options, rules, or whatever have to be approved before they're chosen. If you keep a leash on some of the more unbalanced feats and PrC's in the supplemental books, they don't become unbalanced.
Lord Schpungus 06-28-05, 03:56 PM	Yeah, they can do their piddly little 9d6 damage (at 20th level) once per round all day. Meanwhile, your wizard friend just killed the city with the save-or-dies he had from level 7 on. I think you haven't even looked at the warlock, and have banned it just hearing about it. Trust me, at high levels, I was feeling very far behind the rest of the party. As for Druids not broken out of the box: Natural Spell is in the PHB. That feat alone breaks druids. Clerics: Righteous Might, Divine Power, etc etc. Fighters can't fight as well as a cleric. I love new classes. The more the merrier. I'm inclined to scrap the ranger in favor of the scout (which is awesome as heck) and scrap the sorc for the warlock. I do wish they'd have more support, though. The warlock is hanging out to dry, and it's about the only thing they got right with arcane magic in a long time.
Knights_Disciple 06-28-05, 03:59 PM	Um....if I remember correctly, warmage doesn't get infinite spells per day. I think it's on a chart like the sorc. And so what if it's better at blasting than a sorc? You seem to be operating off of a knee-jerk reaction. Mirikon raised good points on both, better than I can with no access to Complete Arcane and no direct experience playing the classes. So what if the Warlock can keep blasting? You want near broken? A high-level (for kicks lets say 20) wizard casts timestop. Then he strategically places delayed blast fireballs around the place. Time unstops. Fireballs explode. Maybe he does it again for kicks. Then he throws out Implosion, or a Power Word Kill, or maybe just some Disintegrates. He doesn't have the staying power of a Warlock, cause he don't need it.
allenchan 06-28-05, 04:26 PM	As for clerics and druids, they're not broken in the player's handbook. There, they're actually balanced. I only allow PHB stuff to be taken by default, any other options, rules, or whatever have to be approved before they're chosen. "zomgz core is so balanced supplements are br0ke!" :rofl: :heehee
Mirikon 06-28-05, 04:30 PM	Warlock is not balanced, it can keep doing it's eldritch blasts and effects constantly, without having to close into a dangerous area, without running out of spells, or ammo. Archers have arrows, wizards and sorcerers have limited spells, a warlock has...? Yes, it has a limitted selection of spells and effects, so what? Anyone who picks it doesn't -want- utility, the same goes for the warmage, so losing utility isn't a hinderance, it's a cheap way to justify brokeness. The main reason warmage isn't on more builds in the character optimization forum is because it has slower spell progression, so most go wizard if they want arcane builds. The exceptions are the gish builds, the gish builders -love- warmage. And, for the record, I wouldn't allow anything even resembling a creation from the character optimization board. As for clerics and druids, they're not broken in the player's handbook. There, they're actually balanced. I only allow PHB stuff to be taken by default, any other options, rules, or whatever have to be approved before they're chosen. If you keep a leash on some of the more unbalanced feats and PrC's in the supplemental books, they don't become unbalanced. I'll do you a favor, and let other posters rebuke you on the cleric/druid thing. Or you can just go over to the Char Op boards, and ask someone to show you the zillions of ways clerics and druids can be broken in a Core only (PHB, MM, & DMG only) campaign. It ain't pretty. Warlocks can indeed do that damage all day long, without running out. However, the wizard and sorcerer both kick the warlock's ass in terms of power. Hell, MELEE classes can dish out more damage than a warlock. Let me ask you this. Have you ever played a Warlock? have you ever seen what it can actually do, as opposed to what a wizard of equal level can do? Trust me. By Level 10 the wizard owns the Warlock, unless you have six encounters a day.
Koga:The ninja trick 06-28-05, 05:01 PM	Because like American politics, there's only two classes in D&D. Wizards.. And clerics.. Everything else is simply a lesser incarnation of the formers, don't believe The Koga? *Ahem!* The sorcerer is just a rehashed wizard! WOTC should drop it from the core list! A druid is nothing more then a specialized cleric. Why does it even exist? Psions, pheh, if your player wants psions just incoperate spellpoints into your campaighn for his wizard.. WHY is there a paladin?! It should be a prestige class for the cleric is what it should be! Rogues and fighters are like other countries, they can't dumb them in the other two so they simply ignore them.. And bards are like France, we'll leave it at that..
Knights_Disciple 06-28-05, 06:10 PM	I tend to think that few things, especially base classes, are truly broken . More or less powerful, yes. I extend this to the Complete classes. (I'm sure I'll get flamed for that....) That being said........dude, cleric and druid are both extremely powerful. Even with just core material, they are powerful. I don't like to think in terms of broken. While I appreciate balance to a large degree, if we become slaves to "balance", we miss out on the fact that this is a game, and should be fun. (This doesn't mean munchkins who take 8 different classes and prestige classes shouldn't be smacked...) You are the DM. You do make the rulings on material included. If you go core-only, have fun. But don't rule out other stuff, Completes especially, just because it's "broken". Especially if you don't read the stuff very thouroughly. If you do read it, and just don't like it, don't think it will fit, that's one thing. But crying "Broken"....not so much. *Spelling edit*
Dark Voivode 06-28-05, 08:49 PM	The "How broken can I make this class" threads just irritate me. I understand nearly everyone thinks that certain classes (i.e. Clerics & Druids) are overpowered, but balance is the DM's job. Look subjectively at what you're dealing with and make a logical conclusion based on the facts. "Broken" is a term too easily thrown around here. People purposely go out of their way to see how they can abuse the system, then scream "foul" when they achieve their goal. You're the one that abused the material. A smart DM wouldn't allow you to get close to what you've done to wreck the system. The Druid and Cleric are overpowered? How? Healing? That's their friggin' job! Turning Undead? How much Undead do you actually use? If your answer is a lot, perhaps you might consider other monsters to give other players a chance to show how "broke" their characters are. What else is there? Domains? Domains are limp at best. Overbalanced and fixed; the opposite of "broke." Shapeshifting? As compared to what? a Thief's backstab, ability to dodge area of effects and other special abilities? By the time a druid becomes powerful in shapeshifting, the monsters are more powerful. It's not the fault of the class that you're not using the encounters to their fullest extent. Balance; It's the DM's job.
Particle_Man 06-28-05, 10:14 PM	I love my Warlock: At last I have a magic using character without needing to keep track of things. The paperwork free magic-user! I would love to play a Scout: At last a "woodsy" guy without magic! I would love to play a Hexblade: Cool factor. I would love to play a Spirit Shaman: At last a "nature guy" without the broken animal companion and wildshape abilities! I loved playing my Psion (Shaper). Too bad that campaign ended. So, you were saying? :D :D :D :D
Nazzareth 06-29-05, 03:19 AM	Its not that I don't like most the new classes, I just think that most of them are better off as advanced or PRC classess. Warmages, hexblades, ninjas, swashbucklers and warlocks for example. Many of these classes could also be made through the variant class ability rules like those in unearthed arcana. One could even used something similar to the racial substitution levels found in some of the source books, like archer or ranged specialist substitution levels for the fighter. This would also stop some of the neglection of these new classes in future books.
allenchan 06-29-05, 03:24 AM	Warlocks are the only ones that have struggles taking pre-existing prcs. I really dont see the problem.
Particle_Man 06-29-05, 08:21 AM	Its not that I don't like most the new classes, I just think that most of them are better off as advanced or PRC classess. Warmages, hexblades, ninjas, swashbucklers and warlocks for example. Many of these classes could also be made through the variant class ability rules like those in unearthed arcana. One could even used something similar to the racial substitution levels found in some of the source books, like archer or ranged specialist substitution levels for the fighter. This would also stop some of the neglection of these new classes in future books. Since you brought up Unearthed Arcana, there are the 3 Generic classes that could be used in place of the 11 in the PHB. You could whittle that down to 2 by ditching the Expert and adding feats that let you add 2 skill points per level and 2 class skills, and allowing that feat to be taken up to 3 times. Now you have 2 classes. Or you could play GURPS or something. :) Personally, I like having more base classes, but agree that the Warlock could use more love in future books (more invocations, more "warlock" items, a ruling that allows them more access to prestige classes, a fix for the Hideous ruling on Hideous Blow in the FAQ, etc.)
Stormonu 06-29-05, 11:55 AM	I just recently started a new campaign that has a Psychic Warrior, Favored Soul, and Warlock in it (along with a rogue, bard and a monk). While we're still at first level, the favored soul not having turning ability and warlock's "infinite missiles" have both bothered me. However, all three players seem to have enjoyed the new classes overall. So far, no problems with the psychic warrior. I'm strongly considering limiting the warlock's eldritch blast to a number of times per day considering the number of times I've already seen it being launched in a single game. If it continues, I'll slap some kind of limit it on it, but I'm holding off until I see what happens around level 5 (when the Warlock gets the Blast evocation, and each shot becomes a 5d6 fireball). I'm also wondering about the DR - it may get the axe as well. Warmage doesn't fit my campaign model and I dislike the flavor it, so I've banned it from my games. So far, that, Theurge and True Necromancer are about the only "classes" I'm not open to letting folks play in my campaigns. However, I'm pretty happy with the rest of the new classes - I'm hoping WotC will pull most of them into the SRD and/or include them in D&D 4.0 as base classes. In a lot of cases, I get the feeling WotC is fishing to see what people want and will work in future books; for example notice how Immediate and Swift actions have started showing up in many books now; shouldn't be long before we see them as part of the SRD (I hope). The samurai looks back to the 1E version (which is good, considering we've got an 1E party we've been looking at converting and possibly playing again), as does the ninja. Now, if they'd just come back out with OA and the revised classes for it, things would be A-okay. The only problem I have/had with these new classes is getting folks to play them - my players either were not aware of their existance or shied away playing one fearing getting the shaft because the class would be underpowered or overpowered - and then I'd have to step in and tone them down or let them make a new character to replace the "icky" one.
Koga:The ninja trick 06-29-05, 12:07 PM	The druid is easily breakable. Just add natural spell and you can cast spells whilst in animal form. Clerics not only can cast all spells on the cleric list, but domains give them extra abilities and EVEN MORE spells.. The Koga feels if the cleric was restricted to only his diety's domains as his known spells and abilities, then he'd be balanced. As then you'd either have a necromancer, a healer, or some kind of melee mage.. The druid would be alot better if he just didn't have wildshape.. Then it wouldn't be so disgustingly powerful.. And to have both the erudite and psion (The Koga loves psionics..) change the psion to automaticaly learn all powers he or she is able to manifest in thier discipline but those are the only powers they know. Also The Koga has a list of things to improve the wilder and soulknife. About the only classes WOTC got right were the warlock, spell-thief, and--heck, just get the guy's who made miniatures and complete warriors to fix everything lol.. :P
Nyferto 06-29-05, 12:46 PM	Surely the original question would've been quashed by the simple question: "Who says they won't?". Warlocks are broken and overpowered, until someone shoves an axe through their head. Warmages are the same, they blow stuff up like crazy - then they meet someone with blink.
sfubear 06-29-05, 12:57 PM	Warmage and Warlock I've banned. I just started my current campaign a couple months back, the first day we met to play after deciding to start D&D up one of my players showed up and said he wanted to play a warlock. I said, 'Not a chance, that things banned.' to which he replied 'awww, that's the most broke thing I've ever seen!' which, really, was why I banned it. The warmage isn't much better, it's a sorcerer that trades in a familiar for more hitpoints, the ability to wear armor, and sudden metamagic. While I admit the sorcerer is a bit lacking, the warmage takes things too far. I played a warmage, and they are ok, but not broken, there spell list isn't that good, every thing on it or at least 95% of it have saving throws and SR.....so unless you are fighting other people he tends to only effect things 50 to 60% of the time........not that bad for being able to wear armor, not that does you any good when you are fighting something that you can throw a ton of spells at and hardly effect
Knights_Disciple 06-29-05, 01:05 PM	Warlocks are broken and overpowered, until someone shoves an axe through their head. I would imagine that would be true of just about any class or race. ;)
sfubear 06-29-05, 01:16 PM	I think a lot of the arguments on this page are faulty. What it really comes down to is the fact that, if you have a good DM they will be able to compensate for anything you can throw at them. I think to often these days, people just jump into the game with out learning all the rules and so at times do things that you can’t do or the DM just doesn’t know the party well enough to deal with them. I know a lot of DMs I have had are good at dealing with clerics, fighters, rogues, and wizards (the four characters that people think of first) but when it comes to the more exotic classes (druid, monk, warmage, things like that) the DM doesn’t take the time to learn what each can do, and therefore can make a good encounter that will challenge the entire group. I say it has nothing to do with the abilities, feats, spells for any of the classes, it has to do with poor DMing
Knights_Disciple 06-29-05, 01:30 PM	Bravo :clap: sfubear ! I don't know if i could have said it better myself. I think I will take that as my position, even as a player.....ultimately, the DM should shape the challenges of a world. Not by murdelizing classes, or horribly pumping them up (though a bit of room for creativity and such ought to be allowed), but by understanding strengths and weaknesses of each class, and formulating accordingly. This extends to the Completes as well. If you think the Favored Soul is so powerful, target him with a powerful enemy. Let your players have room for creativity. If the world had more time, along with me, I'd like to play about every class out there, all the way through. That being said, I think that if the whole group is new to D&D, or a majority is, they should stick to the core books only, PHB classes only. It keeps things simple, and lets people get used to the game without too many options.
Stormonu 06-29-05, 03:49 PM	I do not agree, sfubear. For example, look at the information printed in the original class splatbooks and the original psionics handbook and compare them to the revisions in 3.5. WotC doesn't always get things right and DMs have to be on the lookout for possible abuses and power creep that is being introduced into their game. For example, I don't see anyone complaining that Warlock is "too weak". People seem to drool over the class, dropping playing wizards and even sorcerors to wreak havoc with these guys; to me that's an indication they are too good. Heck, after my first read-through of warlock I was wondering what WotC was smoking to give a class unlimited magic attack spell casting, DR and d6 hit points! Same with the battle mage. Seems lots of people are dropping playing fireball slinging sorcerors to rush out and play the battle mage. I haven't heard of the same problem (yet) with the other new classes, so I've yet to see if they are problematic. In fact, after reading over a thread about the scout, sounds like it's a unique and fun class to run.
Particle_Man 06-29-05, 04:17 PM	I'm strongly considering limiting the warlock's eldritch blast to a number of times per day considering the number of times I've already seen it being launched in a single game. If it continues, I'll slap some kind of limit it on it, but I'm holding off until I see what happens around level 5 (when the Warlock gets the Blast evocation, and each shot becomes a 5d6 fireball). I'm also wondering about the DR - it may get the axe as well. Nope. At 6th they might get the ability to affect two opponents per round instead of one (gasp! just like a 6th level archer!). The "cool" blast invocations are Cone-shaped (at level 11) and "hit every opponent within 20 feet shaped" (at level 16!). And that is only IF you spend the invocation slots. Note that in both cases, opponents would suddenly gain saving throws for half damage. Frankly, Warlocks get weak starting around 9th level. Wizards outclass them in mass-damage capabilities and bonus feats. And unless your campaigns tend to have more than 4 encounters per day, the warlock's "energizer bunny" status really isn't going to come up.
Mirikon 06-29-05, 04:40 PM	For example, I don't see anyone complaining that Warlock is "too weak". People seem to drool over the class, dropping playing wizards and even sorcerors to wreak havoc with these guys; to me that's an indication they are too good. Heck, after my first read-through of warlock I was wondering what WotC was smoking to give a class unlimited magic attack spell casting, DR and d6 hit points! Same with the battle mage. Seems lots of people are dropping playing fireball slinging sorcerors to rush out and play the battle mage. I haven't heard of the same problem (yet) with the other new classes, so I've yet to see if they are problematic. In fact, after reading over a thread about the scout, sounds like it's a unique and fun class to run. The warlock is no more overpowered than a Fighter is. Properly played, and using synergy with various skills/weapons/feats/invocations, a Warlock can be devestating. But the same can be said of the Fighter. And the answer about what to do about a character that is dominating is always the same. Toss in something he's weak against. For a Warlock, that would be things that inflict massive amounts of pain, have high HP, or target the Fort Save. For this, I like Dragons, Wizards, Beholders, and Medusas with class levels. The DR, Energy resistance, and other such abilities really aren't that powerful. DR 5 at level 20? If that is seriously hampering the melee types at that level, then the warlock isn't the problem. Same for Energy Resistance 10. Fiendish Resilience is nice, but is a very out of combat thing. As for infinite blasts? Yes, you can fire all day long. But look at what you're shooting. At level 20, you do as much damage to one target as a wizard was doing to all in a 20' radius back at level 9 with Fireball. A barbarian will outdamage you easily. Really, the only time that the infinite blasts are an issue are at very low levels, or if the party is facing their sixth encounter of the day. The Warlock is weaker, damage-wise than the Sorcerer or the Wizard, but they have endurance. Compare level 9 spells to a Warlock's dark invocations. The dark invocations all are the equivalent to about 5th or 6th level spells. I just recently started a new campaign that has a Psychic Warrior, Favored Soul, and Warlock in it (along with a rogue, bard and a monk). While we're still at first level, the favored soul not having turning ability and warlock's "infinite missiles" have both bothered me. However, all three players seem to have enjoyed the new classes overall. So far, no problems with the psychic warrior. I'm strongly considering limiting the warlock's eldritch blast to a number of times per day considering the number of times I've already seen it being launched in a single game. If it continues, I'll slap some kind of limit it on it, but I'm holding off until I see what happens around level 5 (when the Warlock gets the Blast evocation, and each shot becomes a 5d6 fireball). I'm also wondering about the DR - it may get the axe as well. Um, don't know where you're getting the each shot becomes a 5d6 fireball bit. A Warlock doesn't do 5d6 damage until Level 9. The only blast shape invocation that gives you the ability to affect a spread would be the Eldritch Doom invocation, which you cannot take until level 16. As I said before, the DR, while nice, doesn't really affect much. By the time it actually gets to DR 5, if it makes a significant difference, then your player is insanely lucky. DR 5/Cold Iron at level 19 really isn't all that impressive. At low levels, the warlock is indeed more powerful than the Wizard. But so is a Fighter. Basically, after about level 5, and definately after level 10, the Wizard is more powerful than the Warlock.
Knights_Disciple 06-29-05, 04:41 PM	Seems lots of people are dropping playing fireball slinging sorcerors to rush out and play the battle mage. Have you seen the warmage spell list? It's perfect for people who would otherwise play sorcerors with almost nothing but evocation spells anyway. Except now, they automatically know all the happy blow-things-up spells. But they sacrifice spells like, oh Greater Invisibility for that. I'm looking to play one. I purposefully chose this spell list, because I like the idea of being a cannon. One-on-one with a sorceror or wizard though, it would probably lose. All they would have to do is go invisible and start flying. I do plan to try to work around some weaknesses with items. But because of personal taste and style, I am willing to accept the trade-off of spell variety. And of course the Warlock isn't weak. But it is limited in several regards. I might drop a wizard to play it, but then, I personally dislike having to juggle huge spell lists and such. I prefer the tighter operations of the spontaneous classes. Would I trade a sorceror for it? I don't know. Maybe. Maybe not. I like fireball, and the Warlock don't get no fireball (purposeful bad grammatical structure).
eggplantm 06-29-05, 04:52 PM	I think this thread is deviating from the original topic... Personally, I don't think we'll see such an influx of classes as with the complete series, miniatures handbook and XPH for a while. Maybe one or two every so often. I love all the classes in all of those books and have played almost all of them at one point or another. I hope they do make more classes. I love'em and they were the main reasons I bought the complete series. I enjoy all the prcs as well. I do agree that the classes presented in those books are lacking a little in the same amount of additional material and updates that the core classes receive but this is to be expected. The psionic classes and the hexblade and warlock do get the occasional bone thrown their way but I would like to see a lot more. My suggestion is that WOTC put out more web enhancements! I so enjoyed the psionic supplements that used to come out on a regular basis and made that supplement enjoyable in spite of the huge problems with how the psiHB was written. The mind's eye articles made me LOVE psionics and I believe are what prompted the creation of the XPH. Why can't we do that for more books? Join me, my bretheren and let your voice be heard! I want a monthly web feature that supplements the classes from the MHB and the complete series. Enough of the crappy features like "fighters with class" YAWN! Don't tell me how to play with material I already have! Give me some new feats for my swashbuckler, substitution levels for the warmage, new invocations for the warlock, new auras for the marshal, etc. I would wait white-knuckled every month for such a thing! Also, (wink, wink) this would encourage other people to buy these supplements for these classes. Can we make some kind of united request for a Mind's Eye type monthly web enhancement that deals with the new classes? "Complete Class"? It needs a catchy title.
Xaxor 06-29-05, 07:13 PM	Warlocks are not 'teh brozoken'. At 20th level, a wizard or sorc can cast at least 4 delayed blast fireballs doing 20d6 each, in a 20ft radius burst. And that's just ONE level of spells. Do Warlocks get Wish? Hell no. Even a lowly level 3 fireball does one more die of damage than Eldritch Blast, at level 20. And a wiz/sorc could empower and maximize that fireball for 60+ damage. Massive damage anyone? Eldritch Blast is the cornerstone of the Warlock class. Limiting it would seriously kill the class. I'm currently playing a warlock in two different campaigns. Quite fun they are. Oh and don't worry about damage reduction, since any magical/energy source ignores it. Wow. They can take a little off melee, which they shouldn't be in in the first place. Of course, I cannot tell you how to run your game, but think of this as a suggestion then. Play one to level 20, base class only. Play a wiz/sorc alongside it. Again, straight to 20. Once you're there, have them square off. I'd bet that the wiz/sorc will win. Finger of Death, Power Word, Kill... one of those will probably be enough. Sure, the wiz/sorc might be hit with 54 damage, at best, but any character that made it that far should have some pretty good stats and that should be quite survivable. Run it as many times as you like. Wiz/sorc will win the majority of the time.
Koga:The ninja trick 06-29-05, 07:57 PM	That looks good IN THEORY, but how many level 20 campaighns do you see? How many would you want too? Most characters are played somewhere in the faccinity of level 1 to 10, more often then not the lower half. Very rarely are high level games played in order to compare magick based classes for that reason. Because inevitably all mages become a god..
Crispy_Spellthief 06-29-05, 08:36 PM	I just recently started a new campaign that has a Psychic Warrior, Favored Soul, and Warlock in it (along with a rogue, bard and a monk). While we're still at first level, the favored soul not having turning ability and warlock's "infinite missiles" have both bothered me. However, all three players seem to have enjoyed the new classes overall. So far, no problems with the psychic warrior. I'm strongly considering limiting the warlock's eldritch blast to a number of times per day considering the number of times I've already seen it being launched in a single game. If it continues, I'll slap some kind of limit it on it, but I'm holding off until I see what happens around level 5 (when the Warlock gets the Blast evocation, and each shot becomes a 5d6 fireball). I'm also wondering about the DR - it may get the axe as well. There's your problem. You're all Level One characters. You're not even near the CR to showcase the limiting features of the Warlock, or the redeeming features of the Favored Soul. Try going to Level 10, and see where the balance of power changes. The Warlock needs his DR and his unlimited blast, because they help balance his much lessened potential for damage. And as for the Blast feature, let's look at it this way: 1. Warlocks don't have a Blast invocation. The Blast is the name of the class feature in the first place (let's ignore the errata that calls Eldritch Blast an invocation, please.. I consider EB a class feature, plain and simple.). The closest thing to fireball a Warlock gets is Eldritch Doom (at level 16 minimum!). 2. Wizard - Fireball = 10d6 maximum, range of 400 feet + 40 feet per caster level (no limit), with a 20 foot spread. A wizard can absolutely roast the enemy from the safety of his own home (practically), and not even come close to being in danger, for some hefty damage, especially with various Metamagics. Warlock - Eldritch Doom = 7d6 damage minimum, with a requirement of epic levels before he can equal the Fireball potential of a Wizard, though he makes up for it by using more epics to exceed the dioe potential, range of 0 feet, with a 20 foot spread radius. Basically, to take advantage of this, the Warlock needs to get right in the thick of things, and surround himself with enemies, then unleash the fury. Which means, that anyone who survives will get to flank and pound the fool into hamburger.. and at level 16, they'll definitely have that ability, DR be damned. Not only that, the closest he gets to metamagics is to give up a feat in order to maximize his Eldritch Doom (a feat that can't be applied to any other form of damage dealing invocation), and he can only do it a number of times equal to his Charisma mod. Now tell me.. who would you rather be.. the Warlock in the midst of danger, or the Wizard who can Fireball and still be home in time for cornflakes? (and yes, Eldritch Doom allows reflex saving throws, so no using that as an argument.) (in my case, I'd rather be the Warlock.. but then again, I love being in the midst of danger. :P ) Anyways, Warlock devotion aside, I love all the new classes offered up by the Complete series. i'm the kind of person who loves customization, and want to have lots of different options to work with. And quite frankly, I havnt found much brokeness with any of the classes. That's a bigger case for certain Prestige classes... But, despite my love with new customization options.. let's see some support for the classes that are here already. (new Invocations for warlocks, please!)
Koga:The ninja trick 06-29-05, 09:28 PM	Ofcourse The Koga would pick Warlock, despite lower damage, that blast will always be there. The wizard has to assume he's going to need fireball and prepare it. (And with a very limited spellpool this is a dire sacrifice to make..) Then the wizard has to hope fireball did it's job, because it's obvious he doesn't have as much HP to spare as the warlock. All the warlock did was make the sorcerer useless, well.. that and the warmage.. As wizard's make the best utility spellcaster. (Seeing as they have to prepare and have ironicaly the lowest spell per day list..) And actually The Koga would probably prefer players choose favored souls and healers over druids and clerics. Seeing as they're more balanced..
Majorafire77 06-29-05, 09:36 PM	I do not agree, sfubear. For example, look at the information printed in the original class splatbooks and the original psionics handbook and compare them to the revisions in 3.5. WotC doesn't always get things right and DMs have to be on the lookout for possible abuses and power creep that is being introduced into their game. For example, I don't see anyone complaining that Warlock is "too weak". People seem to drool over the class, dropping playing wizards and even sorcerors to wreak havoc with these guys; to me that's an indication they are too good. Heck, after my first read-through of warlock I was wondering what WotC was smoking to give a class unlimited magic attack spell casting, DR and d6 hit points! Same with the battle mage. Seems lots of people are dropping playing fireball slinging sorcerors to rush out and play the battle mage. I haven't heard of the same problem (yet) with the other new classes, so I've yet to see if they are problematic. In fact, after reading over a thread about the scout, sounds like it's a unique and fun class to run. I think that sfubear is partially correct, though not entirely. It also has to do with the players. People who play in games just to abuse the rules and make "t3h br0k3n3st ch4racht3r EVAR" should be kicked out of the campaign, plain and simple. Chances are that they're not really good roleplayers anyway. DMs should also chat with players who seem to be powergaming, or who have overly powerful weapons/armor/etc. Any reasonable person would understand why. WotC books give options. Obviously the more options you have, the greater the chance that there is going to be "bent" or "broken" builds. Honestly, if you want WotC to go through every single previous 3.5 edition book before putting out new material to make sure that it isn't broken, you can expect about one new book per year. Also, people seem to be focusing on the "1v1" combat aspect of characters more than the roleplaying possibilities. Take the bard for instance. Many people scream about how horrible the bard is because everything about it screams that it's bad at combat. However, when you're playing the game, and you're in the field, searching for clues as to where the BBEG is, the bard pwns every other class. When you're in a tough fight with 3 of your friend's characters trying to defeat said BBEG, bardic music is going to be a lot better than when you're by yourself staring down OOber munchkin wizard. You seem to be focused on the "roll-playing" aspect as well (which the Warlock absolutely phails in at later levels). What does the warlock have over the bard when not battling? People who don't realize that there is a fine balance between the battle parts of dnd and the roleplaying parts of it aren't that bright in my book. It helps explain many things, such as why the BoED vows aren't all that broken, why Ur-Priest isn't that great (walk into any temple to any god and you are f***ed), etc...
Xaxor 06-29-05, 09:37 PM	I have heard that the Warlock will be getting some new stuff by 2006, at the earliest. But really, the majority of the new classes introduced work perfectly fine as is, and it will not be extremely difficult to add to spell lists, as done in Complete Arcane and Adventurer (notice how they worked through the alphabet backwards? W->D->Ar->Ad? Neat.) Feats are also pretty easy to add, though the more limited a feat is, the more it seems worthless. We'll see plenty of support. Psionics gets a feat and power here and there (at least 1 power in all the race books) and as seen in Complete Adventurer, even the occaisional PrC. Rants aside, there is rather little to really complain about. We'll see tons of stuff well into 2008 if not longer. And I bet every class will get something. For those of you who visit the main site, and not just the boards, I'm sure you've noticed the 'With Class' articles. The new classes are anything but forgotten.
Willie the Duck 06-29-05, 09:58 PM	Warlocks are the only ones that have struggles taking pre-existing prcs. I really dont see the problem. I think the basic premise of the thread is that there are many "new base classes" in the books that don't get support outside the book in which they where introduced (as some incredible moron called the OP a moron for having pointed out). Some of these have special class features that do not lead into or scale with prestige classes (most notably that the warlock abilities do not increase if they take mage PrCs, despite the warlock being a kind of "mage replacement") others simply have specialized spell lists that will not grow as new suppliments come out, while the core base classes they suppliment/replace do (let's not limit this to new base classes. PrCs with their own spell lists suffer from this same problem). This means that, as the total number of game options increases with each new book, these non-core base classes have less options, and therefore less power. As this continues they will be less attractive to players (and for DMs as powerful NPCs/Challenges), and will thus be something akin to wasted space in books people paid good money for. Of course, WotC did warn us of this "non-support" condition, so we can't say we were conned into it. That said, it still sucks, and therefore a thread complaining about it is warranted.
Dark Voivode 06-29-05, 10:23 PM	Come on, guys. Let's play nice, please? Razz's concern is a valid one and getting this thread closed due to name-calling doesn't help get attention to problem. Willie the Duck: That was a very eloquent way of putting it. Thank you for steering the conversation back to the heart of the topic. The point of the matter is indeed the lack of support for the various new classes. WotC needs to show some love. Otherwise, what's the point of the new class?
MerricB 06-29-05, 10:49 PM	The point of the matter is indeed the lack of support for the various new classes. WotC needs to show some love. Otherwise, what's the point of the new class? To provide further options for the game. New classes should be playable as they are, without needing extra feats, prestige classes, etc. For the most part, this is the case. It would be incorrect to say that "older" new classes don't occasionally get new bits and pieces in more recent books: Heroes of Battle adds a new Healer spell, Races of Eberron gives substitution levels for the soulknife - as well as another couple of goodies that make a Kalashtar Soulknife a very interesting choice. Psionic powers turn up from time to time as well. More martial-based classes don't need as much love. There are plenty of prestige classes that build on their abilities. For instance, a Swashbuckler easily goes into the Duelist prestige class. Cheers!
Nyferto 06-30-05, 03:52 AM	Warlock is overpowered, but you can't look at them from a typical adventuring application. A Warlock could run riot all day long, whilst a Wizard might run out of effective spells and have to rest (depends what he faces). Until someone comes along and actually tests his abilities - he's incredibly dangerous compared to some of his piers. That is a problem of the class, but it's not one that will always come up. It's actually a good thing he doesn't have a burst invocation. Warmages seem great, till you get to the new spells section. At which point they're nowhere near better than a Sorc.
CzarGarrett 06-30-05, 10:34 AM	I think there is a simple solution. If, in the case of the Warlock, there is no PrC for it, make one. Make an Eldritch Master PrC to boost damage of the blast or an Eldritch Acolyte who knows an additional invocation or two- or something along those lines. Especially with the DMG2 out, and with the pre-existing formats of dozens of PrCs out there, there should be no excuse for people to complain. If its missing, make it yourself.
Stormonu 06-30-05, 12:12 PM	Sorry if I caused any confusion about my statements with the Warlock - I didn't have my books in front of me and all I could remember was that at somewhere near 5th level they got an attack affected more than one foe at a time (it reminded me of fireball). Still, the blast-to-death problem I've seen isn't IN combat. It's out of combat - when the warlock can use it to knock down locked doors, destroy magic glyphs or other such things. As for "see what happens at level 10", we'll I'll have to see. I always start my campaigns from level 1 and players have their earn their way to that level. So, we'll see what happens when we get there.
babysamurai 06-30-05, 12:36 PM	Someone mentioned one new book a year...there's an idea.
Nyferto 06-30-05, 12:40 PM	Well Dragon already mentioned that it might do features for some of these classes, it's a good avenue to use considering it doesn't cost $30.00 or so.
Siberys 06-30-05, 12:47 PM	I completely agree with the soulknife being left out though. He is already gravely underpowered, and the SK is IMHO the coolest class around :D Gray Well, there is some stuff for SK. Check out Races of Eberron. One race, the Kalashtar (one of the coolest and well thought-out races ever, IMHO), uses Soulknives a lot. They have SK tactical feats and psionic feats, but they are all also racial feats for Kalashtar. Then there's the Atavist, a PrC built for Sks!
Particle_Man 07-01-05, 03:02 AM	Still, the blast-to-death problem I've seen isn't IN combat. It's out of combat - when the warlock can use it to knock down locked doors, destroy magic glyphs or other such things. Most objects have hardness, and the Warlock's Eldritch Blast does half damage to objects. Or if you mean the Baleful Utterance power (shatter spell at will, at the cost of one of their few invocations) yeah that is useful, but a fighter can use meelee or thrown weapons to bust stuff up too.
Karlcullinane 07-01-05, 04:13 AM	>Big Snip< The main reason warmage isn't on more builds in the character optimization forum is because it has slower spell progression, so most go wizard if they want arcane builds. The exceptions are the gish builds, the gish builders -love- warmage. And, for the record, I wouldn't allow anything even resembling a creation from the character optimization board. >Another big snip< Actually, typical gish builds dont include the Warmage simply because nukes are a weak way to "gish" things up; Warmages offer little, if any, utility. Gishing is typically about buffs and battlefield control, with a small selection of nukes to keep things honest. If Warmages got Polymorph, then were talking hawtness... But I digress... /thread hijack off
Nazzareth 07-01-05, 05:50 AM	I think that the distinction between the core classes and prestige classes is blurring with the advent of all these new classes. Many of these new classes are just 20 level PRCs. I think that the new classes subtract the prestige from the prestige classes. The healer a 20 level class could have been made into a 5 level PRC.
Stormonu 07-01-05, 10:26 AM	Most objects have hardness, and the Warlock's Eldritch Blast does half damage to objects Ah! I must have missed that on my earlier reads of the class. That will be of great help in the future actually. Anyway, I ran over to Piazo's website and there is a Dragon thread ("Non-Core Class Acts") there for expanding the class acts articles to include the non-core classes. However, the staff seems resistant to doing such. Which is a shame - even if they just put in one class a month, that's better support than NOTHING. My only concern, which other people have been touching on in here is that the sorcerer class seems to be diminished by the inclusion of the battlemage and/or warlock in the game; a big hunk of what the sorcerer is (a spell-slinger) has been overtaken by these two classes which can seem to do it better, and makes it a sort of red-headed stepchild. It doesn't have the versatility of a wizard, the "endless ammunition" of the warlock or the firepower of a warmage.
Dark Voivode 07-01-05, 12:38 PM	Ah! I must have missed that on my earlier reads of the class. That will be of great help in the future actually. Anyway, I ran over to Piazo's website and there is a Dragon thread ("Non-Core Class Acts") there for expanding the class acts articles to include the non-core classes. However, the staff seems resistant to doing such. Which is a shame - even if they just put in one class a month, that's better support than NOTHING. My only concern, which other people have been touching on in here is that the sorcerer class seems to be diminished by the inclusion of the battlemage and/or warlock in the game; a big hunk of what the sorcerer is (a spell-slinger) has been overtaken by these two classes which can seem to do it better, and makes it a sort of red-headed stepchild. It doesn't have the versatility of a wizard, the "endless ammunition" of the warlock or the firepower of a warmage. My gaming group has agreed to adapt the Sorcerer to mirror the Favoured Soul, with Fly at will instead of Wings. Just a suggestion.
Todd 07-01-05, 01:28 PM	I personally *like* the new base classes. Given the current game setup they are nice to have. The Scout and Warlock in particular are a breath of fresh air. I've played a Warlock and a Warmage. We have a Scout in our current game. We've gone up against NPC Spellthieves, Ninjas, and more. More classes is a good thing ... though I do wish that the spellcasters were more flexible. It really hurts them when they get a very *specific* spell list. It would be nice if they were able to put something in place so that these spell lists grew over time the way the Wizard / Cleric / Sorcerer / Druid lists do. Warlock is overpowered, but you can't look at them from a typical adventuring application. A Warlock could run riot all day long, whilst a Wizard might run out of effective spells and have to rest (depends what he faces). Until someone comes along and actually tests his abilities - he's incredibly dangerous compared to some of his piers. That is a problem of the class, but it's not one that will always come up. I disagree whole heartedly with calling the Warlock overpowered. Good? Yes. Overpowered? No way. The Warlock really shines at the low to mid levels, however they aren't nearly as good as most Wizards at the late mid to high levels. In that respect they are a lot like most warrior classes. Realistically most groups don't do the recommended 3-4 encounters per day. That means that running out of spells isn't a problem for most Arcane casters. So, for all practical purposes, the other arcane casters might as well have 'unlimited' casting ... since they aren't going to run out of spells either. On in rare games, the ones with 5+ encounters per day, or in unusual situations like *very* long and drawn out fights will the Warlock be ‘more powerful’ than a Sorcerer after, say, 7th level or so. It’s worth noting that fighters will shine more in such situations too. So really the issue of balance will vary from game to game. I’ve yet to play in a game that would really favor a Warlock though. Warmages seem great, till you get to the new spells section. At which point they're nowhere near better than a Sorc. The Warmage’s real problem is that they have a nearly static spell list. Slap one into Forgotten Realms which has a ton of setting specific Evocation and Conjuration attack spells and they look pathetic. Many of the new spellcasters suffer from this to a greater or lesser extent. However in my mind it’s particularly an issue for the Warmage
Koga:The ninja trick 07-01-05, 05:51 PM	Hearing "redheaded stepchild" at the same time as Offspring's "the kids aren't alright" gave The Koga a great idea. Get a large gaming group together to have the unpoulars fight the broken. Team Red: Sorcerer. Bard. Wilder. Soulknife. Fighter. Favored Soul. Healer. Team Blue. Cleric. Druid. Warlock. Warmage. Hexblade. Wizard.
Norhg 07-12-05, 05:11 PM	Team Red: Sorcerer. Bard. Wilder. Soulknife. Fighter. Favored Soul. Healer. ... Makes my soul cry inside of its shell.
Lord Schpungus 07-12-05, 07:35 PM	I can see the Cleric/Druid/Wizard, but anything else on Team Blue is merely misunderstood. Hexblade is easily underpowered, and the warlock is on par with the rogue. Warmage is just like the sorcerer, and only marginally powerful when used with Rainbow Servant.