Post/Author/DateTime	Post
LordShadow1080 03-11-08, 10:12 PM	This was somewhat of a issue with LG with each builder book release, but how will new class options be handled as new books are published? From what I saw of the available material from DDX the first PHB will have the Fighter, Paladin, Ranger, Wizard, Cleric, Rogue and a few other classes. With Wizards losing a large number of current spell options because of plans of releasing some of the former specialist classes - Necromancer, Enchanter, Illusionist, est. their own class in future releases. I know that this was done primarily because of space issues of the PHB as well as development/playtesting limitations to meet product deadlines. That means that several iconic DnD classes such as Barbarian, Druid, Bard and the old Wizard specialists are set for PHB2, PHB3, etc., and will not be available at the release of the LFR campaign. I assume that at some point after they are released in an expansion book they will be included but how will that be handled. For example at campaign start a player wants to play an illusionist and told they don’t exist. That player would either have to scrap his character concept or play a wizard as the closest match, neither of which he really wanted. Six months or a year down the line the Illusionist book comes out and he is stuck with a decision restart an Illusionist at level 1 or continues playing his established character. If this person only played at Cons or larger venues with a broad player base it isn’t a big concern. If he plays mostly with a local gaming club that are all roughly the same level, he would not be able to stay in the same APL level of the club and play the Illusionist. The Illusionist would never be able to catch up in level to the rest of the group unless he played it far more than the others in the club. I understand that most people will end up having multiple characters over the life of the campaign. But for the groups that don’t have the time to level multiple characters, and still want to be able to play together should be able to even if one or two of them want to take advantage of newly released material.
gomeztoo 03-12-08, 03:44 AM	Not sure what you are asking for. Rebuilds? I don't expect those will happen. I understand the issue, but them is the brakes. I am likely going to just wait for that Illusionist class myself before I'll play my gnome. In the mean time I'll focus on other character ideas.
Rerednaw 03-12-08, 11:06 AM	It looks like a great deal of the game has boiled down to hit point wars. I prefer lock-down summoning casters myself. No idea if that's in the 4E PHB. Of course given the nature of battlefield control, it appears that one spell = disabling groups is contraindicated by the 4E model of almost everyone blasting or affecting single targets. I did notice that the sleep spell made it to 4E though. So there's some hope for us control freaks. :p I'm pretty sure most of us will find something we can live with in the initial release. We'll just have to focus on what is most fun for us later.
CdrcJsn 03-12-08, 12:21 PM	Of course given the nature of battlefield control, it appears that one spell = disabling groups is contraindicated by the 4E model of almost everyone blasting or affecting single targets. Don't know where you're getting this from. The whole point of the controller role is to control large groups of opponents. That means disabling some (sleep, glitterdust) or inflicting moderate damge over a large area (fireball, lightning bolt) or splitting up the bad guys (walls, terrain modification). What sort of spells are you expecting of 1st level characters (the preview ones from DDXP)?
Lightblade 03-12-08, 03:45 PM	Has a dedicated illusionist been talked about? I thought the main weapons in the current wizard's arsenal were Evocation and Illusion spells (and the high level spell spread showed some illusion spells in the mix). I heard that the Enchantment school was de-emphasized so psionics could have something to master instead, but i intend to start up an orb-juggling Gnome wizard. I think my low-level feats will be mostly skill trainings (Heal, Acrobatics, Athletics?) that i'll retrain out once Gnome-specific racial feats come by. Now, we know a swordmage class is in the FRPG, so you might want to wait a couple months if that strikes your fancy. I believe they've said summoning won't be in the first PHB.
Dempster 03-12-08, 03:48 PM	The illusionist and necromancer were mentioned as future class releases in races and classes, specifically in the section about the non existence of wizard schools.
dimonic 03-12-08, 05:12 PM	I assume that at some point after they are released in an expansion book they will be included but how will that be handled. For example at campaign start a player wants to play an illusionist and told they don’t exist. That player would either have to scrap his character concept or play a wizard as the closest match, neither of which he really wanted. Six months or a year down the line the Illusionist book comes out and he is stuck with a decision restart an Illusionist at level 1 or continues playing his established character. The Illusionist would never be able to catch up in level to the rest of the group unless he played it far more than the others in the club. This may be less of a problem than you perceive. Firstly, low level characters with higher level groups are much more survivable now than they were (especially for a wizard, since their mo is to stay low and stay away). Second, the XP mechanism still enables catching up - the low level character will tend to close in level to the higher level characters over time.
LordShadow1080 03-12-08, 05:26 PM	I’m not sure whether a rebuild, a level bump of some kind or some other type of solution for this issue would be best. I’m just suggesting that the campaign staff start thinking about it. LG didn’t foresee the need for rebuilds at the beginning, but they ended up taking place several times for various reasons. In 3.0 and 3.5 you could manage the majority of character concepts with various combinations of base classes with Prestige Classes only adding a little extra something. Might not be the most optimal but the overall concept would be there. The problem with LFR is that base classes that have been around since 1e are being left out of the initial rule books of 4e until after the launch of the campaign. These missing classes would eliminate character concepts that could have been with players for years. The issues of allowable races are also messing with these character concepts but that issue is discussed in several other threads so I don’t feel a need to focus on that again here. I’m not sure if the rebuild rules from the 3.5 PHB2 will carry over to 4e and if LFR will allow their use. During LC and LG my local gaming club, which consisted of about 2 to 3 tables, would play their primary characters until they were out of TUs then begin playing secondary characters for the remainder of the year. When primary and secondary characters were too high level for the lowest APL modules a new set of characters were made to ensure we had characters to play any module. With this arrangement everyone could always play as long as we could manage legal table sizes but it also meant that people couldn’t mix and match their primary, secondary or tertiary characters with the other tiers due to the inherent level differences. My issue with the whole thing is that at the launch of the campaign if I want to play a druid instead of an Illusionist in my first example. The druid does not exist at launch, so I have the option of not playing for several months/years and never really catch up to my friends primary characters, level something else and being stuck using that since restarting a new character will prevent me from playing with my established group, or somehow carry over my progress with an existing character to the Druid so I can continue playing with my established group. I hope I have something close to the third option.
WolfStar76 03-13-08, 07:59 AM	I seem to recall it being said that rebuild rules and options will be in the base PHB, though my memory could be faulty. Of course, even if my memory holds true, it will be up to the RPGA to decide if and how to make use of them (if TUs stick around, which I've heard is unlikely, perhaps expending TUs to cover "re-learning"?)
dimonic 03-13-08, 12:19 PM	My issue with the whole thing is that at the launch of the campaign if I want to play a druid instead of an Illusionist in my first example. The druid does not exist at launch, so I have the option of not playing for several months/years and never really catch up to my friends primary characters, level something else and being stuck using that since restarting a new character will prevent me from playing with my established group, or somehow carry over my progress with an existing character to the Druid so I can continue playing with my established group. I hope I have something close to the third option. Since only about 1/2 the frequently played classes are to be included in the new PH1, there will be many players in the boat that you are in. Notable omissions are Barbarian, Druid and Monk, all of which were popular. Since the PH2 won't be released for a while, when those classes are released - along with some new ones, I think a number of people will create a new character to play the new classes - so you will not be alone. There will probably be tables of new low level characters to play with. Also, I don't think you can expect the Druid to closely resemble the 3e druid. That class was all over the place - they had animal companions, wild shape and spells. I suspect the new druid will be a more focussed class, looking at the example of the new Wizard - and I speculate that perhaps a "beastmaster" class might appear?
dimonic 03-13-08, 12:40 PM	I’m not sure if the rebuild rules from the 3.5 PHB2 will carry over to 4e and if LFR will allow their use. There has been public confirmation of retraining rules to be included in the new PH. There have also been public assurances (most recently at DDXP from Chris Tulach) that if it is in the PH, it will be available in organized play.
CdrcJsn 03-13-08, 03:54 PM	There has been public confirmation of retraining rules to be included in the new PH. There have also been public assurances (most recently at DDXP from Chris Tulach) that if it is in the PH, it will be available in organized play. Retraining = change feats/spells/skills Rebuilding = change race/class Retraining has been confirmed. Rebuilding might be a matter for the LFR admins to house rule (though I don't think it's necessary).
Rerednaw 03-14-08, 09:21 AM	Don't know where you're getting this from. ... From the character sheets. I do not consider low level AoE evocations as effective battlefield control when compared to other staple spells. What sort of spells are you expecting of 1st level characters (the preview ones from DDXP)? Oh I don't know, maybe the spells I used for AoE battlefield control for first level characters. Other than Sleep there's Grease, Obscuring Mist, Color Spray, Entangle, Summon Monster, to just a few off of the top of my head. And that's just core... In 3.5, if I wanted an evoker, I'd play a warmage, specialist wizard or sorceror. And as I said, we'll have to wait and see what the final product entails. It's possible that the designers wanted to avoid most AoE BFC spells because they slow the game down and they wanted to avoid the mechanics involved at DDXP.
MatteBlack 03-14-08, 01:37 PM	Retraining = change feats/spells/skills Rebuilding = change race/class Retraining has been confirmed. Rebuilding might be a matter for the LFR admins to house rule (though I don't think it's necessary). I think some level of retraining or swapping up of abilities will be necessary to prevent character portfolios from seeming to stale. I like having retraining available as an option in a living campaign because it can help a player avoid being saddled with a small choice that may have large repercussions in his play experience however, I'd be against rebuilding because having that newly allowed class can be a nice perk to offset not having been into the camapign since the start. maybe you are down some levels but, you have a cool new class that may not have been available from the beginning. Ultimately, I think as much as possible should be accessable as soon as is prudent.
CdrcJsn 03-15-08, 12:58 AM	From the character sheets. I do not consider low level AoE evocations as effective battlefield control when compared to other staple spells. Well, AoE evocations ARE a form of crowd control. You do enough damage to a large group of opponents that they go on the defensive and allow your Strikers to easily take them down. It's probably not the best method to deal with large crowds, but it has its uses. We've seen less than a handful of 1st level powers. The wizard is a clear evoker from the selection. However, it's like your judging all wizards because a sample 1st level wizard has magic missile, burning hands and shocking grasp memorized. It's a tad premature to think wizards can only be blasters, especially since we see that at least one power is available that is non-damaging (sleep). You might be right though...only the developers know for sure. The rest of us won't know til June or until more powers are released. However, we've been told repeatedly that Controller = control large number of foes through damage, debuffs and movement control, so I think your concern is moot. Oh I don't know, maybe the spells I used for AoE battlefield control for first level characters. Other than Sleep there's Grease, Obscuring Mist, Color Spray, Entangle, Summon Monster, to just a few off of the top of my head. And that's just core... In 3.5, if I wanted an evoker, I'd play a warmage, specialist wizard or sorceror. I agree. I prefer crowd control wizards myself. But I don't think it's fair to say that there won't be spells to deal with groups without damaging them, when we have a clear indication of at least one spell that does so in the sample given. Grease, Obscuring Mist, Color Spray might be in for all we know but just wasn't in the sample character. Entangle probably won't be, since it's a druid spell. And as I said, we'll have to wait and see what the final product entails. It's possible that the designers wanted to avoid most AoE BFC spells because they slow the game down and they wanted to avoid the mechanics involved at DDXP. Given that Sleep is in, I doubt that there will be a lack of battlefield control for wizards, especially since their main role in a party is Controller. Though I hope they nerf or remove glitterdust (or make it higher level).