Does anybody else think the Runepriest is a glimpse at the future of class design/theme?

Post/Author/DateTimePost
#1

drkmirror

Mar 26, 2010 6:27:23
Sorry if this has been discussed at length elsewhere, but I'm sure others have noticed the line in the runepriest's description about there being other runic alphabets. So I have to ask, does anyone else think will release more rune based classes for other power sources? And if so, that they might do this with other 'cross-source' themes?

Personally, I'd love to see more rune classes, and I could see the theme reasonably fitting in other power sources as well. Although, I just hope that strength being the primary stat and beating people with weapons isn't central to the rune theme.

If such a move met with any success, I could imagine after they've released all the power sources we might see more cross-source themes as the focus of future PHBs and maybe even power books.

So what do you all think? Might this be the future of class design? Or do you think WotC might just give us more classes and builds for the different power sources? Which other power sources do you think we might get new runic classes in? What other cross-source themes could be beyond runes?
#2

Dragon9

Mar 26, 2010 8:05:55
I find it highly unlikely.  The rune flavor is with this class and making other classes exactly the same as the runepriest seems to go against their design intent.  If they were to do something with the other runic alphabets it'd likely be an alternate build for the class.
#3

Neutronium_Dragon

Mar 26, 2010 14:43:39
I could see another rune-themed class happening but I doubt that there will be a sudden explosion of rune-based classes, and if another one does appear then it will likely have a completely different structure rather than copying the runepriest's.
#4

DanTracker

Mar 26, 2010 14:48:00
what is most unfortunate is that runepriest gives a clear proof of concept that a Runic power source could have been developed that supported all four roles and could generate multiple build options for each of the new Runic classes.

I say unfortunate because they placed the runepriest within the realm of divine and this means that using a similar concept of runes in the creation of a striker, defender, or controller would mean that they have to place an additional divine defender, divine striker, divine controller, all of which would create a massive divine power source with two classes to fit each role.

Though this could lead to a second set of martial classes that have an alternative approach to the martial power source, an alternative set of primal classes, an alternative set of arcane classes, an alternative set of psionic classes, and so on, etc., ultimately that creates a strange false obligation to fulfill the alternative rack of classes for each power source in order to justify that runic approach to divine classes.

So, what really should have occurred in the creation ofhte Monk and Runepriest, is that a designer should have realized that they were forming the iconic foundation of a new power source which deserves to be built, Runic, and Ki. This would have easily formed a good basis for additional PHB series books as there would be fodder for creating classes that fit the Runic and Ki power sources as well as filling in the last slot fo psionic with an appropriate striker that uses the iconic psionic augmentation.

While the list of possible races might have at some time been uncomfortably smaller due to the hestiancy to create PC races from the existing monstrous races, there would be supporters of creating numerous aditional races which could fill the pages of PHB series books alongside the additional classes of Runic, Ki, Psionic, Shadow, and Elemental (if they chose to place those all into PHB series books).

While WOTC might find that the DMG series of books and the MM series of books could be exhausted before the PHB series was exhausted, the new campaign settings which could be developed would still be strong. A new campaign setting could be used as a forum for excluding specified power sources, yet the available roles would still be filled through the permitted power sources for that given setting (think Dragonlance, and Dark Sun).

#5

Neutronium_Dragon

Mar 26, 2010 15:47:12
And like elsewhere that this has been posted, I disagree that runes are a prospective power source.

They're a style of accessing a power source (divine in this case).
#6

chanter_hound

Mar 26, 2010 15:49:38
And like elsewhere that this has been posted, I disagree that runes are a prospective power source. They're a style of accessing a power source (divine in this case).




With Muscles!
#7

Dragoncat

Mar 26, 2010 16:00:15
And like elsewhere that this has been posted, I disagree that runes are a prospective power source. They're a style of accessing a power source (divine in this case).




With Muscles!


Not just any muscles.  Runic Muscles!
#8

celticmutt

Mar 26, 2010 16:41:01
Hey, it works for Alchemy!

9gj255.jpg
#9

incenjucar

Mar 26, 2010 16:54:58

While the occassional Rune-themed option is not unlikely, considering certain other themes like the Cerulean Sign have been all over the place, I think it is far more likely that they will reuse the MECHANIC of having multiple choice powers. Runes really aren't tied to the mechanic by any flavor.

#10

mercaius

Mar 26, 2010 16:59:03
And for runemasters!

Property of Blizzard of course.

Okay, so their spells weren't Strength-based, but they were heavy-muscled tauren and dwarf monks with runes and it was using 3.5 rules, so physical stats would probably factor highly into a translation, I would say!

And I agree that just because the runepriest of today is a divine class, doesn't mean a future possible rune user would have to be. 
#11

Lord_Ventnor

Mar 27, 2010 0:39:52
Hey, it works for Alchemy!

9gj255.jpg



The power to punch runes into an enemy's face has been passed down the Armstrong bloodline for generations!
#12

yellerSumner

Mar 27, 2010 0:53:06
what is most unfortunate is that runepriest gives a clear proof of concept that a Runic power source could have been developed that supported all four roles and could generate multiple build options for each of the new Runic classes.


While I can see a vague outline of "I'm like the Runepriest, but I'm a [role]!" I can't actually picture three other rune based classes which would feel unique. Do you have any examples?
#13

Duskweaver

Mar 27, 2010 1:31:54
And for runemasters!
Property of Blizzard of course.


Screw those plagiarising hacks at Blizzard. Runesmiths/priests/masters/lords were a Games Workshop invention.
#14

DanTracker

Mar 27, 2010 5:56:44
what is most unfortunate is that runepriest gives a clear proof of concept that a Runic power source could have been developed that supported all four roles and could generate multiple build options for each of the new Runic classes.


While I can see a vague outline of "I'm like the Runepriest, but I'm a [role]!" I can't actually picture three other rune based classes which would feel unique. Do you have any examples?

weeeeelll, they created a leader that takes advantage of runes of medning and runes of destruction. I oculd imagine that runes of speed, runes of stealth are both reasonable ideas for building a striker that could play into melee themes share some similarity with rogue and barbarian. the rune state could relate to the extra damage dealt such as a barabarian rage adds damage for that class.

the defender could make use of runes of shielding, resistance, runes of imprisonment, weakness. I'm certain that might be a bit more difficult to really give it a clear distinction. every defender can mark and the mark is fairly similar to every other defender. how a defender impacts the enemy when a mark is ignored creates the distinction. perhaps using a rune state of runes of weakness, if the marked enemy targets an ally the enemy is weakened until ...

so i can imagine that they could treat the rune syllabaries as a stand in for any sort of concept they want them to fulfill and let the rune state dictate how those impact the attacks and playstyle of a Runic class.

While the occassional Rune-themed option is not unlikely, considering certain other themes like the Cerulean Sign have been all over the place, I think it is far more likely that they will reuse the MECHANIC of having multiple choice powers. Runes really aren't tied to the mechanic by any flavor.

i could certainly imagine runic primal, runic arcane, runic psionic, and martial characters that make use of runic weaponry.

And like elsewhere that this has been posted, I disagree that runes are a prospective power source. They're a style of accessing a power source (divine in this case).

oh, this is absolutely true. i don't believe that it will become a power source, but it just shows that there is a good foundation wherein a new power source could have been built, but wasn't.

they are a way to access power. to me just that means that we're talking about a power source and not just another class within a power source.

the idea that they are drawing upon divine powers, but don't make use of channel divinity, a holy symbol, nor do they appear to need any sort of religious bindings to fill the class... that doesn't seem to fit the divine power source. the other four existing divine classes all use channel divinity, holy symbols if they want to as an implement, and their choices about alignment are related to a choice of deity. the choices available fore channel divinity are related to the domain of their deity or to the deity directly. runepriest stands out and doesn't appear very similar at all. it could have been any power source and still not have fit in.

so, i do apologize, i don't mean to say that this bodes a new power source of Runic for the future. It seems to me that it is a missed opportunity for another flavorful and dynamic power source that approaches the growth and use of power through runes rather than the other existing methods.

similarly, the monk seems to stand out from the other published psionics and does not appear to be psionic. it is a nice candidate for something else, but nothing else exists that it might fit into. thus, i think it was a good illustration that ki could have grown into a power source and additional classes could have been developed that used a Ki power source. but, that's certainly not where WOTC is going with things.

I didn't mean to derail the thread with talk of what could have been (or what should have been IMO).

#15

thewaever

Mar 27, 2010 11:14:22
I think the good folks at WotC have kind of a strange design asthetic.

In some cases, I think they have certain rules that they feel they have to abide by. For example, melee attacks are ruled by Strength now, which is why the formerly agile rogue suddenly needs to be buff. I think this is why the runepriest, whose attacks are melee based, needs such a high Strength. This is a good thing. It keeps the game consistent & helps to keep the game balanced.

On the other hand, the game designers sometimes seem to forget conceptual themes. I think they sometimes forget things like what DanTracker said. It really irks me, actually, when thematic rules & balances don't get preserved. What I think happens is that the WotC folks sometimes get this idea in their heads that they can't shake. The idea swells & pushes out the rules they already set up for the world. (ugh monk! It should've used power points & been set up like the other psionic classes! I wouldn't've banned it from my game table if they hadn't broken the game by ignoring their own design rules!)

I think you can kind of justify a runepriest as divine, because they have learned about the "True Names" of things, & in the beginning the gods created those "True Names." (The problem with that, though, is that practically every game, movie, comic book, & story going back for forever places the concept of "True Names" firmly in the realm of the Arcane.)

But, getting back to the OP's idea. No, it doesn't feel like that whole "alternate runic alphabet" thing was a push for cross-power themes. It's like how they hint at alternate builds in the other classes.
#16

Janx_14

Mar 27, 2010 11:20:15
Melee attacks were always ruled by strength, with a bit of dex for the rogues, and some other feat exceptions in third.

4th has the Rogue, Monk, Assassin, Charisma Paladin, Sorceror's with that dagger channeling feat, Battlemind, Ardent, Avenger, beast form druids, Wisdom Cleric PP's tha should be melee cleric PP's, Artificers, and Bards who all use different stats for melee, with only  2 or 3 of those having strength as a secondary stat.

I think the runepriest may have been a concept for another powersource that didn't quite pan out. I'm not saying Ki, but perhaps an old direction for elemental that they changed for something cooler.

Also, banning a class because it wasn't made just the way you want it is kind of odd. The monk is a fine class, it doesn't quite fit in with the others mechanicly, but at the same time, a monk's diverse combat styles would not be represented well as 3 at-wills that you augment.
#17

mercaius

Mar 27, 2010 12:49:50

Screw those plagiarising hacks at Blizzard. Runesmiths/priests/masters/lords were a Games Workshop invention.



I said "property of Blizzard" in reference to the picture itself out of propriety.

And I'll believe Games Workshop invented rune magic the same day I believe they invented steam engines - which is to say, no, they were inspired by real world believes and instances, much as modern fantasies today are inspired by their predecessors. Might as well harpoon them for stealing elves from Tolkien. 
#18

KoboldAvenger

Mar 27, 2010 12:55:02
I don't think there will be other Rune classes, but maybe they might try to incorporate a bit more with Runes for the Artificer, as some of it's powers have sort of described some Runes.
#19

Duskweaver

Mar 27, 2010 16:12:29
I said "property of Blizzard" in reference to the picture itself out of propriety.


What picture? If there is supposed to be a picture in the post I responded to, then it's not showing up for me. There doesn't even seem to be one of those 'broken image' icons...
#20

celticmutt

Mar 27, 2010 17:31:25
What picture? If there is supposed to be a picture in the post I responded to, then it's not showing up for me. There doesn't even seem to be one of those 'broken image' icons...


The new forums (well I guess they aren't that new anymore) do that.  A lot.  I can't tell you the number of times I've tried posting a picture and then it didn't come up even for me.  When I go to edit the posts, there's not even a sign that there was a ever a picture in the post.  Highly irritating.
#21

mercaius

Mar 27, 2010 18:31:26
It's gone again? I was getting a broken link after the initial post, but when I went to edit, it was back and didn't go away.

Henways, it was this picture. sonsofthestorm.com/images/samwise/WarCra...

#22

Duskweaver

Mar 28, 2010 7:42:51
Henways, it was this picture. sonsofthestorm.com/images/samwise/WarCra...




"Access Denied - You do not have permission to view this page. You will be redirected to the main page in 10 seconds. If this does not work for any reason click here to return to Sons of the Storm."