Still, money is the main i would guess
More money? More options for martial characters? I guess I like more options for existing classes more than just dumping them after one extra book and just coming out with new classes. New classes are good too, but I like expansion as well.
Still, money is the main i would guess
New Classes only come out in Player's Handbooks. Martial Characters already have enough options, they're going to be stretching the limit and providing subpar content is they do this. There's a reason why Complete Warrior didn't get a sequel.
Well, the feats and such in MP can only be used by the original martial classes, leaving the newer and shiny classes left behind. Solution? MPII, MPIII, MP IV, and so on and so forth. The most optimal solution overall? Maybe not, but I'd be glad to have it myself, just not the whole "lugging forty sounds of books with me everywhere I go" bit.
But there are no new martial classes, and hopefully there never will be, so said nonexistent classes don't need a martial power of their own.
Well, the feats and such in MP can only be used by the original martial classes, leaving the newer and shiny classes left behind. Solution? MPII, MPIII, MP IV, and so on and so forth. The most optimal solution overall? Maybe not, but I'd be glad to have it myself, just not the whole "lugging forty sounds of books with me everywhere I go" bit.
Ah but that assumes that there will be new Martial classes in time for Martial power II. A fact that we have no evidence for one way or another(well beyond the fact that if there are any new ones they would have to be in either PHBIII or 2010's PG).
Yeah, yeah they did. From the first time we heard about them they were Primal. What gave you the idea that they wouldn't be?
Well, not having access to D&DI or any kind of playtest, I simply assumed that when the Barbarian and such was announced that they would be part of the Martial breed. I see this is what bad sources gets you: A whole lot of foot in the mouth. *sigh* My bad all, ignore my previous post, and feel free to throw gnomes at me for my error if you wish.
New Classes only come out in Player's Handbooks.
Yes, I am well aware of that. My intent was to say that MP2 would be just like MP, in that it would contain more options. I meant that it's nice to get more options for existing classes and not just keep coming out with new classes (via PHB2, campaign settings, etc). If they came out with just one "Power" book for each source, then what? They would either keep coming out with new classes and leave the originals with no new (non MC) options, expand the existing ones and NOT make new classes (very doubtful, and would not be fun anyway), or keep coming out with new classes and more Power handbooks (or some equivalent) for both new and old power sources. I would much rather have option 3 than either option 1 or 2, and hence, there will be a MP2.
EDIT: Also, I assume that MP2 would come out AFTER Divine, Arcane, and Primal Power come out...
Also things like mounted options for existing martial classes.
Bel
With new classes coming out, it is important to keep older classes interesting (and in some cases, as powerful). One does that with new powers, new feats, new class features, and new builds.
I am sure that there are MANY valuable builds for the martial classes left to explore. Just look at what everyone is saying about the "Int Rogue;" it made sense both in game and narrative in 3e, and I am sure some people would like to continue this narrative in 4e.
Additionally, this precedent gives us hope of an Arcane Power 2, so that Artificers can get the same love the rest of the Arcane classes have gotten.
A third book in the same line might eventually be too weak on the crunch but then again (assuming the other power sources get two books each too) it would probably 2013 and come out for D&D4.5...
That class will be the gladiator.
I just thought of that. Please, please tell me I'm the first one to put that together. I'm probably not, but it would make me feel awesome
If the campaign setting is dark sun, we probably will get a new martial class, and it will probably be a martial controller.
That class will be the gladiator.
I just thought of that. Please, please tell me I'm the first one to put that together. I'm probably not, but it would make me feel awesome
No worries, you are like the bazzillionth. :D
Well, not having access to D&DI or any kind of playtest, I simply assumed that when the Barbarian and such was announced that they would be part of the Martial breed. I see this is what bad sources gets you: A whole lot of foot in the mouth. *sigh* My bad all, ignore my previous post, and feel free to throw gnomes at me for my error if you wish.
If you have access to this forum then you had just as much access as anyone else to download the Barbarian preview since it was for free from the WOTC main page.
I can only hope we don't get any more martial classes. I think we have all the martial concepts covered, there's not too many different ways to say "I swing my sword fantastically!"
Not in any way that dosn't blur into other power sources, at least. We got swordmage (arcane), all them divine classes that use weapons, and then primal classes that use weapons, and then finally the future ki classes. We have yet to cover Ki, but I am fairly confident we have all the "fundamental" Martial classes covered.
Not in any way that dosn't blur into other power sources, at least. We got swordmage (arcane), all them divine classes that use weapons, and then primal classes that use weapons, and then finally the future ki classes. We have yet to cover Ki, but I am fairly confident we have all the "fundamental" Martial classes covered.
I'm sure you are.
Now where's my archer who can shoot a storm of arrows into the air and have it cover an area instead of only hitting 1 to two targets?
I'm sure you are.
Now where's my archer who can shoot a storm of arrows into the air and have it cover an area instead of only hitting 1 to two targets?
Somewhere in the planes, fighting epic level monsters? o.o
Why is this question directed to me? It may not be clear by my posts, but I support future Power books, including MP2 to give us new options for all martial classes. Surely, what you are looking for is a specific ranger power.
I'm sure you are.
Now where's my archer who can shoot a storm of arrows into the air and have it cover an area instead of only hitting 1 to two targets?
Clearly magical and thus not martial.
Clearly magical and thus not martial.
Not clearly magical, IMO (check the wording again). This person is trying to tell me that this is a Martial Control power. I think it is an epic level Ranger power.
If the campaign setting is dark sun, we probably will get a new martial class, and it will probably be a martial controller.
That class will be the gladiator.
I just thought of that. Please, please tell me I'm the first one to put that together. I'm probably not, but it would make me feel awesome
We've already got gladiator as a pseudo-class (gladiator-style feats). I'd be surprised to see another gladiator class.
Instead I think EPG's class will be the a new Paladin feature called Templar, while a new arcane class will come out called the Preserver.
We've already got gladiator as a pseudo-class (gladiator-style feats). I'd be surprised to see another gladiator class.
Instead I think EPG's class will be the a new Paladin feature called Templar, while a new arcane class will come out called the Preserver.
I COULD BE CALLED TRUE GLADITARO AND IT'DS BE TOTALLY AWSEOMS LIKE PWNSER THE FACE OF TOS TOALL THE WIZARDS YEAAAAAAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
there maybe new arcane, divine or martial builds for existing classes in the it, but that's all.
ADNFADNF, dude cut back on the font size!
Bel
martial power 2 is needed for rogues and rangers. They simply don't have much good stuff as say.. the fighter. Rangers need love the most IMO, and I hope MP2 gives it out.
You obviously dont spend much time on the CO boards >_>
Ranger is the martial class LEAST in need of love. Rogues, on the other hand, are miles behind the other martial classes in terms of good stuff from WOTC. Including paragon paths (daggermaster being the obvious exception) and powers, both of which show a lack of quality in general for the rogue.
And lets not forget more MC feats that give quasi class features (and maybe a few martial MC feats worth taking!).
A lot of good stuff could come from any power source book II. I do think the fighter is mostly covered (a few more ranged options), the ranger is solid but beastmaster and archer could use a little more love. Warlord still needs some ranged options too and the rogue can use a build off Int.
see loads of good stuff.
BEWARE POWERCREEP however.
I'd imagine the Ranger could get an off-controller archer build to compensate for the lack of a real martial controller?
I mean, first they said that only PHBs would have new classes and then FR had the Swordmage. Then they said they were done with Martial classes for "a while" and already they're getting out a playtest for Martial 2 end of this month. Doesn't seem like the "rules" they set for themselves are a hard and fast thing, more guidelines really. :pirate:
edit: wait there's no pirates and ninjas smileys???
I'm hearing already about "power paralysis", players being unable to decide which power to use. I think adding in a third book of powers would increase the "power paralysis", wouldn't it?
Paragon paths and epic destinies on the other hand, bring it!
New Classes only come out in Player's Handbooks. Martial Characters already have enough options, they're going to be stretching the limit and providing subpar content is they do this. There's a reason why Complete Warrior didn't get a sequel.
If The Complete Warrior had needed a sequel, then it wouldn't be "complete"
Anyway, WoTC is a publishing company, which means that their revenue stream depends primarily upon publishing books.
D&D players are hungry for options...therefore:
Publishing books chock full of character options=KA-CHING$$$$!
Apparently it's been confirmed there will be a second Martial Power book, my question is. Why?
To help fight power creep with new PHBs.
I can't wait to have more BEASTMASTER ranger options, a few new archer ranger options, and a little love for the 2 new warlord builds wouldn't hurt.
And lets not forget more MC feats that give quasi class features (and maybe a few martial MC feats worth taking!).
A lot of good stuff could come from any power source book II. I do think the fighter is mostly covered (a few more ranged options), the ranger is solid but beastmaster and archer could use a little more love. Warlord still needs some ranged options too and the rogue can use a build off Int.
see loads of good stuff.
BEWARE POWERCREEP however.
I think there was a bit of powercreep in martial power, but not enough to ruin the game. We haven't seen anything on the level of 3.5's cheese. (Save for Orbwizards, but that was present from core)
What I love about 4E is that I don't feel like I have to take the absolute best options to have a viable character, so I wind up putting more thought into concept than mechanics.
As long as the game keeps this trend going, I see no reason to worry about power creep.
I'm still hoping for a Ranged Warlord build. I mean, why not? He's a Leader, he doesn't have to be at the very front like a Defender does.
I will second this.
I will second this.
Thanks, bro!
I'm still hoping for a Ranged Warlord build. I mean, why not? He's a Leader, he doesn't have to be at the very front like a Defender does.
I will second this.
And I shall third it.
I'm still hoping for a Ranged Warlord build. I mean, why not? He's a Leader, he doesn't have to be at the very front like a Defender does.
I will second this.
And I shall third it.
Have you guys actually read the powers in MP? Most of the Resourceful Warlord's powers require thrown weapons
I'm hearing already about "power paralysis", players being unable to decide which power to use. I think adding in a third book of powers would increase the "power paralysis", wouldn't it?
No. "Power paralysis" is a rewording of a term used by boardgamers called "analysis paralysis." It refers to not being able to decide what to do on your turn, holding up the table. It doesn't matter if they make their way up to Martial Power 8, a given character is still only going to have the standard number of powers available to him.
We've already got gladiator as a pseudo-class (gladiator-style feats). I'd be surprised to see another gladiator class.
Instead I think EPG's class will be the a new Paladin feature called Templar, while a new arcane class will come out called the Preserver.
I think we'll definitely see some changes, but I think preserver and defiler will be feats or class features for the wizard, or something that has to be chosen by all arcane classes. Preserving and defiling shouldn't really be classes on their own; that was a necessity of second edition, but back then we didn't have any other arcane classes (except the bard, which they deliberately stripped of its arcane components). I think the templar thing will have to be handled along with all of the general problems of the divine in Dark Sun, namely, that it's really the elemental powersource we've heard rumours about. You can't really use the current cleric as an elemental cleric without adding a whole class worth of materials.
I think we will get the gladiator in the player's guide (assuming they do use dark sun), because they can't assume you'll have the old dragon article. everyone is already discussing the "true assassin" teasingly mentioned in this month's (very similar) assassin article. I imagine that means we can also get a "true gladiator". It was the one class really original to dark sun (the only one to get a complete guide for the setting), and the gladiatorial combat was a central theme to the setting. They're not going to leave it out of the book
edit: technically, we'd get a defiler class, not a preserver class. that was the modified form in all previous versions of dark sun on initial release. The preserver uses the same rules as normal, it's the defiler who is modified. But not be a whole class worth of material (under the modern conception of class). The first second-edition defiler was only different by having a different XP progression, preservers were capable of casting spells by defiling
Have you guys actually read the powers in MP? Most of the Resourceful Warlord's powers require thrown weapons
Most? None of the at wills have an option for ranged combat, which by itself means no ranged build.
Of the encounters: 1 (level 3)
Of the Dailies: 3 (level 5,9,19)
None of the paragon path powers are at ranged.
There is one feat that supports a ranged warlord, but its for bows which are not heavy thrown...
So thats a total of 4 powers out of 10 that do, no feats. So what 40% means most? And to have them at epic level is essentially gimping yourself as you don't have the higher level more advanced encounter/dailies.
I can only hope we don't get any more martial classes. I think we have all the martial concepts covered, there's not too many different ways to say "I swing my sword fantastically!"
the problem is that swords are for whimps and so we clearly need more axes, hammers and tetsubos please....
Now, a dual-dagger rogue would be nice. I was actually surprised one wasnt implemented in MP1.
the problem is that swords are for whimps and so we clearly need more axes, hammers and tetsubos please....
What the heck is a tetsubo?
Perhaps it will feature paths that encourage using some more obscure weapons, such as whips, pics, and double weapons or something.
I agree. 4E has definitely improved the likelihood of a character choosing an axe or hammer, rather than a sword, but swords are definitely still the dominant weapon group. Better support for other weapon types would improve things further.
What the heck is a tetsubo?
Japanese War Club.
Japanese War Club.
So, a greatclub.
So, a greatclub.
qft
Versatile weapons need love.
I'd also like to see a Rogue feature built of intelligence, and a Warlord who if necessary could stay out of the front lines.
Essentially yes, but it has the Japanese name so is betteererer like the Katana.
Tetsubo sounds like a tree you put on your coffee table so that you can impress your faux-intellectual friends.
And Katana, well, it ain't half bad far as names go.
But Greatsword and Greatclub? The title explains it. This one is a sword. This one is a club. They're both great. Any questions? Well, there's only one answer. And that answer is instant death.
1. Rebalancing of the broken 2 handed weapons from the Adventure's Vault.
2. Loads of Weapon MC feat trees that go into at least a dozen or more weapon Paragon Paths.
3. A Master of ALL weapons Epic Destiny.
4. A more defined Ranged Warlord. Sure, thrown weapons are fine, but I've always wanted a Bow Warlord.
5. Loads of crazy new Superior weapons.
6. A leadery style Rogue. Perhaps a Errol Flynn build?
7. A better exploration of Marital Schools. Perhaps School feats to show, the origins of your training and tactics.
8. More cool, multiclass required Paragon Paths with ties for Arcane, Primal, Ki, Whatever.
9. A ranged figher build. It can be done!
10. Eh. What the hell. Accept the challenge WOTC, try and come up with a Martial Controller. Just for the hell of it. Make it cool.
Apparently it's been confirmed there will be a second Martial Power book, my question is. Why?
I agree with this statement. There really seems to be no reason to create all new alternatives for the martial classes when they are arguably already the most powerful power source there is. (I'm looking at you battle rager fighter) Unless there is a new martial class coming out some time soon, I can't possibly imagine a need for another martial book, if new feats and powers are all they want to make, then they can simply add some racial requirements to the powers and a racial effect and stick those in the race books if they ever make them.
I agree with this statement. There really seems to be no reason to create all new alternatives for the martial classes when they are arguably already the most powerful power source there is.
Odds are this will be a build light book and more an option book. Weapon Specialization feat MultiClasses, Paragon Paths, etc. Even then, they can ALWAYS be more power and options for existing builds. I could go on for days listing ideas.
Apparently it's been confirmed there will be a second Martial Power book, my question is. Why?
I can give you five reasons: Goliaths, Deva, Shifters (both kinds), Gnomes and Half-Orcs. Most feats and paragon paths from Martial Power (surely, someone will count and prove me wrong, but I still contend that it's a lot, if not most) were in support of race/martial class combinations. None of the Player's Handbook 2 races will have that sort of support until a Martial Power 2 comes out.
7. A better exploration of Marital Schools.
I wasn't aware there was so much relationship trouble in D&D... :P
I can give you five reasons: Goliaths, Deva, Shifters (both kinds), Gnomes and Half-Orcs. Most feats and paragon paths from Martial Power (surely, someone will count and prove me wrong, but I still contend that it's a lot, if not most) were in support of race/martial class combinations. None of the Player's Handbook 2 races will have that sort of support until a Martial Power 2 comes out.
Feats: 45/93 (Heroic Tier) Orrr: 48.38%
Paragon Paths 10/48 orrr: 20.83%
They will probably get some feats, but I would be surprised slightly at Paragon classes being universally applied (Mostly as human's don't have their own for martial classes).
Didn't feel like doing paragon/epic seems about the same ratio (hovering around 50%)
I wasn't aware there was so much relationship trouble in D&D... :P
In relation to feats and 'builds' that can simulate Schools of combat and thought. Think just like the Primal Preview "Tribal' feats, but affiliated with schools of combat.
In relation to feats and 'builds' that can simulate Schools of combat and thought. Think just like the Primal Preview "Tribal' feats, but affiliated with schools of combat.
No he is making a pun. Martial - Married person related.
No he is making a pun. Martial - Married person related.
You're thinking Marital, not Martial.
You're thinking Marital, not Martial.
Post he was refering to Read number seven, you will see the joke, Maybe.
Post he was refering to Read number seven, you will see the joke, Maybe.
Please don't mind my typos and I'm entirely too tired to give a shake. Sorry.
Please don't mind my typos and I'm entirely too tired to give a shake. Sorry.
Oh I don't, it was the other guy who made the joke then I explained it poorly, then had to explain it again.
Where exactly was Martial Power 2 confirmed?
the fact that we get a play-test for it next Monday confirms it.
Some ideas for stuff that could appear in this product:
- Fatal Precision: Epic-level feat that grants a 19-20 critical when you have combat advantage against an enemy. This should help out CHA rogues so that they have additional options to boost their crit rate (if they don't have the STR for Light Blade Mastery) and won't feel obligated to take Daggermaster all the time for this purpose.
- Multi-Weapon Mastery: Could be a class feature for a PP or ED. Basically, once per encounter/day the character may change the weapon type his Weapon Focus/Mastery feats apply to (similar to the warblade ability in 3rd Ed).
- INT rogues might be a nice idea, but since none of the Power builds we've seen so far explore alternate stat arrays (other than that Swordmage PP that uses WIS), this might not make it. "INT Rogues" might be absorbed into the new Shadow Striker class (true assassin? ninja? nightblade?).
How about some Warlord exploits that give actions to non-melee allies?
Agreed.
Furthermore, I want more warlord powers that work like Commander's Strike. I want to be able to play a battle field tactician who coordinates his comrades without ever making an actual attack roll himself.
Beyond that more beast master powers for rangers. Also, feats that let players customize a beast companion into a more specific animal, such as a feat that grants a snake companion a poisonous bite (viper) or a the ability to grab when attacking and deal ongoing damage while maintaining that grab (constrictor).
If the campaign setting is dark sun, we probably will get a new martial class, and it will probably be a martial controller.
That class will be the gladiator.
I just thought of that. Please, please tell me I'm the first one to put that together. I'm probably not, but it would make me feel awesome
I had the same toughts some while ago (even posted on my portugues RPG blog). Even with the gladiator being a possible martial controller, i think that a swashbuckler would make a more viable one.
I had the same toughts some while ago (even posted on my portugues RPG blog). Even with the gladiator being a possible martial controller, i think that a swashbuckler would make a more viable one.
I rather prefer swashbuckler as the title for a DEX based martial defender. I think of it as a nimble hero who makes themslef the focus of the enemy's attention by mocking and taunting.
Bel
I'm sure you are.
Now where's my archer who can shoot a storm of arrows into the air and have it cover an area instead of only hitting 1 to two targets?
Players Handbook, Page 108, "Spray of Arrows", Confounding Arrows, Triple Shot, Manticore's Volley, and lastly, 27th level, Hail of Arrows. This all from the Ranger class, in that order. On page 53 of Martial Power, Blow-Through Assault might be something that you would consider. Page 54 of Martial power, Threefold Assault, and page 57 Martial power, Five-Missile Dance.
In regards to the Rogue, there's Cloud of Steel, page 121 of the PHB.
Although most of the Ranger powers target 3, there are the few in there that target many targets. Such as how Spray of arrows being a blast. I know if there was thing I made sure to check out from the ranger, was that they had at least one power that transforms them into a one man volley.
As thus, there is no need for a Martial controller, Martial classes with their bursts and blasts, and cleaves and what such, can cover all that.
As for the fact there's a Martial Power II, I wasn't aware, until now. Tis awesome that we'll get a playtest of it even, so this is going to be good. Since Martial is my favorite power source, as well as having awesome classes with it, I'd be glad to see a second martial power.
As for what ideas they could hold? I'm not sure, but they could consider:
Mounted combat for Fighter, and maybe Ranger (maybe in the form of an Imperagon Path)
Two Weapon Fighting for the Rogue, as I'm sure most people have wanted this.
More weapon specialization powers, so it's possible to play a fighter specializing in other weapons, such as light blades, flails, and the none too used Pick.
Those are just ideas, never said if any or all of them were good ones. Except more weapon specific powers is nifty to see as well, especially for weapons that need to see more use.
Even with the gladiator being a possible martial controller, i think that a swashbuckler would make a more viable one.
I don't see a Martial Controller ever happening at this point, except for the one we already have (archer Ranger), as it seems a bit too contrived, but of course you never know.
I don't see a Martial Controller ever happening at this point, except for the one we already have (archer Ranger), as it seems a bit too contrived, but of course you never know.
Still, if WoTC can pull it off and it's interesting. Why not? Imagine if that's the playtest. :P
Feats: 45/93 (Heroic Tier) Orrr: 48.38%
Paragon Paths 10/48 orrr: 20.83%
They will probably get some feats, but I would be surprised slightly at Paragon classes being universally applied (Mostly as human's don't have their own for martial classes).
Didn't feel like doing paragon/epic seems about the same ratio (hovering around 50%)
Thanks for obliging me. I would expect approximately half of the feats to be in support of PHB2/martial class combos (possibly less, since we're dealing with 5 races instead of 8), and 1/5 of the Paragon Paths. In addition, I would expect at least one new build for each martial class; and maybe 1/8 to 1/4 of the new Paragon Paths would be in support of those, as well as a significant (1/4 or more) number of the feats.
For new builds, I wouldn't be surprised to see a two weapon rogue (2 daggers and rapier/parrying dagger are things that could use some support). A "heavy thrown" warlord wouldn't be shocking, and while a damage-less warlord that revolves around upgraded commander's strikes would be a bit surprising, it would still be very possible. Just as the battlerager is the "martial barbarian", I could see a "martial monk" build for the fighter, specializing in unarmed combat. The ranger is a bit more difficult, I can't think of any concepts that the three builds plus the warden don't already cover.
I do wonder if they will get into "alternative attack stats" for classes. A perceptive ranger that uses Wisdom for ranged attacks, for example, or a warlord that uses Intelligence or Charisma for attacks and Strength for additional effects. A cunning rogue that used Charisma for its attack stat and Dexterity for riders would make an interesting "martial bard".
I also just realized that in addition to the 6 PHB2 races (if you count Shifters twice), Eberron "official" Warforged and any additional races published in the Eberron Character Guide would also need martial feat/Paragon Path support. That still leaves Martial Power 2 at (probably) two fewer races to support than Martial Power (unless Eberron is packed with new races).
Then there are fighting style/weapon specialization multiclass feat trees that could fill out a Martial Power 2. There is plenty of room for more of those.
I rather prefer swashbuckler as the title for a DEX based martial defender. I think of it as a nimble hero who makes themslef the focus of the enemy's attention by mocking and taunting.
Fighter-MC Rogue with Rakish Swashbuckler paragon path?
I see the Swashbuckler as a multiclass only similar to the Gladiator and Assassin.
That would be fairly reasonable.
Fighter-MC Rogue with Rakish Swashbuckler paragon path?
And why not Rogue-MC Paladin with Angelic Avenger paragon path instead of the new, rather nifty, Avenger?
I'm all for using multiclassing and paragon paths to refine a concept, but I feel that swashbuckler is a basic enough concept that it should be possible to fully realize it at 1st level.
I'd like to play, for example, a archery fighter. A ranged Defender, not a striker.
What I'd like to see more than anything in a Martial Power Handbook II would be some awesome choices for heavy armour builds. Everything out there now seems geared towards lighter armour. I wanna see some features, builds, and options that encourage and reward wearing plate armour.
I agree, it seems to me that light armor is what all the classes lean towards these days. Now it feels like I am paying a cost to wear heavy armor, loose speed, get a bunch of penalties all to protect the party. When, Mr.Cool over there gets almost the same AC as me minus all the costs. Maybe its because phb 2 and primal power came out and suddenly heavy armor seems to be paladins and fighters. But it annoys me why Mr.Cool isn't he paying some sort of cost.
I'd like to see a decent number of ranged weapon powers for classes OTHER than ranger.
I'd like to play, for example, a archery fighter. A ranged Defender, not a striker.
I don't think a ranged defender would work, as how are you going to defend while not imposing your body between the monsters and your allies without coming across as a controller?
Two Weapon Fighting for the Rogue, as I'm sure most people have wanted this.
I 100% agree.
I have been very disappointed that they did not allow the other martial classes (especially the strikers) allowed to have some sort of variation at-will power to "dual stike". Instead they gave the Dual Strike at-will power to fighters (a defender class) first before any other martial striker class. WotC needs to make another similiar variation to Twin Strike for Rogues, Avengers, etc...
I don't like heavy armour characters in general, but I feel that intsead Arcane characters should get more heavy armour options.
As for ranged defenders, I feel there just to be abilities to punish enemies for attacking other characters at range, that's all. The fighter can already mark enemies with ranged attacks. They can even make a feat that gives combat challenge at range, if they multiclassed as ranger.
I don't like heavy armour characters in general...
Why not?
I don't think a ranged defender would work, as how are you going to defend while not imposing your body between the monsters and your allies without coming across as a controller?
Melee Fighters are Defender/Strikers
Swordmages are Defender/controllers
Paladins are Defender/Leaders
So why can't a ranged fighter be a Defender/Controller?
Oh, because it's martial?
Sorry, forgot that people are freaking morons about the martial controller thing.
I believe swordmage dailies are the only ones with more than a range of 3.
Why not?
Probably because just as you have a thing for them, there are those of us, such as myself, who don't. In 3.5 I never had a character who went over medium.
Melee Fighters are Defender/Strikers
Swordmages are Defender/controllers
Paladins are Defender/Leaders
So why can't a ranged fighter be a Defender/Controller?
Oh, because it's martial?
Sorry, forgot that people are freaking morons about the martial controller thing.
It has nothing to do with martial controller, I think you could make one,
Swordmages are not controllers in the sense of sitting back and blasting at stuff, their powers are generally short ranged (5> squares) or Melee ranged, most have weapon keyword (I forget the exact total, but outside of at wills it a handful that you can never have all at the same time), which by nessictates them being within 2 squares (Heavy Blade, Polearm).
Plus lets look at what we know Defenders do:
Defender (Paladin, Fighter)
Defenders have the highest defenses in the game, and good close up offense. They are the party's frontline combatants, wherever they're standing is where the action is. Defenders have abilities and powers that make it difficult to move past them or ignore them in battle.
It is all but impossible fullfill that role blurb at range, the only way to do it is status affects like Immobilize, Daze, Stun. Which makes one 'sub' or be primarily controller.
I can't even find it sensible 'I defend by running around shooting arrows/bolts at people.' as a statement. I am not, however, strictly opposed to SOME powers having a heavy thrown option, or light thrown option.
BTW: having looked more closely at the Swordmage, I wouldn't call them Defender/Controllers. There is a lot of overlap in ability from a defnder to a controller, but they are not even close to the same as Controllers (thus far) are at range. The Swordmage gets a total of 9 powers that are not melee, most of them close burst 1-3, only 1 ranged 10.
Fighters took the damage for a striker, and Swordmages added the mobility, from what I see.
Raned Martial Controller? Did you just solve the martial controller problem or are you just spewing blasphemy? :P
Actually to me a martial controller would be what everyone clamors for in a bow based fighter. Weaker status ailments (Immbolized, Daze few stuns next to no blind/deafens) but higher damage than normal.
New Classes only come out in Player's Handbooks. Martial Characters already have enough options, they're going to be stretching the limit and providing subpar content is they do this. There's a reason why Complete Warrior didn't get a sequel.
Hmm...
Swordmage in the Forgotten Realms PG.
... Artificer in the Ebberon PG...
... I'd have to say you're wrong there.
(And as long as I get some freaking options for a Heavy Weapon Thrower, I'll be happy with the MP2, if they don't tank the project before it gets that far)
I agree, it seems to me that light armor is what all the classes lean towards these days. Now it feels like I am paying a cost to wear heavy armor, loose speed, get a bunch of penalties all to protect the party. When, Mr.Cool over there gets almost the same AC as me minus all the costs. Maybe its because phb 2 and primal power came out and suddenly heavy armor seems to be paladins and fighters. But it annoys me why Mr.Cool isn't he paying some sort of cost.
You get Masterwork Armors first??
I 100% agree.
I have been very disappointed that they did not allow the other martial classes (especially the strikers) allowed to have some sort of variation at-will power to "dual stike". Instead they gave the Dual Strike at-will power to fighters (a defender class) first before any other martial striker class. WotC needs to make another similiar variation to Twin Strike for Rogues, Avengers, etc...
They don't really have to if you play the right race/class combination, or paragon multiclass into a class that offers that option.
A Half Elf Brute Rogue (I admit rare as it maybe) at 11th lv could take versatile master and if he picked dual strike or twin strike as his racial encounter at will power, then whala, he now has Dual Strike or Twin Strike as a at will. Which means now he has to chances to land a successful hit and thus probably add sneak attack damage.
(And as long as I get some freaking options for a Heavy Weapon Thrower, I'll be happy with the MP2, if they don't tank the project before it gets that far)
Agreed.
I like the concept of Heavy Thrown Weapons.
It just seems that the Devs forgot about them after making them. (Or made them after everything else.)
When I read the new powers and "opportunities" you get with this MP2, it smells of developers who doesn't seem to care if their system ****s up or not. And then you are welcome to playtest it from here on and until the world ends.
I am in no way against new books or material, but I am against too many character-development-opportunites, because it opens up ways to unbalance the game.
//
Traditions, like Golden Wyvern Adept, will be back in Arcane Power 2.
Be afraid, excited, or uncaring, whatever you choose!
As for the fact there's a Martial Power II, I wasn't aware, until now. Tis awesome that we'll get a playtest of it even, so this is going to be good. Since Martial is my favorite power source, as well as having awesome classes with it, I'd be glad to see a second martial power.
As for what ideas they could hold? I'm not sure, but they could consider:
Mounted combat for Fighter, and maybe Ranger (maybe in the form of an Imperagon Path)
Two Weapon Fighting for the Rogue, as I'm sure most people have wanted this.
More weapon specialization powers, so it's possible to play a fighter specializing in other weapons, such as light blades, flails, and the none too used Pick.
Those are just ideas, never said if any or all of them were good ones. Except more weapon specific powers is nifty to see as well, especially for weapons that need to see more use.
Mounted combat would be a fun idea, and would be great if it worked with the warhorse paladin option that's likely to appear in Divine Power. And it'd be nice to have knights, jousting, and lances back in the game.
I'd also like a swashbuckler/dexterity-based fighter, but this is likely relegated to the ranger. But it'd be interesting to see a defender that's based on evasion and avoiding blows (parrying and dodging and such) and taking advantage of weaknesses rather than the straight, generic rangers/rogues with light blades.
The other big omissions would be a shortbow/ranged rogue (assassin/sniper) so we can have a Haley from OotS rogue again. Really, a feat would be all that's needed for this, like the ones in MP1.
And, of course, the ranged warlord. This is a glaring omission. I'd love a warlord that led general-style from the rear and emphasized commanding troops, triggering basic ranged attacks, and otherwise directing the battle.
But, really, I expect much of this book to be devoted to PHB2 and PHB3 races, adding feats for them with the established classes and giving every race a reason to look at a class.
Raned Martial Controller?
That would be the archer build Ranger, right?
But AoE attacks, especially ranged ones, would be hard to replicate without assuming special equipment (trick arrows, alchemical bombs, etc). But it's still workable to attack X targets within Y and allow sudden multiple attacks (let off a barrage of 4 arrows that slow their targets).
But this would be in a PHB not martial powers.
I'd love an arcane archer, but that really seems to combine power sources, something we haven't seen much of yet.
It screams out FUTURE CONTENT: mixed-class paragon paths (ranger with the arcane power source unlocks the Arcane Archer, rogue with arcane unlocks spellthief, etc).
We can expect this in a future Dragon article or the PHB3.
That would be the archer build Ranger, right?
You mean the Striker? then no, it wouldn't.
A martial controller could work well, with a build that focuses on reach weapons and a build that uses archery.
But AoE attacks, especially ranged ones, would be hard to replicate without assuming special equipment (trick arrows, alchemical bombs, etc). But it's still workable to attack X targets within Y and allow sudden multiple attacks (let off a barrage of 4 arrows that slow their targets).
But this would be in a PHB not martial powers.
Actually...just well aimed aterilleral/muscular shot. It would work for Immobilized/Restrained/Slowed. Might even work for Stunned/Dazed.
I'd love an arcane archer, but that really seems to combine power sources, something we haven't seen much of yet.
It screams out FUTURE CONTENT: mixed-class paragon paths (ranger with the arcane power source unlocks the Arcane Archer, rogue with arcane unlocks spellthief, etc).
We can expect this in a future Dragon article or the PHB3.
I doubt it will be in PHB3, but I believe PHB3 will feature only new power sources, so I could be wrong.
You mean the Striker? then no, it wouldn't.
Ranger-Archers are striker/controllers in a way though, which I think is what Steely was getting at.
You mean the Striker?
Nope, I'm talking about the 4th Ed Archer Ranger, which was originally designed to be a Martial Controller, but as the designers didn't have a good enough bead on what a Controller entails, they squeezed it into Striker, hence the big control aspect of the Archer Ranger.
My guesses (or suggestions if any WOTC bods are reading).
Fighters
1h fighting style, 1 hand is a weapon, the other is open (for various hand techniques like grappling or deflect arrows).
Ranged Warrior, just an array of bow options for the Fighter, might work as a secondary controller too, might work better as a multi-weapon fighter.
Warlords
Opressive Warlord: Crushes the enemy, inspiring others to do the same. Lots of coordinated assaults and inspiring others to hurt a target.
Bow Warlord: Just give us a Warlord with a bow you spoony fraks. I want a Dexlord
Rogue
Scout: Move at least 2 squares on your turn and get CA for your next ranged attack, uses bows and heavy thrown weapons, would suit some of the primal characters better.
Wliderness Rogue: A re-flavour suited to the more primal races
Ranger
City: Adept in cities, replacing dungeoneering with Streetwise, can move through crowds and may use a variety of weapons, may even use improved weapons?
Leader: A bow using commander (Someone just give me a Ranger/Warlord with a Bow), part leader, part controller focuses on AOE and directing allies movement.
Core themes: Bows, Reflavouring for environments (especially Wilderness)
Ranger-Archers are striker/controllers in a way though, which I think is what Steely was getting at.
"In a Way" is not "is." Which is what my post was getting at. They're semi-controllers, not true controllers.
I'd like to see a Martial Controller, if for no other reason to see Chiba_Monkey spend 13 p[osts in a row ranting about it. :D
EDIT: Steely, never heard of it before. and "Folded into a striker class" doesn't make the Striker a controller, even if there are controller elements.
EDIT: Steely, never heard of it before.
Well hopefully you learn something new everyday, baby!
I also still think it might have been cool to call the 4th Ed Martial Ranger, Hunter, and call the Primal Warden, Ranger.
But then Ranger's would polymorph into weirdness things, which would be just plain weird and they still wouldn't have an animal companion.
You want to talk about weird, the 1st Ed Ranger had access to Druid and Magic-User spells.
You sure they won't be in AP1?
Not entirely sure, but AP1 is going to be jam-packed, covering 5 classes, so there might not be room until AP2. We'll soon see.
You want to talk about weird, the 1st Ed Ranger had access to Druid and Magic-User spells.
Which is actually quite cool and would be great in 4E, I wish I had access to druid powers, Wizard powers and TWF/archery/A pet, or at least a 4E char who could do all that.
I see no reason that a Bow fighter or Crossbow Rogue, or Ranged Warlord should be rendered unplayable by simply denying them any freaking attack powers.
I've said it once already, and I'll say it again. I want ranged weapon attack powers for classes other than the ranger.
I see no reason that a Bow fighter or Crossbow Rogue, or Ranged Warlord should be rendered unplayable by simply denying them any freaking attack powers.
The Crossbow Rogue is very viable. Most all of the class's powers can be used with a crossbow, shuriken, or thrown dagger, there are a couple of paragon paths that focus on it, and with the Gnome and new Feat in the PHB II that lets you gain combat advantage over enemies flanked by your allies, it's easier than ever.
With the way the Fighter's abilities and powers work, any ranged powers would be single use stuff before moving into melee. An actual dedicated ranged build wouldn't work too well with the Fighter's other class features, which all rely on him getting up close and personal. I think Ranger works well enough for the "battlefield archer".
I would like to see a few more ranged powers for the Warlord though.
Arangers don't have that big a control aspect, they could have a greater control aspect with the combined forces of MP and MP 2. A new combat style and suitable powers could easily open up the ranged control potential for Rangers.
My guesses (or suggestions if any WOTC bods are reading).
Fighters
1h fighting style, 1 hand is a weapon, the other is open (for various hand techniques like grappling or deflect arrows).
Ranged Warrior, just an array of bow options for the Fighter, might work as a secondary controller too, might work better as a multi-weapon fighter.
Warlords
Opressive Warlord: Crushes the enemy, inspiring others to do the same. Lots of coordinated assaults and inspiring others to hurt a target.
Bow Warlord: Just give us a Warlord with a bow you spoony fraks. I want a Dexlord
Rogue
Scout: Move at least 2 squares on your turn and get CA for your next ranged attack, uses bows and heavy thrown weapons, would suit some of the primal characters better.
Wliderness Rogue: A re-flavour suited to the more primal races
Ranger
City: Adept in cities, replacing dungeoneering with Streetwise, can move through crowds and may use a variety of weapons, may even use improved weapons?
Leader: A bow using commander (Someone just give me a Ranger/Warlord with a Bow), part leader, part controller focuses on AOE and directing allies movement.
Core themes: Bows, Reflavouring for environments (especially Wilderness)
Opressive Warlord? Sounds alot like the Bravura as presented in the Martial Power we have now. Acting all aggressive and reckless, granting his allies greater benefits to help crush his enemies. Also, I thought the whole Intelligence based, Tactical Warlord was about having allies bum rush foes at the later levels.
However, I do have to say, these are pretty darn good ideas. These are things I could see being in Martial Power 2. A one handed style fighter is something I've always wanted to do, assuming it's nifty and everything. While a bow fighter, would truly complete the "weapon master" ideal of the fighter.
I see no reason that a Bow fighter or Crossbow Rogue, or Ranged Warlord should be rendered unplayable by simply denying them any freaking attack powers.
Crossbow Rogue
====== Created Using Wizards of the Coast D&DI Character Builder ======
level 1
Halfling, Rogue
Rogue Tactics: Artful Dodger
FINAL ABILITY SCORES
Str 8, Con 14, Dex 18, Int 11, Wis 10, Cha 17.
Starting Ability Scores
Str 8, Con 14, Dex 16, Int 11, Wis 10, Cha 15.
AC: 16 Fort: 12 Reflex: 16 Will: 13
HP: 26 Surges: 8 Surge Value: 6
TRAINED SKILLS
Stealth, Thievery, Intimidate, Streetwise, Acrobatics, Bluff.
FEATS
1: Deft Hurler Style
POWERS
1, At-Will: Deft Strike
1, At-Will: Sly Flourish
1, Encounter: Impact Shot
1, Daily: Blinding Barrage
ITEMS
Adventurer's Kit, Climber's Kit, Leather Armor, Hand Crossbow, Crossbow Bolts (20)
====== Created Using Wizards of the Coast D&DI Character Builder ======
level 1
Halfling, Rogue
Rogue Tactics: Artful Dodger
FINAL ABILITY SCORES
Str 8, Con 14, Dex 18, Int 11, Wis 10, Cha 17.
Starting Ability Scores
Str 8, Con 14, Dex 16, Int 11, Wis 10, Cha 15.
AC: 16 Fort: 12 Reflex: 16 Will: 13
HP: 26 Surges: 8 Surge Value: 6
TRAINED SKILLS
Stealth, Thievery, Intimidate, Streetwise, Acrobatics, Bluff.
FEATS
1: Deft Hurler Style
POWERS
1, At-Will: Deft Strike
1, At-Will: Sly Flourish
1, Encounter: Impact Shot
1, Daily: Blinding Barrage
ITEMS
Adventurer's Kit, Climber's Kit, Leather Armor, Hand Crossbow, Crossbow Bolts (20)
====== Created Using Wizards of the Coast D&DI Character Builder ======
Which is actually quite cool and would be great in 4E, I wish I had access to druid powers, Wizard powers and TWF/archery/A pet, or at least a 4E char who could do all that.
Funnily enough 4th Ed has given me a craving to start up a 1st Ed campaign alongside my/our 4th Ed one – would you like to join if I start it up?
Two-weapon Rogue build.
More two weapon feats.
In fact, make fighting style about feats, not class. Then people can have their two-weapon Rogues, ranged Fighters, and ranged Warlords, and other wackiness.
- A two-weapon rogue (another for the tally)
- A trapsmith rogue and/or ranger (kinda controller-y), since they have rules to accompany it with the artificer now.