Haven't seen any threads on this yet, so I ask: what sorts of things do you want to see in this book?
I'm going to guess that there will be more feats/powers to take advantage of some of the more underutilized weapon groups, like spears, picks, maces, and flails.
Maybe some alternate multiclassing feats as well, such as one that grants a Ranger's combat style rather than hunter's quarry (making two-weapon fighters or rogues a better option).
I heard somewhere that they might include animal companions for the Ranger, so it might be possible that tracking and other flavorful powers might also be in the works for those that wanted a more naturey Ranger rather than an archer or a Drizzt-clone.
Haven't seen any threads on this yet,
You didn't look too hard. http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1065069 :P
I'm going to guess that there will be more feats/powers to take advantage of some of the more underutilized weapon groups, like spears, picks, maces, and flails.
Maybe some alternate multiclassing feats as well, such as one that grants a Ranger's combat style rather than hunter's quarry (making two-weapon fighters or rogues a better option).
I heard somewhere that they might include animal companions for the Ranger, so it might be possible that tracking and other flavorful powers might also be in the works for those that wanted a more naturey Ranger rather than an archer or a Drizzt-clone.
They have said that there will be expanded multiclass feats(or maybe it was alternative ones, I forgot), more powers, paragon paths, epic destinies, animal companions, and maybe build options(I don't think this has been stated but it has been assumed).
I read on EN world and the Wizards recap on some product questions at Gen Con that Fighters are getting a two weapon build, and the answer indicates so are Rogues. It was stated that these TWF build would feel very appropriate for their respective classes.
That's nice... um... can ranger's get a one weapon build? Especially with spears, or longspears, or the like?
That's nice... um... can ranger's get a one weapon build? Especially with spears, or longspears, or the like?
Don't forget a two-handed build! (After all, with martial characters, it's all about fighting style!)
And people said I was crazy for thinking that Fighters ought to be able to dual-wield. "Play a Ranger, they'd say." Suckers. :P
Don't forget a two-handed build! (After all, with martial characters, it's all about fighting style!)
And people said I was crazy for thinking that Fighters ought to be able to dual-wield. "Play a Ranger, they'd say." Suckers. :P
Well... um I mentioned longspears, I hope you didn't think I meant for them to wield them one handed.
Well... um I mentioned longspears, I hope you didn't think I meant for them to wield them one handed.
No, no, of course not. I just misread your post as referring to a "one-HANDED weapon build".
I read on EN world and the Wizards recap on some product questions at Gen Con that Fighters are getting a two weapon build, and the answer indicates so are Rogues. It was stated that these TWF build would feel very appropriate for their respective classes.
Any way you can throw us a link where you found that at EN world?
Any way you can throw us a link where you found that at EN world?
It is on the wizards site. http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4dnd/20080815
It is on the wizards site. http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4dnd/20080815
Yeah I actually caught that in your thread shortly after I made that post.
Thanks a ton!
We need striker-ish THF and BnB.
I'm not too psyched about the TWF being more available to fighters and rogues. What I'm really concerned about is THF or Board-and-Blade fighting being available for the ranger.
We need striker-ish THF and BnB.
I don't think rangers should be using shield, it seems a little too defenderish to me. But otherwise I agree, I was actually figuring initially that they were going to do the new 4.0 striker ranger like the scout in 3.5. Aside from enough powers to make a THF, I think it would be cool if there were ranger powers that encouraged you to move through extra bonuses, instead of just making it possible to move. Figuring out how to keep moving around for my extra damage was half the fun of playing a scout, but a 4.0 ranger has no intrinsic reason why he has to move even though he has so many ways he can move around.
I don't think rangers should be using shield, it seems a little too defenderish to me. But otherwise I agree, I was actually figuring initially that they were going to do the new 4.0 striker ranger like the scout in 3.5. Aside from enough powers to make a THF, I think it would be cool if there were ranger powers that encouraged you to move through extra bonuses, instead of just making it possible to move. Figuring out how to keep moving around for my extra damage was half the fun of playing a scout, but a 4.0 ranger has no intrinsic reason why he has to move even though he has so many ways he can move around.
I think using a shield should at least be an option, the way it is for rogues and warlords.
I'd personally like to see a ranged weapon build for the fighter and the warlord. Those 2 classes are lacking in ranged attacks. The rogue could do with some more too, but they have a few at least.
I wouldn't hold your breath for that "ranged defender", KA.
We need striker-ish THF
This is what i think the barbarian ought to be.
I think they are going to give the ranger a new fighting style based on an animal companion. I think it won't matter so much what the weapon is, but I see things like in WoW, using your companion to keep the target at a distance for ranged rangers (
) while a close in ranger will use their companion to flank and harry opponents and then exploit the weakness in their defense, as well as allowing their companion to extra damage. We know we are getting animal companions, and this seems like a logical way to use them in a balanced manner, as opposed to 2-3.x "minion-athon"
I don't think rangers should be using shield, it seems a little too defenderish to me. But otherwise I agree, I was actually figuring initially that they were going to do the new 4.0 striker ranger like the scout in 3.5. Aside from enough powers to make a THF, I think it would be cool if there were ranger powers that encouraged you to move through extra bonuses, instead of just making it possible to move. Figuring out how to keep moving around for my extra damage was half the fun of playing a scout, but a 4.0 ranger has no intrinsic reason why he has to move even though he has so many ways he can move around.
So something along the lines of the warlock powers that kick in after X squares have been moved?
So something along the lines of the warlock powers that kick in after X squares have been moved?
You mean shadow walk? Yeah, that's a good example of what I'm talking about. It just seems like rangers have alot more mobility option then they actually need to do their jobs. The mobility is nice, I just wish I had more reasons to actually use it.
Also bear in mind that the "dancing fencer" was specifically mentioned in Races and Classes as a fighter build (not a rogue or ranger build) that could be seen in splats--in the very same breath they mentioned two-weapon fighters, which have been confirmed.
It also occurs to me that there are a number of enemies in the Monster Manual that wield longswords, yet clearly use Dexterity as their key attack stat, like the drow blademaster and one of the eladrin MM entries (the Bralani of Autumn Winds, I believe, but I could be wrong; it is not the eladrin fey knight, despite the fact that the fey knight's Dexterity is better than their Strength). Of course these are monsters and not PCs, but it indicates to me some willingness for WotC to add Dex-primary heavy blade powers.
What I heard long before announcement of a two-weapon fighter build was that there'd be a "sword dancer" build. WotC Rodney also said that his eladrin wand wizard, Vargas, picked up some longsword powers from fighter multiclassing that came from the Martial Power book and dovetailed with his agility--that could just mean that there'll be more heavy blade powers with a secondary effect based on Dexterity, but part of me holds out hope for a Dex-primary fighter path.
Also bear in mind that the "dancing fencer" was specifically mentioned in Races and Classes as a fighter build (not a rogue or ranger build) that could be seen in splats--in the very same breath they mentioned two-weapon fighters, which have been confirmed.
It also occurs to me that there are a number of enemies in the Monster Manual that wield longswords, yet clearly use Dexterity as their key attack stat, like the drow blademaster and one of the eladrin MM entries (the Bralani of Autumn Winds, I believe, but I could be wrong; it is not the eladrin fey knight, despite the fact that the fey knight's Dexterity is better than their Strength). Of course these are monsters and not PCs, but it indicates to me some willingness for WotC to add Dex-primary heavy blade powers.
Or perhaps we'll see some version of 3e's Weapon Finesse feat.
This is what i think the barbarian ought to be.
I'm pretty sure the Barbarian will be a Defender (Primal), he's always been meaty.
I wouldn't hold your breath for that "ranged defender", KA.
A fighter can already mark an enemy with a ranged attack. There's just the need for a couple of encounter or daily powers for the fighter to do something more with ranged attacks.
Or perhaps we'll see some version of 3e's Weapon Finesse feat.
I wouldn't be surprised if we do, especially if we get Dex-based fighters. The ability to use Dex for basic melee attacks would be right handy... particularly for a fighter whose Dex>Str.
On the other hand, given the way powers are built, I doubt there'll be a feat that lets you sub in Dex for Str in melee powers. My money's on it just applying to basic attacks.
Dex-primary fighter starting with Dex 18 = Lightly Armoured (Non-Swordmage) Defender?