Provided that it's a year before it's actual design and still capable of being changed, the bar under the D&D border, it says: Player's Handbook - Arcane, Divine and Primal Heroes. Looks like Ki and Shadow gets the shove next year, but that's just one book a year away. Any thoughts?
Now, throw in any amount of magic and you get countless more options.
Bel
So:
-Ninja are basically covered by Rogue.
-Samurai are basically Fighters, but I could easily see them getting their own class, with Iaido based things. It's not impossible to roll a "samurai" now, but the flavor is off in a lot of cases.
-A dedicated "archer" class that differentiates from the Ranger Archer would be nice.
-A "Taskmaster" class that uses Whips/Chains would make a nice Controller.
-A class entirely dedicated to using shields in new and interesting ways would be cool.
-The obvious example would be a Monk, but I hear a lot of people talking about a Ki or Chi power source that's apparently either going to be separate from Martial, or people are whining as loud as possible for it to be separate.
Most of the other classes that I've always thought as "Martial" (because they're in melee making attacks, yes I realize that it's a flawed conception) would be covered under another origin anyway, like Spellblades or whatever.
-Swashbuckler could be a Dex-based Martial Controller.
After all, PHB1 has:
* 2 Divine
* 2 Arcane
* 4 Martial
PHB2 (Divine, Arcane, Primal):
* 4 Primal
* 2 Divine
* 2 Arcane
PHB3 (Shadow, Ki, Psionic):
* 4 Psionic
* 2 Ki
* 2 Shadow
PHB4 (Psionic, Shadow, Elemental):
* 4 Elemental
* 2 Ki
* 2 Shadow
Now I was prepared to say that WotC could use its past classes in extra books, however having a quick look at them I don't think there's really any unique material after these 4 PHBs. Here's my thoughts on a few:
* Beguiler - Multi-classed rogue or mutli-classed wizard.
* Dragon Shaman, Dragon Adept, Binder - Warlock with new pacts.
* Warblade, Swordsage, Samurai, Crusader - Fighter with new powers and feats from Martial Power and Dragon articles.
* Hexblade, Duskblade - Swordmage
* Factotum - Simply unlikely.
* Shugenja, Healer, Favored Soul - Cleric
* Soulborns, Incarnate - Artificer
* Knight - Paladin
* Ninja - Rogue
* Swashbuckler, Scout - Ranger
* Truenamer - Sorcerer
* Wu Jen, Warmage - Wizard
I saw 3 other classes unmentioned but they're the KI and Shadow power sources. The only truly unique 2 seemed to be Archivist (Divine) and Spellthief (Arcane). So its possible I have no clue and there'll be plenty of other new classes that are unique, in PHBs5-10.
Personally I think a power source book means that power source is finished, so if we do get a Spellthief it will either be in Dragon or a setting book. As such I expect to see the Divine Power book in the second half of 2009. I'm guessing WotC will leave the Primal power book for 2010 so that they can sell 2 power books each year.
Arcane Controller
Arcane Defender
Arcane Leader
Arcane Striker
Divine Controller
Divine Defender
Divine Leader
Divine Striker
Elemental Controller
Elemental Defender
Elemental Leader
Elemental Striker
Ki Controller
Ki Defender
Ki Leader
Ki Striker
Martial Controller*
Martial Defender
Martial Leader
Martial Striker
Primal Controller
Primal Defender
Primal Leader
Primal Striker
Psionic Controller
Psionic Defender
Psionic Leader
Psionic Striker
Shadow Controller
Shadow Defender
Shadow Leader
Shadow Striker
There are thirty-two possibilities pending any more power source announcements. From that, you can't easily cross any out (even Martial Controller, though highly unlikely, might surprise us) given that there are infinite possibilities.
We see precedence in that we have two martial strikers in the PHB 1 that both have different methods of attacking. Rogues have Sneak Attack; Rangers have Archery and Two-Bladed Fighting.
Every Striker then may draw upon that idea. A Psionic "Ranger" emulating a TWF Soul Knife.
And I dare say that WotC will not disappoint in all the ideas that are going to be flowing from every orifice (both good and bad) for character diversity.
The Sky's the limit.
We may have some power sources with only 2-3 classes while we get 6+ in others. I suspect that a splatbook for a power source won't come out until we've gotten at least 3 classes for a power source though.
Also there's really no need for a ton of base classes when with the right addition of powers we can get different builds to fill in concepts, as well as paragon path options. After all the Kensai was once a base class but is now a paragon path, and not one shunted off into an OA book.
Yes, there will probably not be many other martial classes. I'm having problems coming up with what more you could want, though. You got your classic fighter, sword and board or 2HW. You got your finesse fighter with the rogue. You have your archer/TWF with the ranger. Then there's the drill sergeant "boss everyone around" class with the Warlord. Without getting into specifics, those cover just about everything. Everything else can be filled in with different powers, fluff, and paragon paths.
Now, throw in any amount of magic and you get countless more options.
I'm not thrilled with having to choose a class to use the weapons I want. What if I want a 2w defender? Or use a 2h striker? A ranger who prefers spears? A fighter who wants to focus on archery? I like 4e overall, but this bothers me a bit.
A fighter focusing on archery doesn't make as much sense though as the role of a fighter class is being in melee.
In 4e you have to break the idea of tieing concept terms to class terms. The classes are designed to be distinct and if you want to do archery type stuff you play an archery ranger. If your concept has him wearing heavier armor than take the feats to let him wear it. Just because your character sheet class says 'ranger' doesn't mean your character has to look and act like Legolas or Aragorn. Nor does a fighter neccessarily have to run around in heavy armor or act like Conan.
I'm not thrilled with having to choose a class to use the weapons I want. What if I want a 2w defender? Or use a 2h striker? A ranger who prefers spears? A fighter who wants to focus on archery? I like 4e overall, but this bothers me a bit.
4e doesn't focus too much on fluff as far as the martial classes are concerned. Most of those options can be accounted for by taking the class who is focused that way offensively and taking the skill training/armor proficiencies you need to look like the other class. I mean Ranger is pretty much "Take this if you're an archer or a Drizzt." Other options you can't just make up for this way might be presented in something like Martial Power, I'd hope.
These options don't currently exist. I'm banking on new feats and builds in Martial Power.
Also keep in mind even without PHB2 that we'll have 4 arcane classes (Swordmage in FRPG and Artificer in EPG as well as Wizard and Warlock). So there's no hard and fast rule about 4 classes to a power source, nor is there any guarantee or plan for filling all four roles for every power source.
We may have some power sources with only 2-3 classes while we get 6+ in others. I suspect that a splatbook for a power source won't come out until we've gotten at least 3 classes for a power source though.
Also there's really no need for a ton of base classes when with the right addition of powers we can get different builds to fill in concepts, as well as paragon path options. After all the Kensai was once a base class but is now a paragon path, and not one shunted off into an OA book.
Actually, based off of the fact that Arcane Power is coming out before the Artificer is officially released, I think it is safe to say that the power books won't cover classes from campaign setting books. So I'm thinking that every power source will have 4 PHB classes and can have any amount of campaign setting classes.
Actually, based off of the fact that Arcane Power is coming out before the Artificer is officially released, I think it is safe to say that the power books won't cover classes from campaign setting books. So I'm thinking that every power source will have 4 PHB classes and can have any amount of campaign setting classes.
Ranadiel, I really think a lot of people are getting way too hung up upon how many classes will be in each power source. (And each role, for that matter.) I honestly believe, and to an extent hope, that this is not the strategy being used by Design & Development, and AFAIK, there's been no real evidence that it is. I'd much rather classes were created with an eye towards usefulness and traction rather than meeting arbitrary power source and role quotas.
The Artificer's beta form is already online, ten months before the soonest possible print publication in the as-yet-unannounced Eberron Player's Guide. It seems highly possible to me that the Artificer's final version will be complete long before that point, and that resources for the Artificer might very well be included in Arcane Power, even if it is released a couple months ahead of EPG. I want Arcane Power to support the Artificer, just like I want it to support the Swordmage!
Ranadiel, I really think a lot of people are getting way too hung up upon how many classes will be in each power source. (And each role, for that matter.) I honestly believe, and to an extent hope, that this is not the strategy being used by Design & Development, and AFAIK, there's been no real evidence that it is. I'd much rather classes were created with an eye towards usefulness and traction rather than meeting arbitrary power source and role quotas.
The Artificer's beta form is already online, ten months before the soonest possible print publication in the as-yet-unannounced Eberron Player's Guide. It seems highly possible to me that the Artificer's final version will be complete long before that point, and that resources for the Artificer might very well be included in Arcane Power, even if it is released a couple months ahead of EPG. I want Arcane Power to support the Artificer, just like I want it to support the Swordmage!
I should probably alter what I said initially, I don't think there are going to be more then 4 PHB classes in each power source, until all the stated power sources are released. This wouldn't be for creating a quota. It would be to ensure that there are enough classes for a power source to be viable and that they don't focus too heavily on a power source, holding back other power sources in the process(such as having 10 arane classes before they have even released any Ki or Elemental classes).
And the simple fact is, had they wanted to support the Artificer in Arcane Power, they could have released Arcane Power later. The divine power source should be just as ready as the arcane power source post-PHBII, so if they were going to include the artificer then they could have swapped their locations on the release schedule so as to have things make more sense.
I also agree that the PHB II will have 4 Primal (barbarian, druid, shaman and witch), 2 Arcane (bard and sorcerer) and 2 Divine (invoker and theurge).
Just my speculations.
Eh, what else can there really be for Martial characters? Most concepts I can readily think of can be made from one of the Martial classes we already have.
So:
...
Most of the other classes that I've always thought as "Martial" (because they're in melee making attacks, yes I realize that it's a flawed conception) would be covered under another origin anyway, like Spellblades or whatever.
I must point out that you forgot Luchador. Viva lucha libre!
You don't know terror until you're surrounded by a half-dozen high-flyin' kobolds -- in masks!
-Ninja are basically covered by Rogue.
-Samurai are basically Fighters, but I could easily see them getting their own class, with Iaido based things. It's not impossible to roll a "samurai" now, but the flavor is off in a lot of cases.
-A dedicated "archer" class that differentiates from the Ranger Archer would be nice.
-A "Taskmaster" class that uses Whips/Chains would make a nice Controller.
-A class entirely dedicated to using shields in new and interesting ways would be cool.
-The obvious example would be a Monk, but I hear a lot of people talking about a Ki or Chi power source that's apparently either going to be separate from Martial, or people are whining as loud as possible for it to be separate.
Most of the other classes that I've always thought as "Martial" (because they're in melee making attacks, yes I realize that it's a flawed conception) would be covered under another origin anyway, like Spellblades or whatever.
-Swashbuckler could be a Dex-based Martial Controller.
Ki is a confirmed upcoming power source, as it was stated in the PH.
That being the case, it's where I'm guessing closer fits to Samurai (Defender), Ninja (Striker), and Monk (?) would fall.
As for the taskmaster and shieldwielder (Capt. America?), I think they are a little too niche to be classes unto themselves, but feats and powers that build upon those ideas could certainly work.
As for the taskmaster and shieldwielder (Capt. America?), I think they are a little too niche to be classes unto themselves, but feats and powers that build upon those ideas could certainly work.
These are perfect for Paragon Paths.
I should probably alter what I said initially, I don't think there are going to be more then 4 PHB classes in each power source, until all the stated power sources are released. This wouldn't be for creating a quota. It would be to ensure that there are enough classes for a power source to be viable and that they don't focus too heavily on a power source, holding back other power sources in the process(such as having 10 arane classes before they have even released any Ki or Elemental classes).
This is fair, and it doesn't seem too far off base to me. My point was that I want the classes to be natural concepts instead of forced ones, and this seems in line with not "having 10 arcane classes" before they've released any of the other power sources. (There's going to be conceptual overlap between Arcane and others, especially Shadow, Elemental, and Psionic; hopefully though, this overlap will be minimal.)
And the simple fact is, had they wanted to support the Artificer in Arcane Power, they could have released Arcane Power later. The divine power source should be just as ready as the arcane power source post-PHBII, so if they were going to include the artificer then they could have swapped their locations on the release schedule so as to have things make more sense.
This makes sense, but it doesn't necessarily invalidate my previous point. I suppose the only solution is to wait and see (and cross my fingers and pray), because I'd really prefer if the splatbooks did support all the classes in each power source, including campaign specific classes. (IIRC, even the campaign specific books are still going to officially be "core".)
This makes sense, but it doesn't necessarily invalidate my previous point. I suppose the only solution is to wait and see (and cross my fingers and pray), because I'd really prefer if the splatbooks did support all the classes in each power source, including campaign specific classes. (IIRC, even the campaign specific books are still going to officially be "core".)
Oh don't get me wrong, I want the book to cover campaign guide classes. I love the swordmage, I want every single bit of love for the class that is possible. However I don't think it is likely. At this point though you are right though, we can only wait, see, and hope that I am wrong.
Oh don't get me wrong, I want the book to cover campaign guide classes. I love the swordmage, I want every single bit of love for the class that is possible. However I don't think it is likely. At this point though you are right though, we can only wait, see, and hope that I am wrong.
Optimism, brother! (Or sister!)
Sorta. The light martial character is strictly a stealthy knife-in-the-back type, he can be a classic D&D thief, and assassin or ninja and that's about it. The S&B as defender works fine, but the two-hander can't cover more offense-oriented concepts too well. The archer & TWFer are tied to ranger woodsyness a bit too much for other concepts.
Not covered are reach fighters (while a THF works, really emphasizing reach obviates key fighter features, and, for that matter, the defender role); duelists (no the dagger-and-shuriken addicted rogue doesn't cover it); non-woodsy archers, flourentine fencers, and also just plain more versatile warriors who aren't tied irrevocably to one weapon or style.
The number of concepts you can do is prettymuch limitted to the available classes & builds. And, that's a selling point for future books. I don't expect WotC to stop publishing new classes for this or that obscure concept until they're ready to do 5th ed.
IMO, the gladiator will be favored because the templar is too limited as a PC.
We will see...
That is, as time as proven over and over again, a lie.
In 1E, we never actually expected anything else.
In 2E, we never expected 3E.
In 3E, we never expected a 3.5.
In 3.5, we never expected a PHB2.
Then it happened.
Kinda makes that 3.5 PHB feel a little dumb for not having a 1 at the end of it, doesn't it?
I'm just sad Kalashtar and Psi didn't make it to PH2.
I must point out that you forgot Luchador. Viva lucha libre!
You don't know terror until you're surrounded by a half-dozen high-flyin' kobolds -- in masks!
Lucha, like Wuxia, is something that should be approached as a campaign theme rather than a specific character class. I don't want anyone telling me my masked mage that throws people around with Thunderwave isn't a real Luchador!
All that is needed for a class is a concept with powers and abilities that support that concept in a way that other versions wouldn't. A Swashbuckler (Martial Striker) would have an entirely different set of exploits than a Rogue. I'm not sure that concepts can be too niche to build a class around in 4th edition, they are just limited by their potential popularity (and the ability to sell books).
I think it would almost work better to try to keep the pool of powers for any one class relatively small. A managable number of powers helps keep balance. The more powers a class has the more likely that a seriously unbalanced combo will get through.
I too believe they are shooting for roughly 4 classes per power source, so I doubt we'll see any further Martial classes, especially as they have stated new classes will not appear in power splats.
I also agree that the PHB II will have 4 Primal (barbarian, druid, shaman and witch), 2 Arcane (bard and sorcerer) and 2 Divine (invoker and theurge).
Just my speculations.
But wouldn't the Wizard, Warlock, Bard, Sorcerer, Artificer and Swordmage all be Arcane?? Maybe they will have 4 per power source core.. but not in total because we already have 6 arcane that we know about (unless Bard and Sorcerer end up something else)
Is there a mechanics reason not to have multiple martial classes of the same role?
All that is needed for a class is a concept with powers and abilities that support that concept in a way that other versions wouldn't. A Swashbuckler (Martial Striker) would have an entirely different set of exploits than a Rogue. I'm not sure that concepts can be too niche to build a class around in 4th edition, they are just limited by their potential popularity (and the ability to sell books).
I think it would almost work better to try to keep the pool of powers for any one class relatively small. A managable number of powers helps keep balance. The more powers a class has the more likely that a seriously unbalanced combo will get through.
Ranger and Rogue are both martial characters in the same role... so i am guessing it is fine.
But wouldn't the Wizard, Warlock, Bard, Sorcerer, Artificer and Swordmage all be Arcane?? Maybe they will have 4 per power source core.. but not in total because we already have 6 arcane that we know about
Exactomundo.
Martial Power Cards
A D&D Accessory
Players using Martial Power Cards don't need to crack open a rulebook every time they swing a sword - all the crucial information is right in front of their eyes.
Each and every power appearing in the Martial Power sourcebook has its own card. Simply select the cards for the powers your character is using and you're ready to play!
Each deck of 100 cards includes all the powers from Martial Power for one of the four classes features in the book - fighter, ranger, rogue, and warlord - plus a few blank cards for players to use for other powers.
The display box includes eight decks of power cards: two apiece for the fighter, ranger, rogue, and the warlord.
$9.99
January 20, 2009
This thread is a report of WotC's Spring 2009 Catalog. It includes "Martial Power Cards", cards for each power in the Martial Power book, implying that said book will have nearly 100 new powers for each martial class!
:D Also, for your perusal:
Player's Handbook 2
A D&D Supplement by Rob Heinsoo and Mike Mearls
Player's Handbook 2 expands the range of options available to D&D players with new classes, races, powers, and other material.
This book builds on the array of classes and races presented in the first Player's Handbook, adding both old favorites and new, never-before-seen options to the game.
The book adds a new power source for 4th Edition D&D: classes using the new primal power source include the barbarian and the druid.
Key Selling Points
* This book is aimed directly at players, helping them build more exciting and interesting characters.
* The new classes in this book include some long-time favorites of D&D players, such as the barbarian, druid, and sorcerer.
* The book features several new races, including the gnome, the half-orc, and the goliath.
Hardcover, 224 pages, $34.95
March 17, 2009
There's our half-orc!
I'm not thrilled with having to choose a class to use the weapons I want. What if I want a 2w defender?
Fighter with two weapon fighting.
Or use a 2h striker?
Good point. I kind of want a ranger variant that uses a two handed sword. Aragorn tiem nao?
A fighter who wants to focus on archery? I like 4e overall, but this bothers me a bit.
You can mark with anything, including a fireball.
I personally can see Ninja being a Striker and Samurai to possibly be both Defender and Striker depending on the stance he's currently using. However with the asian classes not sure if they will be in a PHB# or if they're going to be in Oriental Adventures (if that's ever released.)
Based on their currently stated design goals, they won't be making an Oriental Adventures book, at least not limiting all of the Ki classes in there. Additionally, I think that it is quite likely that they are going to split the "asian themed" classes so that they aren't only in Ki. For example, I think that it is quite likely that they will put the ninja, assuming they make it a distinct class from the rogue, as a shadow class.
Are they implying in the player's handbook description that druid and barbarian are the only primal power source classes in the book? If so I'm really disappointed, I was looking forward to the idea of Shaman as a primal leader.
Unless I'm overlooking something it is sayikng the exact oppisite because says "classes using the new primal power source include the barbarian and the druid" as opposed to "classes using the new primal power source are the barbarian and the druid". So it seems to me to be saying there is at least one more primal class(likely two more).Are they implying in the player's handbook description that druid and barbarian are the only primal power source classes in the book? If so I'm really disappointed, I was looking forward to the idea of Shaman as a primal leader.
Don't worry, we're pretty sure the Shaman (primal leader) is in there, I'm also speculating that there might be a Witch class (primal controller) as well.
Not covered are reach fighters (while a THF works, really emphasizing reach obviates key fighter features, and, for that matter, the defender role); duelists (no the dagger-and-shuriken addicted rogue doesn't cover it); non-woodsy archers, flourentine fencers, and also just plain more versatile warriors who aren't tied irrevocably to one weapon or style.
As the rapier is a light blade it's quite possible to make a fencer through the rogue. Just take Sly Flourish and Riposte Strike as your at-wills and you've got most of the flavor right there, then go for the more acrobatic utilities. In fact, I think you can make a more swashbuckly character than was ever possible in 3rd.
-The obvious example would be a Monk, but I hear a lot of people talking about a Ki or Chi power source that's apparently either going to be separate from Martial, or people are whining as loud as possible for it to be separate.
Dear Powers that Be,
Please, don't let them create a "Ki" power source. "Ki" is just martial; if people want magical ninja give them shadow power source. I'm really hard to offend, but as a japanese descendant this kinda does. Its a like creating a power source known as La Resistance for French inspired classes. Its just that Theme-Parkesque.
I know I might be fighting a lost battle but hope is the last thing I wanna loose
Dear Powers that Be,
Please, don't let them create a "Ki" power source. "Ki" is just martial; if people want magical ninja give them shadow power source. I'm really hard to offend, but as a japanese descendant this kinda does. Its a like creating a power source known as La Resistance for French inspired classes. Its just that Theme-Parkesque.
I know I might be fighting a lost battle but hope is the last thing I wanna loose
A little late, you lost the battle when the PHB went to the printers. Ki is one of the 8 power sources listed that will cover 90% of the classes that WotC want to make.
If it makes you feel better though, a lot of people are thinking/hoping that it will include incarnum styled classes so it won't simply be an "oriental" power source(as the power source has been described as harnessing the energy of your soul or something to that effect).
A little late, you lost the battle when the PHB went to the printers. Ki is one of the 8 power sources listed that will cover 90% of the classes that WotC want to make.
If it makes you feel better though, a lot of people are thinking/hoping that it will include incarnum styled classes so it won't simply be an "oriental" power source(as the power source has been described as harnessing the energy of your soul or something to that effect).
What he said.
Bel
Is there a mechanics reason not to have multiple martial classes of the same role?
Not really (especially since PH1 has two martial strikers). It's just about having a concept that doesn't overlap a lot with an existing class.
All that is needed for a class is a concept with powers and abilities that support that concept in a way that other versions wouldn't. A Swashbuckler (Martial Striker) would have an entirely different set of exploits than a Rogue.
See, I think a swashbuckler as a striker would overlap too much with Rogue. Swashbuckler as a defender might work well for a non-magical lightly-armored defender type (with either sword and dagger or sword and buckler/empty hand builds).
And I could see Knight as a defender with mounted combat powers. And maybe a non-mystical martial artist. Beyond that, though I'm out of ideas except for things that aren't appropriate to core D&D settings (like firearms based classes) or are only borderline martial (like an alchemical grenadier).
But wouldn't the Wizard, Warlock, Bard, Sorcerer, Artificer and Swordmage all be Arcane?? Maybe they will have 4 per power source core.. but not in total because we already have 6 arcane that we know about (unless Bard and Sorcerer end up something else)
I imagine that's about right. They probably won't go beyond 4 classes per power source in the PHx series (which might not necessarily be one per role), but setting books (and anywhere else new classes show up) could add more. I could see a Duskblade or something like that as the striker cousin to Swordmage for a 7th arcane class, but it's hard for me to think of any ki classes beyond the core three (monk/striker, ninja/striker, and samurai/defender).
One could call it a stretch but with the right set up of powers and feats a warlord could easily turn into a bard or a fighter into a barbarian.
Just give the fighter a "rage stance" and you're halfway there.
I'm not so interested in classes or power sources as I am in the powers and feats that really define the characters. So as for an end to martial characters, so long as someone is thinking up a new martial feat or power to add to a certain level, the martial options will be published and, I would like to think, ongoing.
QFT.
For example, righteous brand and furious smash are at-wills that come from different power sources, yet they both accomplish very similar things and use melee weapons to do so. To the point that nobody could tell me what makes one divine or the other one martial without the fluff.
Anyway, with new powers coming out for existing classes and new classes coming out which will use melee weapons as their real power source (barbarians for example), then I think there will be plenty of opportunities to fill in martial character types that are hard to make right now.
Hell, they already have new powers available for light blade/spear weapon fighters and a new PP for eladrin rogues.
As far as I can tell, power sources are pretty much fluff at this point anyway. No mechanics actually rely on power sources yet, and while different power sources tend to have different themes, there is still plenty of overlap.
For example, righteous brand and furious smash are at-wills that come from different power sources, yet they both accomplish very similar things and use melee weapons to do so. To the point that nobody could tell me what makes one divine or the other one martial without the fluff.
...or could they (DUN DUN DUN!). What if they invent a ritual that repels non-arcane power users, or a Heretic weapon that does more damage to divine characters, or a shadow pocket that gives a bonus to defense to shadow-users?
I think one of the warforged paragon paths requires you to be a martial power sourced class but can't recall (it might be a role instead). So while there is mechanical uses for roles and power sources they're few and limited in scope making power source and role listings needed but not really affecting routine gameplay (just as your class doesn't).
I think one of the warforged paragon paths requires you to be a martial power sourced class but can't recall (it might be a role instead). So while there is mechanical uses for roles and power sources they're few and limited in scope making power source and role listings needed but not really affecting routine gameplay (just as your class doesn't).
Just to clarify, both of the Warforged Paragon Paths require you to be of a specific role not power source.
Also you'll notice that most divine class powers do radiant damage and I don't think any other classes powers use radiant.
Oddly enough, the starlock at-will power is radiant damage.
Oddly enough, the starlock at-will power is radiant damage.
Seems that a few of the star pact powers are radiant. I guess it makes sense if the Far Realm pact-makers are essentially gods so have the divine spark. I think this is another of those 'source bleed' issues. After all by the time elemental power source classes come out we'll have a lot of other power sources with powers that deal with damage from the elements.
Although even star pact warlocks don't seem to focus on channeling divinity or heavy use of radiant damage. This is why the concept of power sources (and roles) shouldn't be a hard-coded mechanic but a meta-mechanic design tool that works as a guideline and to help with grouping and limited gameplay effect.
Seems that a few of the star pact powers are radiant. I guess it makes sense if the Far Realm pact-makers are essentially gods so have the divine spark. I think this is another of those 'source bleed' issues. After all by the time elemental power source classes come out we'll have a lot of other power sources with powers that deal with damage from the elements.
Although even star pact warlocks don't seem to focus on channeling divinity or heavy use of radiant damage. This is why the concept of power sources (and roles) shouldn't be a hard-coded mechanic but a meta-mechanic design tool that works as a guideline and to help with grouping and limited gameplay effect.
I've highlighted the part I disagree with, Grazel, although I think you and I are of a similar opinion overall.
I hate thinking of damage types as somehow innately connected to power source; Starlocks deal radiant damage because they deal radiant damage, not because of some half-ridiculous flavour-connection to the gods.
Yes, certain power sources lend themselves toward one energy-type or another. (Psionics, for example, will probably have an abundance of psychic-damage powers; Divine powers often deal radiant-damage; Elemental classes will probably deal lots of fire-, cold-, and lightning-damage.) However, no power source should be limited in the types of damage it can deal, and no power should have to "explain" why it deals a particular type of damage; a Psionic power that deals fire damage is not an Elemental power, nor is an Arcane power that deals psychic damage a Psionic power.
'Source bleed' is BS, IMO.
See, I think a swashbuckler as a striker would overlap too much with Rogue. Swashbuckler as a defender might work well for a non-magical lightly-armored defender type (with either sword and dagger or sword and buckler/empty hand builds).
I would like to see the Swashbuckler as a Controller using speed and a skirmish ability to engage mulitple foes at once
I've highlighted the part I disagree with, Grazel, although I think you and I are of a similar opinion overall.
I hate thinking of damage types as somehow innately connected to power source; Starlocks deal radiant damage because they deal radiant damage, not because of some half-ridiculous flavour-connection to the gods.
Yes, certain power sources lend themselves toward one energy-type or another. (Psionics, for example, will probably have an abundance of psychic-damage powers; Divine powers often deal radiant-damage; Elemental classes will probably deal lots of fire-, cold-, and lightning-damage.) However, no power source should be limited in the types of damage it can deal, and no power should have to "explain" why it deals a particular type of damage; a Psionic power that deals fire damage is not an Elemental power, nor is an Arcane power that deals psychic damage a Psionic power.
'Source bleed' is BS, IMO.
I agree and that's why I'm saying you can't clearly define a power source, at least not by the damage types. The reason the radiant damage sounds odd on any warlock (note that ANY warlock could take those powers and do radiant damage) is that radiant has been described as raw divine energy from the gods. Since the star pact powers come from something in the Far Realm and does radiant damage we assume that something is a 'god' or something of 'divine' power.
That's why the power sources are a tricky mechanic to work with because there's no true clear line between them. Paladins are divine but have many 'martial' based powers often with extra radiant damage. Some martial paragon paths have powers that channel arcane or primal energies but are still martial. That's why power sources should be seen more as a design rule than a game mechanic. Roles are the same way since most classes 'bleed' over into other roles besides their primary with certain powers, especially once they get to the paragon paths.
I agree and that's why I'm saying you can't clearly define a power source, at least not by the damage types. The reason the radiant damage sounds odd on any warlock (note that ANY warlock could take those powers and do radiant damage) is that radiant has been described as raw divine energy from the gods. Since the star pact powers come from something in the Far Realm and does radiant damage we assume that something is a 'god' or something of 'divine' power.
That's why the power sources are a tricky mechanic to work with because there's no true clear line between them. Paladins are divine but have many 'martial' based powers often with extra radiant damage. Some martial paragon paths have powers that channel arcane or primal energies but are still martial. That's why power sources should be seen more as a design rule than a game mechanic. Roles are the same way since most classes 'bleed' over into other roles besides their primary with certain powers, especially once they get to the paragon paths.
I don't know if what you say is official, but as far as I'm concerned, 'radiant damage' is damage from dazzling magical light, whether it comes from the gods (Divine power source), pacts with otherworldly nightmare entities (Arcane power source), or my ass (Colorektal power source?).
There doesn't need to be any mechanical basis for power sources. Rules that do use power source can be based upon the arbitrarily-drawn flavour lines.
(I don't mean to sound hostile, man; this point just bugs me.)
Eg. str/cha based warrior who takes advantage of war cries/feints to disorient enemy. marshall/knight.
eg. dex based swashbuclker fighter with a fast, moving fighting style
eg. a str/int/wis dedicated weapon master. i have always wanted this class but it was never an option. a pc with a strong sword arm but also a keen intellect or focused wisdom (int and wis could be different build paths). he specializes in weapons like the fighter but gains benefits from intelligence and (more) benefits from wisdom. he would memorize and practice complex techniques with his weapons (any melee weapon, not just small wimpy ones). int or wis would be main stat, strength secondary. this would be the archetypal wandering lone swordsman, stout and strong, but he has faced and beaten many more physically imposing enemies with his strong set of techniques. kind of like a warlord who improves his own tactics, not his allies. he is not as frilly as a swashy, no supernatural power, just battle mettle.
eg. dedicated archer class
eg. maybe some adventurer/fortune finder/ skilled martial class if it can be differentiated from the rogue. might not have a place, but could be a class able to cheat death by pure favour of the goddess/god of luck, spirit etc. can adapt to any situation.
They need a lot more martial heroes for people who want pcs who are highly skilled without supernatural or magical power.
I have feeling we're done with Martial. It seems they want about 4 classes per source – the PHB II will most likely contain 4 primal classes (barbarian, druid, shaman, witch…?), 2 arcane (bard and sorcerer) and 2 divine (invoker/inquisitor and theurge…?), thus granting every power source 4 classes, not counting campaign specific (artificer/swordmage etc).
They need a lot more martial heroes for people who want pcs who are highly skilled without supernatural or magical power.
Eg. str/cha based warrior who takes advantage of war cries/feints to disorient enemy. marshall/knight.
eg. dex based swashbuclker fighter with a fast, moving fighting style
eg. a str/int/wis dedicated weapon master. i have always wanted this class but it was never an option. a pc with a strong sword arm but also a keen intellect or focused wisdom (int and wis could be different build paths). he specializes in weapons like the fighter but gains benefits from intelligence and (more) benefits from wisdom. he would memorize and practice complex techniques with his weapons (any melee weapon, not just small wimpy ones). int or wis would be main stat, strength secondary. this would be the archetypal wandering lone swordsman, stout and strong, but he has faced and beaten many more physically imposing enemies with his strong set of techniques. kind of like a warlord who improves his own tactics, not his allies. he is not as frilly as a swashy, no supernatural power, just battle mettle.
eg. dedicated archer class
eg. maybe some adventurer/fortune finder/ skilled martial class if it can be differentiated from the rogue. might not have a place, but could be a class able to cheat death by pure favour of the goddess/god of luck, spirit etc. can adapt to any situation.
-Warlord
-Rogue
-Umm I guess Fighter/Kensai with specific fluff
-You have 50% of of one with the Ranger and I think that works fine
-those are basically haflings
They need a lot more martial heroes for people who want pcs who are highly skilled without supernatural or magical power.
Eg. str/cha based warrior who takes advantage of war cries/feints to disorient enemy. marshall/knight.
eg. dex based swashbuclker fighter with a fast, moving fighting style
eg. a str/int/wis dedicated weapon master. i have always wanted this class but it was never an option. a pc with a strong sword arm but also a keen intellect or focused wisdom (int and wis could be different build paths). he specializes in weapons like the fighter but gains benefits from intelligence and (more) benefits from wisdom. he would memorize and practice complex techniques with his weapons (any melee weapon, not just small wimpy ones). int or wis would be main stat, strength secondary. this would be the archetypal wandering lone swordsman, stout and strong, but he has faced and beaten many more physically imposing enemies with his strong set of techniques. kind of like a warlord who improves his own tactics, not his allies. he is not as frilly as a swashy, no supernatural power, just battle mettle.
eg. dedicated archer class
eg. maybe some adventurer/fortune finder/ skilled martial class if it can be differentiated from the rogue. might not have a place, but could be a class able to cheat death by pure favour of the goddess/god of luck, spirit etc. can adapt to any situation.
I think Ranadiel is right, those roles are covered by the Warlord, Rogue, Fighter and Ranger already. Additionally, we've been told to expect additional builds in Martial Power. From that book I expect to see Dex/Int Rogues, as well as other kinds of martial builds that essentially cover all of the concepts you've presented. Except that last one, which sounds a heck of a lot more like a divine class to me anyway.
1.) They're unique enough they don't feel like a rehashed existing Class
2.) They don't make another class within the same role obsolete
3.) They keep campaign specific classes (and races for that matter) out of the core books and in campaign specific books.
3.) They keep campaign specific classes (and races for that matter) out of the core books and in campaign specific books.
Every race is campaign specific. Every game is unique, and most DM's don't even use a campaign and pick and choose what races they wish to include. The campaign specific race issue is BS, and unless a class is overtly tied (Such as most old prestige classes) the same is true for classes.
What I don't want is for classes and races to built overtly tied to any campaign setting to the point it takes extreme effort and re flavoring to separate them from such. I also don't want another round of, ignoring the DMs that actually like monstrous races to be allowed some of the PC spotlight, where sentient races are at war because, well their sentient races and such being's come into conflict, like in our world, and not in some retarded, this race is shirts, you can only be skins.
Encourage DM's to run their own games and pick and choose the races they want, and encourage players to be more accepting of such, and leave all options open so that each game can be individual without other play styles being hosed because someone has some elitist concept of what classes or races should be "core" and what shouldn't.
Every player and every DM is different and is going to have different views of such, it is not only asking for trouble in my opinion to limit things in such a way, but is in my opinion wrong because it's favoring one play style over the other and telling others, their way just isn't worthy of support.
The truth is, when people ask for this stuff, they are either too lazy or don't have enough of a backbone to tell their player's, not in my campaign, because it is your campaign. No one actually runs Ebberon, or Forgotten Realms, or Dark Sun. They run Ebberon as they envision it, same with the others, it's unique from every other Ebberon game, heck some games might even include races that aren't typically in the setting, or exclude/replace races with others.
That is how it should be.
I say more elitism, no more, my way, or the high way. I say make things open to everyone, and they agree with me.
That's why everything is "core" now, because they are trying to drive that point home. Just because something is in a campaign setting book doesn't make it bad, or any less usable than any other book.
There is no real main campaign setting. There's points of light, which means whole new races and classes can be around every corner, same with whole new cultures of sentient races, be they chivalrous hobgoblins, to entirely new races, or classes, like the tribal shaman. There's no reason not to add something to points of light, other than it getting to crowded, and who's allowed in and who goes, should be the individual DM's choice.
I guess what I'm saying is, there shouldn't be campaign specific races or classes, but classes and races that work well in a particular campaign, but work just as fine in others. I believe that is their intent, and I believe the game is better for it. I'll be happy when some of this "campaign" "specific" stuff is included in other books so it can drive the point home that there IS NO SUCH THING!
I think what I don't want is some race or class that exsisted in prior edition WOTCs modules or related novels to be included as "generic" to appease some fan-base. I'd rather see those racial variants in the Campaign book it's from in a section on how to convert the Halfing to a Dark Sun Halfing or whatever or have Harpers as a Paragon class rather then show up as a generic class. It more the physical space they take up in the book (that can used for more paths or powers or equipment) then saying "no I don't want that in my world".
Does the Martial Power sourcebook mean we've seen all the martial classes?
No. As new, compelling martial classes are created, they will continue to be published where appropriate.
GenCon Friday
Bel
I guess I agree with you. And truthfully I let my players run with pretty much anything, especially in 4E. I've even come to terms with the Warforge as a race since I never ran Eberron.:D
I think what I don't want is some race or class that exsisted in prior edition WOTCs modules or related novels to be included as "generic" to appease some fan-base. I'd rather see those racial variants in the Campaign book it's from in a section on how to convert the Halfing to a Dark Sun Halfing or whatever or have Harpers as a Paragon class rather then show up as a generic class. It more the physical space they take up in the book (that can used for more paths or powers or equipment) then saying "no I don't want that in my world".
I think you will find fourth much more accommodating than most in this respect. Where appropriate there will like be additions or substitutions to various classes or races to add different flavors where appropriate. Kind of like how you can use alchemy in place of ritual casting, or other specific builds.
That said I'd prefer Athasian halfling to the current ones, I've never bought into the the whole, "I'm short... and... um... I'm lucky yeah that's it, since uh... being short is all I really truly have for flavor, and um, well really I need a boost of some sort..." Luck is not a racial trait, it's ridiculous, it's an ability you give something when you can't think of anything else worthwhile to give them.
I'm looking forward to options within classes and races, where some powers can be switched with others, and entire new build options come out, as well as flavorful feats.
I hope the days are gone where your worry is even a possibility, though... to be honest the drow specific warlock build scares me a bit. I'm sorry but they could have defined it in so many ways that weren't drow specific, or that required drow as part of it.
to be honest the drow specific warlock build scares me a bit. I'm sorry but they could have defined it in so many ways that weren't drow specific, or that required drow as part of it.
It isn't a drow specific warlock build. The drow just were the original users of it, sort of how tieflings are the prototypical infernal pacters(well the humans who became tieflings). They might have developed that style of the pact, but they are hardly the only ones who practice it.
The dark pact was created by the drow (at least in FR) and spread to others. It's just a bit of flavor to the pact. It'd take a dark race like the drow to create something like that but like most things arcane once someone's done it others will start doing it.
So far the only race-specific class-type stuff they've put out so far is a few race-specific paragon paths (and a region-specific one in FR that could be adjusted easily for another campaign) which make sense. I doubt they'd ever have a build or base class tied to a race requirement, just some race will be a better 'natural fit' for a build, class, pact, etc.
From the GenCon Friday article.
GenCon Friday
Bel
Quoted from above, because no one responded to it; this is directly relevant to the OP.
Quoted from above, because no one responded to it; this is directly relevant to the OP.
I wasn't surprised to see that. If the devs have a great idea for, say, a martial controller class, they're not going to sit on it for four years until all the sources are filled up. Though I think we're more likely to see new martial classes in campaign settings rather than PHBs.
Given that the two upcoming campaign classes (swordmage and artificer) will be arcane, I think the next campaign class will be different. For example, the campaign class for Planescape, if that's released, would have to be divine.
I see no mention of a dark-pact drow warlock?
Hello. Can someone tell me what the dark-pact drow warlock is please? I have the PHB and the FRCS supplement (which details drow), and I would like to roll a drow for the LFR campaign.
I see no mention of a dark-pact drow warlock?
I know we talked about that for a short time, but that seems extremely off topic to suddenly bring up.However to answer your question, it is in the currently unreleased FRPG.