My vote is for the Necromancer, for three reasons.
First and foremost, because they spoiled the two most iconic classes of the book in the months before it (Monk is undisputed; Barbarian... well, you could argue that maybe the Druid or the Bard could take that title, but I think it's fair to say Barbarians were one of the most expected classes since PHB1).
Second, because a Necromancer playtest would prove once and for all that PHB4 will be the Shadow book (thus burying Elementals for yet another year...)
Third, because I want to see Wizard's take on the class. Which role? (I've seen arguments trying to place the Necro in all of them). Will it be Summon-focused, or is this too much hastle? What is it's main attribute? How is it going to be different from the Wizard?
So... opinions? And do somebody have any information about when (and whether) is this playtest showing up? I don't expect it before June, but... what the hell... one can always hope.
I'd also love to have the new book be Shadow/Elemental/Martial. WotC may say they are done with Martial, but I won't believe it. Even if it doesn't add the fabled martial controller. Just would be nice too revist it, instead of the already explosive Divine powersource.
Anyway I would like to see a class from whatever the new source is, not something from an existing source.
I would like to see a renamed Shadow Dancer class, the Necromancer, Illusionist, and most likely a new class for the Shadow power source that is more physical than the other three in a Defender Role.
I don't see Elemental coming up for PHB4, but Wizard could break the mold and introduce the power source in a different product. Perhaps in the next setting or another product.
The three power source I see coming is all magic for the PHB4, Shadow, perhaps the Soulknife for Psionic, and one of the specialized classes for Arcane, perhaps the Transmuter or Enchanter.
My money's on the Necromancer since it's a high in demand class.
As long as they can avoid Shadow ending up seeming like the "evil" power source. I'd much rather they explore ideas of illusion, mystery, souls, darkness (with an emphasis on Dark is not Evil), distorted reflections of reality and suchlike, rather than death/undeath and making it a ghetto for traditionally evil classes. If the Shadow classes just end up being assassin, necromancer and blackguard, I'll be very disappointed.
My money's on the Necromancer since it's a high in demand class.
As long as they can avoid Shadow ending up seeming like the "evil" power source. I'd much rather they explore ideas of illusion, mystery, souls, darkness (with an emphasis on Dark is not Evil), distorted reflections of reality and suchlike, rather than death/undeath and making it a ghetto for traditionally evil classes. If the Shadow classes just end up being assassin, necromancer and blackguard, I'll be very disappointed.
And I'd be disappointed if there wasn't mention of death and undeath. Shadow is the source of both. That being said, I doubt there'll be a pure Necromancer class, but that just comes from my perspective. I'd love one, but I can only wonder what it can bring to the table that the current classes are unable.
Because maybe if we all say it, it will become true.
That would seem to bring up shadow source, which is traditionally evil, or dark.
However not all men in black were bad guys.
Paladin from "Have Gun will Travel"
Batman
Soloman Kane by Robert E. Howard
Men in Black with Will Smith
to name a few examples.
"This is the witness that the light has come into the world, but the world would not receive the light. For men loved darkness, because their deeds were evil."
So what is shadow? Is it parallel with the human soul? Every person cast a shadow per light shining on them. Or is shadow something more natural? Or perhaps preternatural?
Perhaps they will explore, and research into ways to create heroic archtypes using a shadow source, or maybe anti-hero that are not per say evil, or good, but somewhere inbetween.
Necromancer should be the first to be previewed.
I'd like to see a new magic-user class that is like the old D&D Wizard class. Something with a flexible choice of spells, chosen ahead of time.
Make the spells weak so as to be balanced.
Make them take a extra turn to cast so as to be balanced.
Give them a ton of rituals so as to be balanced.
Call'em Conjuror, Mage, Magic-user, or Vancian.
I wasn't going to speak up on this... but I got an idea.
I'd like to see a new magic-user class that is like the old D&D Wizard class. Something with a flexible choice of spells, chosen ahead of time.
Make the spells weak so as to be balanced.
Make them take a extra turn to cast so as to be balanced.
Give them a ton of rituals so as to be balanced.
Call'em Conjuror, Mage, Magic-user, or Vancian.
They already have a class for this archetype. It's called ''Wizard''. It's in the first PHB.
Seriously, though, this is exactly what the Spellbook class feature is all about!
However, I would like to see the Hexblade. As a defender (just my guess) the Hexblade could hold enemies in place and cause all kinds of penalties or effects on those that try to harm his allies.
I would also like to see another shadow striker like, maybe, a Ghostwalker.
Ghostwalker.
Already a monk paragon path.
I liked the Ghostwalker who could travel through shadows and use fear to shake up his opponents. A Ghostwalker could be someone who passed into the Shadowfell upon their death but was restored to life. However, they left part of themselves there and brought back a shadowy darkness within themselves. They could move through the Shadowfell as a shortcut to the material world. They could distract or disorient their foes with shadow images. They could strike fear into their enemies hearts and cause them penalties to attack or defense. As a twist on extra striker damage maybe they could gain temporary hit points when they hit an enemy. This would make them more durable than most strikers, but might be too vampiric feeling.
Dunno. My two cents.
I'd like to see the Shadowcaster...
You know, I never quite got the shadowcaster. It felt to me like a wizard with the serial numbers filed off. A studier of secret knowledge. Yay.
It was a yet another mechanic within the D20 sphere. It wasn't a very good class, to boot. Some liked it, though, for the fluff more than the rules.
Yeah, and I'm asking about the fluff. I don't recall it very well, but it seemed like a philosophy revolving around the Shadowfell that granted you powers. Didn't make much sense to me, but I don't remember it well.
Ghostwalker may be a monk paragon path, but I'd like to see it as its own class with nothing to do with monks ala the Ghostwalker novel by Erik DeBie. (There are numerous "Avenger" paragon paths that have nothing to do with the class itself.)
I liked the Ghostwalker who could travel through shadows and use fear to shake up his opponents. A Ghostwalker could be someone who passed into the Shadowfell upon their death but was restored to life. However, they left part of themselves there and brought back a shadowy darkness within themselves. They could move through the Shadowfell as a shortcut to the material world. They could distract or disorient their foes with shadow images. They could strike fear into their enemies hearts and cause them penalties to attack or defense. As a twist on extra striker damage maybe they could gain temporary hit points when they hit an enemy. This would make them more durable than most strikers, but might be too vampiric feeling.
Dunno. My two cents.
That sounds exactly like a Revenant Assassin, actually. All the things you mentioned, Assassins can already do (even the vampiric thing).
A light armour defender with an AC boosting class feature 'Armour of cynicism', maybe?
He could be based on charisma... and the marking punishment could be simply refusing to believe that an enemy could have possibly got past him. SO... maybe a low damage but with a high pull back towards, or a punishment that triggers on moving away from him, rather than attacking an ally?
Sure, the Necromancer is gonna have a "dark" side, but it isn't gonna overtake the whole book. All that Dark Hero, gritty feel stuff is material for a different game. This, D&D, is Heroic Fantasy. If that isn't was someone wants, play a different game.
Dude, the Anti-Hero stuff isn't gonna be an overall theme, not in a full D&D book. The Assassin is in DDi to avoid having that in a book, and there are "dark" themes in a class, race or something in each book (Warlock in PHB, Half Orc in PHB2 and so on).
Sure, the Necromancer is gonna have a "dark" side, but it isn't gonna overtake the whole book. All that Dark Hero, gritty feel stuff is material for a different game. This, D&D, is Heroic Fantasy. If that isn't was someone wants, play a different game.
I have to disagree, there is plenty of room for anti-heros, and multiple ways to do it.
It's the reason I want the shadow defender to be the hexblade. They have dark powers thrust upon them, and are often outcasts because of the bad luck that follows them. They learn to harness this. THey are by no means the knight in shinning armor, but they also aren't your typical anti-hero they are something in between.
Also almost every class can play the anti-hero, which is why I agree that the whole book should not center around then concept of anti-heros, however. If they are doing anti-hero stuff it needs to be about exploring the different ways to be a non traditional hero. I'd love to see a shadow class that was quite unmistakablly a good guy, not sure what it would be but I'd love for them to break type this much.
In the same way that Dark and shadow=/= evil, Good=/= nice. I think there's certainly room for more tragic concepts, which fit into my purview as anti-heroic.
D&D is built to model heroic fantasy, yeah... But if you think back to Fantasy roots, Hercules, Gilgamesh, and Achilles, they are all anti-heroes, rather than straight up heroes. Classes with either their worldview tainted by the evil, or perhaps classes who do have their power unceremoniously and unfortunately thrust upon them rather than explicitly choosing life as an adventurer (Even sorcerors, who are the most 'born with power' of the bunch so far, actually consciously choose to manifest and exemplify their natural gifts, much like somebody who has a naturally stronger figure might work out physically...)could provide an interesting angle, and could even be the Shadow power sources defining 'schtick'.
Anti-heroes in modern imagination are often the dark, brooding, ends justify means Punisher sorts, but thats not always true.
Other Anti-heroes archetypes are the Loser (Arthur Dent and sorts), the Byronic hero (Heathcliffe), or even those simple 'good isn't really that nice' sorts, like Weatherwax in Discworld. There's a lot of precendence for them in generic heroic fantasy, and... while they can easily be illustrated by the current ideas (My current Warden, rather than choosing to protect the earth, is rather bullied into it by the world around him. Warlocks, also, can fit an interesting 'didn't know what they were getting into niche' and a lot comes from the player's background too.) I think more explicit in design could be fun too... (Much the same as how a Cleric of Moradin could be all into runes and sorts, but that doesn't make the Runepriest any less awesome.)
If that isn't anti-hero or dark-hero in the making, then I don't know what is. Sure, you could be a very good character who made a dark bargain in the past and has dark powers, but it's still that dark element, and Shadow's definitely grittier than other Power Sources.
So we reach an impasse here: either thaX is right, and thus Shadow will entirely be in Dragon magazine. In this case, we'll be getting Elemental next year, which would sort of make sense, considering there was a passing mention of multiple power sources coming next year.
Or else thaX is wrong, and grittiness isn't going to be just in Eberron and Dark Sun and Gamma World whatever other dark and gritty Campaign Settings and Genre Games and non-D&D games that exist or will exist in the near future, but will be part of Points of Light and all D&D settings as well.
The most recent Assassin article explained that all Shadow classes will trade a part of their soul for Shadow powers, much like the Assassin.
If that isn't anti-hero or dark-hero in the making, then I don't know what is. Sure, you could be a very good character who made a dark bargain in the past and has dark powers, but it's still that dark element, and Shadow's definitely grittier than other Power Sources.
This isn't 3e where you have 'inherently evil negative energy'. It's just a power source, and there's absolutely no reason that a Shadow character has to be an anti-hero or dark hero.
This is my only real beef with the Shadow power source, is knowing how many people won't be able to let go of that stupid assumption and think that they have to either be evil, or some brooding emo, to use the Shadow source.
Official word is that -all- Shadow classes trade a bit of their soul for Shadow.
Please don't get me wrong Salla. I'm not saying ANYTHING about inherently evil negative energy. Shadow characters -can- be good. But the dark powers they wield is a relationship that they'll have. That's why I mentioned that they could be happy-go-lucky and good, but they're still dealing with a dark bargain that traded a part of their very essence.
Official word is that -all- Shadow classes trade a bit of their soul for Shadow.
And that's just non-binding fluff, but anyway. Explain to me, please, how this bargain is 'dark', and, in fact, what precisely you mean by 'dark' in this context? It makes no sense to me. 'I can manipulate shadows' only says 'dark' to me in the most literal of senses.
Official word is that -all- Shadow classes trade a bit of their soul for Shadow.
Explain to me, please, how this bargain is 'dark', and, in fact, what precisely you mean by 'dark' in this context? It makes no sense to me. 'I can manipulate shadows' only says 'dark' to me in the most literal of senses.
Well, it's "dark" in the same way that a Warlock's pacts are "dark" - it's a sort-of-bargain with a generally-not-good power source. Instead of the literal "deal with the devil," though, it's more of a "trading part of my soul - a portion of my humanity [or what have you] - for power."
If you can't see why that's commonly considered a rather "dark" trope, I... well, I honestly don't see how you can't.
====================================
I don't think that in any way would preclude Shadow from being in a PH4, though. I certainly hope it doesn't. Heck, if they did (and I'm not saying they should) go with more of an "anti-hero" feel to a PH4, it could be a great way to tie Character Themes (ala Dark Sun) into a core book.
So we reach an impasse here: either thaX is right, and thus Shadow will entirely be in Dragon magazine. In this case, we'll be getting Elemental next year, which would sort of make sense, considering there was a passing mention of multiple power sources coming next year.
Or else thaX is wrong, and grittiness isn't going to be just in Eberron and Dark Sun and Gamma World whatever other dark and gritty Campaign Settings and Genre Games and non-D&D games that exist or will exist in the near future, but will be part of Points of Light and all D&D settings as well.
Oh come now, this one's easy. thaX is always awrong.
Oh come now, this one's easy. thaX is always awrong.
Oh be nice, he has been right before....once.....a year or so ago.....I think. :P
The most recent Assassin article explained that all Shadow classes will trade a part of their soul for Shadow powers, much like the Assassin.
If that isn't anti-hero or dark-hero in the making, then I don't know what is. Sure, you could be a very good character who made a dark bargain in the past and has dark powers, but it's still that dark element, and Shadow's definitely grittier than other Power Sources.
The assassin presents the first look at the shadow power source and hints at the requirements to master it. Assassins forfeit a shard of their souls to safely channel the dark energy imbuing the Shadowfell. One doesn’t dip into shadow power without paying a price and meeting its perilous demands. Yet opportunities exist for those unwilling to make the full commitment to the Shadowfell’s power. If such individuals think they can escape the plane’s steep price completely, they learn their error quickly.
I didn't say specifically that all shadow classes trade a *part of their soul*, it did say that there is price to pay for the power though, which makes me think that each class comes with it's own cost. Unless you read something I didn't.
I didn't say specifically that all shadow classes trade a *part of their soul*, it did say that there is price to pay for the power though, which makes me think that each class comes with it's own cost. Unless you read something I didn't.
You cut out the important part of the quote from the article:
Assassins, and other classes that wield shadow magic, forfeit a shard of their souls to safely channel the dark energy imbuing the Shadowfell.
wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/drcac...
That's odd. The version I copied from did not have that line...
wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/drcac...
Well, I just re-downloaded the article through your link, Mcnancy, and it still has the line, and I downloaded it first time prior to it's official release (as I often guess at these things).
I guess you just didn't notice the line.
Few creatures embrace shadow magic without both a
compelling reason and a measure of desperation. Not
many visit the Shadowfell willingly, let alone pledge a
shard of their souls to it. Yet that is exactly what assassins,
and other practitioners of shadow magic, do to
gain their power.
From the original assassin article. That would seem to suggest atleast 1 other shadow class was going to do the same.
Well, I just re-downloaded the article through your link, Mcnancy, and it still has the line, and I downloaded it first time prior to it's official release (as I often guess at these things).
I guess you just didn't notice the line.
I think he is just copying the text from the web site and not the article. The web version randomly cuts that phrase out of the text for whatever reason.
I keep forgetting that not everybody who's cool and insightful on these boards are Insiders.
i don't want a necromancer. i don't want a necromancer to even enter the list of classes.
i'd like to see a divine striker that uses ranged attacks primarily rather than melee.
I'd like to see an alternative psionic striker that uses psionic augmentation for both melee and range options.
i'd like to see an additional psionic that uses a ki focus as the monk.
i'd like to see more shadow classes. one that i'd prefer to see might be a shadow leader. personally, i think Witch is an appropriate title.
i'd like to see elemental receive the archetype of Transmuter.
Right. Mcnancy's an Outsider, so of course he didn't see the in-article line about it.
I keep forgetting that not everybody who's cool and insightful on these boards are Insiders.
No, I just didn't log on to the insider account that me my friend share to see if you were right. I'm not an outsider, I'm just frugal.
When I first read the article I skipped over that part because I had already read it on the website.
Ninja (shadow?-may already be represented by assassin?)
Sohei (divine, primal?)
Shugenja (elemental, arcane?)
Wu-jen (elemental, arcane?)
Samurai (primal, martial?)
I would like to see shadow and/or elemental added as a power source. I wouldn't mind seeing another martial class (swashbuckler, scout, gladiator? etc.)
I would like to see some of the classes from Oriental Adventures represented in PHB4. Such as:
Ninja
Sohei
Shugenja
Wu-jen
Samurai
Between the Rogue and the Assassin, I'm not sure what unique niche a Ninja class could hold. Sohei might end up as a Psionic class to serve as a counterpart to the Monk, but is something of a longshot. Shugenja and Wu Jen might find their way into the Elemental source, though, and would fit quite well there.
As for the Samurai, the heavily armored samurai warrior could be made as a Fighter, Ranger, Warlord, or even a Barbarian if you squint hard enough (particularly the STR/CHA build). A lightly-armored "ki swordsman" might form the basis of a new class (maybe Psionic), though giving a monk a sword might work as well (since their damage doesn't depend on weapon choice).
Some possible choices for PHB4 classes might be:
Necromancer (Shadow Controller)
Beguiler (Shadow Controller)
Hexblade (Shadow Defender)
Witch (Shadow Leader)
Reaper (Shadow Striker, offensive necromantic gish)
Soulblade (Psionic Striker)
Samurai/Sohei/Mystic (Psionic Defender)
Elementalist (Elemental Striker, might have a variable role depending on build, such as a earth-based defender or a wind-based controller)
The Assassin is the Anti-Hero, but that is reserved for the Dragon Exclusive and won't see print in a book. The Necromancer, Illusionist, and others will be more like the Warlock, a dark flavor without completely shutting out the rest of the party as he does the Batman, brood and ponder...
The Ninja can use some or most of the stuff from the Assassin, if Wizards think to have him in a book, but I doubt it will be in the PHB4. I see a setting in the future instead, one that has the shady little Ninja flinting about in the Shadows.
As an aside, I was right that there was not any classes in the Dragon Annual (and will never be any), that the Warlock is an Arcane power source class, and that the Gnome was gonna be in the PHB2.
I was wrong that the Half Orc was not to be again (having been replaced by the Dragonborn) or that it would have been within the pages of Ebberon instead of the PHB2. I still don't see why the Dromite was not included in the PHB3. I expect it will be in the PHB4, along with one or two more Psionic classes. (crosses fingers for the Soulknife)
I am not saying that "dark" themed classes isn't gonna be in the book at all, but that they won't be the "anti-heroes" that seem to be a major theme in some short lived RPG's in the past.
Oh, you mean like White Wolf? Oh wait, they're still going strong ...
Or Conan? No, that one's still fairly popular ...
Warhammer? No, that just got a new edition ...
Well, at least you're right about video games and video game RPGs! Oh wait, anti-heroes are even more popular there ...
The Assassin is the Anti-Hero, but that is reserved for the Dragon Exclusive and won't see print in a book. The Necromancer, Illusionist, and others will be more like the Warlock, a dark flavor without completely shutting out the rest of the party as he does the Batman, brood and ponder...
... The Warlock is just as much of an anti-hero as the Assassin. If you don't realize that, you're delusional.
The Ninja can use some or most of the stuff from the Assassin, if Wizards think to have him in a book, but I doubt it will be in the PHB4. I see a setting in the future instead, one that has the shady little Ninja flinting about in the Shadows.
The Ninja is never going to exist as a class named Ninja. Not in 4e in a book by WotC.
As an aside, I was right that there was not any classes in the Dragon Annual (and will never be any), that the Warlock is an Arcane power source class, and that the Gnome was gonna be in the PHB2.
And? Anyone who bothers to pay attention to WotC already knew all of that?
I was wrong that the Half Orc was not to be again (having been replaced by the Dragonborn)
Oh good lord. No it wasn't. You really are delusional. That or you just love the attention you get for saying idiotic crap like this.
or that it would have been within the pages of Ebberon instead of the PHB2.
Why on Earth would you ever believe that? News flash! Eberron did not make Half-orcs popular or acceptable.
still don't see why the Dromite was not included in the PHB3. I expect it will be in the PHB4,
Because they have nothing to do with the themes of PHB3, and they're not that popular. Maybe they will show up eventually, but don't hold your breath.
along with one or two more Psionic classes. (crosses fingers for the Soulknife)
Of course there is going to be one or two Psionic classes in PHB4. That's the established pattern. I don't Soul Knife will be one, but hey, at least in this case you're not spouting nonsense, so I suppose anything's possible. At least the Soulknife has the potential for being a unique class.
Ninja (shadow?-may already be represented by assassin?)
Sohei (divine, primal?)
Shugenja (elemental, arcane?)
Wu-jen (elemental, arcane?)
Samurai (primal, martial?)
I think the Sohei could work as a Ardent build... Then again I don't know much about Sohei other than they're like warrior poets/philosophers or something.
I think for the Psionic defender, they should've gone full discipline instead of augmentable; made it more Kionicsy, to set it apart from Ardent more and give us a speed/mobility based defender.
I've never gotten round to playing one, but I rather liked the idea and fluff. Also, a better name might be in order. Killclerk? Bookbasher? Sageinator?
I think the Sohei could work as a Ardent build... Then again I don't know much about Sohei other than they're like warrior poets/philosophers or something.
Sohei = (Strength) Paladin + (Ki-powered) Barbarian Rage
It never had anything remotely unique enough to justify being its own class.
Or perhaps they finally pull out of thier little cave when MP3 comes along and they finally add in skills for the fighter that have him attack with Dex. Powers for the rogue that attack with Cha. Ect.
Sohei = (Strength) Paladin + (Ki-powered) Barbarian Rage
Yeah those would work just fine too, but if you think about it, in a way the Ardent is a Ki powered Barbarian.
Sohei = (Strength) Paladin + (Ki-powered) Barbarian Rage
Yeah those would work just fine too, but if you think about it, in a way the Ardent is a Ki powered Barbarian.
Yeah.. Its annoying how people go "You can't have Class X because if you just Hybrid these to classes, Multiclass with that one and use this and that, then kill a million rabbits to refluff all your powers and skill you can create something that slightly resembles class X."
I mean, to some extent, yes, you can say your rogue is a pirate and you don't need to have a pirate class. But if you wanted to be an arcane trickster you couldn't just "refluff" rogue into being an arcane trickster. You would have to also actually hybrid or MC with an arcane class, and that still wouldn't be quite right. Lucky, they did put the paragon path in, so you can now really become an arcane trickster.
But paragon paths and hybrids can still only go so far. Sometimes you need to make the class develope more into a V or X or such type of class. Sometimes you just need to make a new class.
Then each class carries certian 'stimatas' with it. The Wizard is a controller, not a striker. Some people will try to play them as a striker and often will piss people off because of it. The fighter is a defender, not a striker. Ect. Ect.
I find that very few concepts are worthy of a new class.
I'm not advocating a Sohei class, I'm advocating a Ardent build called Sohei (or Mantle of the Sohei if you will)
I find that very few concepts are worthy of a new class.
by that though, you are indirectly advocating for the sohei class. Not the class itself of course, but altering a perexisting class mechanically rather than re-fluffing the existing mechanics to be a sohei.
In otherwords, similar to how I'd want the swashbuckler to be made, where it could change the pre-existing fighter into a dex based class, instead of trying (and failing) to fluff the character with 20+ str and 12 dex is somehow a very agile fighter.
What about hybrid powers and paragon paths?
We've already got a few hybrid paragons.
But like an expanded list of powers that require you to either hybrid or MC with another class. (probally just hybrid.)
This is to allow a sort of fusion of effects, like a Rogue/Fighter having the power to both mark and strike the same enemy using a power that is balanced for rogue|fighter hybrids.
Just as there was a lot of people that didn't get the mags in the previous system, there are just as many people that are not getting DDi for the preview heavy advertisments that are called the same names.
I'm actually surprised there weren't any Hybrid specific Paragon Paths in PHB3. I was fully expecting them after seeing a few in Dragon.
You can paragon Hybrid, which will probably be the only hybrid class PP. There are way to many combo's to do one for each.
You can paragon Hybrid, which will probably be the only hybrid class PP. There are way to many combo's to do one for each.
The thing is that Dragon has released actual PPs that require you to be either a Hybrid or at least multiclassed.
Wizards is starting to sell Dragon back on the newstand again?
No, and you know that's not what I mean. Dragon is absolutely no different from any physical book put out but WotC, and is considered to be on the same level as physical books.
Right now, the DDi service gives you everything for one price, and Wizards is trying to keep competition for electronic aids out by expanding the video gaming license to include them. If you want one thing, you have to get all.
A separate service for the tools and one for the mags is needed, but Wizards most likely knows that more people would get the tools and not the mags.
My point, though, is that Dragon is extra material, stuff that can be used if wanted, but mostly likely it is perused and forgotten. Recently they made exclusive material of fan service material (revenant and Assassin) to try to break that trend.
My point, though, is that Dragon is extra material, stuff that can be used if wanted, but mostly likely it is perused and forgotten. Recently they made exclusive material of fan service material (revenant and Assassin) to try to break that trend.
And your point is wrong. Dragon is only as much "extra material" as everything other than PHB1 is. PHB2? Extra material. PHB3? Ditto. FRPG? Ditto. EPG? Ditto.
My point, though, is that Dragon is extra material, stuff that can be used if wanted, but mostly likely it is perused and forgotten. Recently they made exclusive material of fan service material (revenant and Assassin) to try to break that trend.
And your point is wrong. Dragon is only as much "extra material" as everything other than PHB1 is. PHB2? Extra material. PHB3? Ditto. FRPG? Ditto. EPG? Ditto.
Holy cow! Hound and Mutt agree on something.
I really don't get the hatred and utter uncaring of the dragon magazine while absolutle love for everything else.
My 3.5 DM did not allow us to play with druids or rangers. He didn't let us have survival, knowledge nature, riding, animal handling or a few other 'foresty stuff'. All of which is from the PHB. Why? Because it didn't fit with the whole idea of "the characters spent thier entire life in the city" events we have.
Everything is Optional.
Yeah those would work just fine too, but if you think about it, in a way the Ardent is a Ki powered Barbarian.
I think you (and possibly chanter_hound too) slightly misunderstood what I was saying. I wasn't saying that was how the sohei should be represented in 4th edition. I was saying that's basically what the sohei was in 3rd. It was only its own class because it was 'Oriental'.
That doesn't mean you shouldn't play an ardent and call him a sohei (although I don't see much similarity between the 3rd edition sohei and the 4th edition ardent, to be honest). And it doesn't mean there shouldn't be a sohei class in 4th edition, as long as enough new stuff is added to make it unique in some way other than "it's an Oriental class that's sort of halfway between a paladin and a barbarian".
It is extra material that can be used, but isn't likely to be a part of a DM's "world" unless he himself prints the material he wants to use or have the player able to choose from. Dragon has always been this way, it didn't change. What did change is the medium.
My point, though, is that Dragon is extra material, stuff that can be used if wanted, but mostly likely it is perused and forgotten. Recently they made exclusive material of fan service material (revenant and Assassin) to try to break that trend.
Dragon Magazine is part of the Core Rules: all the material found therein is legal in RPGA for example. At $7 per month its cost is so low as to be negligible.
As far as being "extraneous," it is no more so than anything in any book, including the 1st Players' Handbook. The beauty of Dungeons & Dragons is that every campaign can be played as the table sees fit.
Archivist is a great name for a new class and doesn't need to be changed.
Arcane Trickster (or pretty much any class/PP/ED with the word trickster in it) ranks high on my list of dumbest names for a class ever.
A sea-based game doesn't require its own classes, but probably would benefit from having its own feats, PPs, and backgrounds.
I want Necromancer to be previewed in the near future as a Shadow controller, striker(unlikely), or leader.
That is all.
Dragon Magazine is part of the Core Rules: all the material found therein is legal in RPGA for example. At $7 per month its cost is so low as to be negligible.
As far as being "extraneous," it is no more so than anything in any book, including the 1st Players' Handbook. The beauty of Dungeons & Dragons is that every campaign can be played as the table sees fit.
thaX knows all this - he just prefers screaming louder than everyone else that he's right until they stop talking to him, letting him think they agree with him.
thaX knows all this - he just prefers screaming louder than everyone else that he's right until they stop talking to him, letting him think they agree with him.
He wouldn't be so bad if you'd stop enabling him.
After he's said the same thing for like the third time, just ignore him.
To just ignore him or her is just not right, it makes a person like that think that you agree with them or they are right even though they are dead wrong. You have to stick to your guns and to your side of the argument or they may never learn. I know its may seem silly at the time but in the long run it is usually for the best.
Can I vote for no more classes in Player's Handbook 4, and maybe no Player's Handbook 4? I would rather see an "Unearthed Arcana" which gives us new ways to alter the 25+ classes we already have in the game (and X races, I really can't keep track). I say this because each new class needs support, dragon articles, a place on the forum, etc, and I would rather see new ways to play existing classes (such as the archer warlord or vestige warlock) instead of a soulknife.
.........You mean the power books? Because that's how we got the Archer Warlord and the Vestige Warlock. It would also be how we could get a soulknife (by adding a Ki-focus-to-create-blades option).
The 3.5 Unearthed Arcana brought us bloodlines, item familiars, teamwork benefits, organization benefits, touchstones, places as treasure, and the prototype for Legendary Weapons. That sort of book could be much more useful than another "Power" book, or a Player's Handbook.
Dragon Magazine is part of the Core Rules: all the material found therein is legal in RPGA for example. At $7 per month its cost is so low as to be negligible.
As far as being "extraneous," it is no more so than anything in any book, including the 1st Players' Handbook. The beauty of Dungeons & Dragons is that every campaign can be played as the table sees fit.
thaX knows all this - he just prefers screaming louder than everyone else that he's right until they stop talking to him, letting him think they agree with him.
First thing, it is 10 bucks a month, or a bit cheaper if you shell out more at one time (75 bucks) for a year, or the price point you pointed out, the three month all in (25 bucks)
You should know that the best reason to get DDi is not the magazines, but the Electronic Tools. The Character Builder has all the rules inside it (god, why do I have to uncheck the dragon junk after every update?), the Adventure tools are slowly coming out, and the web things that were free in 3.5. The Visualizer is not even mentioned anymore, and the 3d mapper/dungeon thingy is smoke. That Wizards was considering charging us for "virtual Mini's" for the thing smacks to the real reason CMP was yanked from the license and how Piazo was shunted aside as the mags were put in limbo for a couple of months before putting out a few articles here and there for the service that wasn't working at the time.
Money.
Not that them earning money is a bad thing, but that they wanted to prevent others from making quality products while providing mediocre replacements. It still confuses me why CMP couldn't continue the 3.5 line, cept that Wizards wanted to cut all ties with the previous system. The Vminis was simply a way to gouge the customer, and someone saw the bad vibe it had on these boards and stopped it cold.
I, myself, don't want to pay for the mags at all, but still want to use the tools, hence the want for two different tiers of support, mags and Electronic Aids. Wizards will never do this, the Mags would die if they did.
Yes, it is considered a part of the game, but the adversiment in the books and online puts it into perspective. "D&DI(tm) will help enhance every aspect of your tabletop game."
Mags wouldn't die if they split it. There are many people, such as myself, who pay for mags and the Compendium. I can't use the CharBuilder or any other Adventure tools. It's still way worth the deal.
All D&D is a money-making scheme. That's what business is. Do we enjoy what they're giving us for our money? Hopefully yes. You don't. Do I wish I was not paying for the Tools? Yes, but I'm fine with $6 a month for the time-being. I get a lot. The Mags are worth it to me. I get stuff all the time to use.
I was wondering why you were now an Insider. You like the Tools. That's fine. You're entitled to not like the magazines. It's your choice. You're entitled to think that the mags are crap. That's your choice too.
But know that a lot of people think differently, and you're way down in the minority, especially 'round here.
There is no reason why WotC would change the name and a bit of the fluff from a Mag-only class and port it to a book. Especially when they said that the class would "never appear EVER" anywhere else. Especially not because one player wants them to redo the class with the name Ninja or Shadow Dancer and remove the core fluff of it, somehow fixing this player's fixation on the class somehow being villainous, just because the name has been misappropriated in modern times for bad people.
But you're entitled to reject everything I'm saying, because I have no power over you. But I hope you understand what I'm saying, thaX.
IN OTHER NEWS
Highlander and Cavalier should not be classes. They're basically Fighter by a different name. Or Barbarian, in the case of Highlander, but Battlerager works fine for it too.
Get a mount. Be a weapon-wielding class, better yet, a weapon-wielding defender. Like a Fighter. Congratulations. You're a Cavalier.
Necromancer
Illusionist
Summoner
etc...
Non wizard potentials:
Cavalier
Dualist
First thing, it is 10 bucks a month, or a bit cheaper if you shell out more at one time (75 bucks) for a year, or the price point you pointed out, the three month all in (25 bucks)
71.40 =/ 75bucks. (Thats what I was charged anyway) 5.95/month isn't just a 'bit' cheaper compared to 9.99/month. Its about 60% cost. The rest of that post was opinion, but I think I shall continue to clear up facts that are misrepresented.
You know, Mcnancy, that's a pretty good idea. I'd had a similar idea for a beastmaster mc warlord. Paragon mc into warlord and then take that epic destiny for multiclassed martial characters. I forget its name, but it was in Martial Power and the fluff was for the founder of a new combat style. Which is so awesome.
Well based on its neither in the comphendrium or the builder, I'd say it was recent.
Nope. Still can't find it. Checked both ranger articals.
Well based on its neither in the comphendrium or the builder, I'd say it was recent.
Nope. Still can't find it. Checked both ranger articals.
Huh. That's funny. It was in the same article that gave a 17th level encounter power for ranged beastmasters. I remember that.
Thats good.. I can start making a good ranger then. :D
AH I found it. Its walker of the unseen path. And it isn't just for small characters, but anyone whos animal compaion is at least medium.
Thats good.. I can start making a good ranger then. :D
Ah yes, the Unseen Path. I remember that now. Really? Any character can use it? Not just small size? That makes it so much better.
AH I found it. Its walker of the unseen path. And it isn't just for small characters, but anyone whos animal compaion is at least medium.
Thats good.. I can start making a good ranger then. :D
Ah yes, the Unseen Path. I remember that now. Really? Any character can use it? Not just small size? That makes it so much better.
And wisely enough, the beast must be at least Medium, so no mounting on your raptor and gaining at-will flight at level 1. One of these times that Wizards just make everything so damn correct.
Already have Illusionists and Summoners...both wizard builds
The Illusionist will be more than someone making illusions. Wizards has already mentioned the Illusionist as a valid class for the future, before the PHB2 was out and the Ki power source was axed. I doubt they would make a "build" for the Wizard to replace it. I look at it as a place holder, one that will pale in comparison to what the Real Illusionist can do.
Already have Illusionists and Summoners...both wizard builds
The Illusionist will be more than someone making illusions. Wizards has already mentioned the Illusionist as a valid class for the future, before the PHB2 was out and the Ki power source was axed. I doubt they would make a "build" for the Wizard to replace it. I look at it as a place holder, one that will pale in comparison to what the Real Illusionist can do.
Yes ... and Wizards also said the Psionic leader was the Empath (now just an upcoming build for the Ardent), Sorcerer's were going to be Controllers, and Monks would be Ki, all before PHB1 was out, let alone 2. They clearly decided to make Illusionists a build, not a class, which is how it should be.
What about the Transmuter? Necromancer? Diviner?
What about combining some of the Specialists, like the Illusionist and Evoker?
The return of the 1st edition Illusionist would be a great addition to the game and be a wonderful class in the Shadow Powersource. Truly, I thought you guys would be all for it.
Now the Beguiler, who has a background in Illusion - that's a possibility. But Illusions will at best be a single build for it.
AH I found it. Its walker of the unseen path. And it isn't just for small characters, but anyone whos animal compaion is at least medium.
Thats good.. I can start making a good ranger then. :D
Ah yes, the Unseen Path. I remember that now. Really? Any character can use it? Not just small size? That makes it so much better.
And wisely enough, the beast must be at least Medium, so no mounting on your raptor and gaining at-will flight at level 1. One of these times that Wizards just make everything so damn correct.
Yeah But watch out, you might run into a rules lawyer who will suddely turn fluffing your weight to something that could still ride a creature, but not be too ridiculous into grinding for mechanical advantages.
I thought it would have the four elements and then have four other classes that are the mirror to those elements (Fire/Heat Water/Vapor Air/Wind Earth/Mud)
Beguiler, hmm... Not sure I know much about that class. PHB2 in the previous system, right? I never got it, seemed to break the game to me.
Which of the Elements is the Transmuter, Earth?
None of the above. The majority of people who do more than dismiss Elemental as a poor man's Arcane recognize that it's unlikely that Elemental will deal solely in the classical elements.
I thought it would have the four elements and then have four other classes that are the mirror to those elements (Fire/Heat Water/Vapor Air/Wind Earth/Mud)
Won't happen, because then all the "why does Elemental exist when we have Arcane!" whining would be right.
Beguiler, hmm... Not sure I know much about that class. PHB2 in the previous system, right? I never got it, seemed to break the game to me.
You .... what? You thought the 3.5e PHB2 broke the game? The book that most people agree made the Druid finally balanced, as well as adding a lot of other stuff that helped create balance? That book? Wow ....
CM beat me to the PHBII fixing the druid thing. Alas, they did nothing about the cleric...I mean come on, a full caster AND a half-decent BAB? At least wizards and sorcs had crappy BAB for all of their god-likeness.
That said, to the point. I want, Want, WANT to see a dread necromancer. I can feel at least 4 builds coming off of this thing (summoner of many undead, master of undead armies; master of a single, powerful undead servitor, a la beast ranger; negative energy themed ranged power beast (hurray for drains!); and a plague bearer, a la master cyst from I think it was 3.5 BVD, but I'm not sure. I agree that I don't see the ninja, or the illusionist, or even the shadowcaster being viable classes, but the necro...that beast can stand on its own, and it deserves to do so.
Also, I must say, I'm guilty of being in that school that thinks an Elemental power source would just be a poor man's Arcane. I just don't think there's a point, given all the elemental-themed powers out there. He**, the chaos sorcerer draws his power from the Elemental Chaos itself, if ever there were a class that should have been Elemental (and I don't think there is) it was the chaos sorc build at least. And that's just the problem with Elemental as a power source. It's good for a build of a class here, a build of a class there, but I don't believe there's enough there out of which to build a full power source without stepping on the toes of other power sources/classes. All of the Arcane classes deal heavily in elemental damage, or could easily support an elemental build, same with some of the Primals, but I don't see much more than that coming from Elemental, especially with people now crying for Psionics to get pyromancy and cryomancy. Maybe even electromancy...I saw that mentioned too. Then again, I've been wrong before....
On a related note, I'm pushing for soulknife to be an actually viable (and kinda strikery) battlemind build.
Please, no more divine classes, and no more fighter support. Show some love somewhere, anywhere, else.
Anywho, necromancer would be great. Or an elemental class, just to show off what they can do. Personally, I'd like it if transmutation and creation fell under the elemental classes as well as RARGH! FIRE, ICE, AND LIGHTNING!
There is a book incoming called 'the players strategy guide'.
Do we really need a PHB4 at all?
I think a DMG3 should come first, concentrating on the Epic tier.
I think that there are now more than enough races and classes out there and future 'powers' books could take care of anything that might be missing.
There is a book incoming called 'the players strategy guide'.
Do we really need a PHB4 at all?
I think a DMG3 should come first, concentrating on the Epic tier.
Since we're still to get a full set of classes for the Shadow and Elemental power sources, yes a PHB4 and possibly 5 are needed. And there will never be enough races for a lot of people to be satisfied. Just look at how many constantly ask for full write-ups for Goblinoids, Kobolds, animal-folk races, etc.
I think that there are now more than enough races and classes out there and future 'powers' books could take care of anything that might be missing.
There is a book incoming called 'the players strategy guide'.
Do we really need a PHB4 at all?
I think a DMG3 should come first, concentrating on the Epic tier.
Since we're still to get a full set of classes for the Shadow and Elemental power sources, yes a PHB4 and possibly 5 are needed. And there will never be enough races for a lot of people to be satisfied. Just look at how many constantly ask for full write-ups for Goblinoids, Kobolds, animal-folk races, etc.
PHB4 could have that really cool twist where it is just a goblinoid sourcebook in terms of races but with classes for all races using Shadow as the power source !
I think that there are now more than enough races and classes out there and future 'powers' books could take care of anything that might be missing.
There is a book incoming called 'the players strategy guide'.
Do we really need a PHB4 at all?
I think a DMG3 should come first, concentrating on the Epic tier.
Since we're still to get a full set of classes for the Shadow and Elemental power sources, yes a PHB4 and possibly 5 are needed. And there will never be enough races for a lot of people to be satisfied. Just look at how many constantly ask for full write-ups for Goblinoids, Kobolds, animal-folk races, etc.
Exactly, alot of us are hungery for races we played in the past, or for races that aren't part of the status quo (Elves, dwarves and all the kind) but instead new races, races that only had a fleeting moment in previous editions, races of other places.
Same goes for classes. I myself really want a duelist kind of class, or at least someway to turn the fighter into a dex based class instead of str based.
A ranged defender. I know, some people don't like the concept, but I can see it working if it was a throwing weapon character.
More use of Con as an primary stat. If we are getting a new power source a "blood mage" (Not the PP) could fit the bill here with abilities to sacrifice their own surges/hp in order to better the party.
Speaking of Which, a class that is a self sacrificing class (other than the previous) that focuses on being in the center of combat. (duel wields.. WHIPS! :D)
I'd be happy to know the names of the classes in the PHB and what power sources it'll cover. I assume Elemental and Psionic but will there be a third?
Last May we got the Monk playtest. How come we aren't getting any PHB4 classes to playtest?
Because WotC has decided to discontinue all D&D related products and instead release a Twilight based table top roleplaying game. As none of the new classes are compatible with the current rules they felt releasing a playtest would be silly. >.>
On a more serious note, no one would know execpt WotC employees and they really don't hang out in Future Releases too frequently. If I were to take a guess it is either the fact that there are no more "iconic classes" that people are complaining about not being in PHB1 like people were doing with the monk or perhaps that playtest and debut material wasn't recieved as well as they would have liked so they have decided not to do it anymore.
why not the return of rules of racial/monster class?
I could be a evolution of hybrid class.
There still is the Illusionist, Necromancer, Soulknife(mind), Knight, a renamed,expanded Shadow Dancer, and more that I can't think of at the moment. There are some that want the Assassin printed into a PHB (I am not one of them) while others think a simular class can be done with the name Ninja. There is a good amount of classes to choose from.
Only 4 PC races? I want +5!!
why not the return of rules of racial/monster class?
I could be a evolution of hybrid class.
Racial / Monster Classes?
I doubt we'll see Monster classes, Racial classes are also unlikely but an interesting idea.
The main problem would be consigning races to power sources and role.
I am hopeing for shadow/elemental/martial. With summoners added to the list of striker, defender, controller, leader
Controllers get summons.
Also, I know this may sound a bit strange, but I think there should be "Racial Classes." Like a class designed for just an elf, eladrin or a minotaur and so forth. Complete with feats and unique skills.
Also, I wouldn't mind to see a Samurai or Ninja class as well.
Looks like we're getting the shadow power source in March, but not in PHB4.
They are trying to keep the monsters... monsterious. Making them PC races would give them a human face.
There still is the Illusionist, Necromancer, Soulknife(mind), Knight, a renamed,expanded Shadow Dancer, and more that I can't think of at the moment. There are some that want the Assassin printed into a PHB (I am not one of them) while others think a simular class can be done with the name Ninja. There is a good amount of classes to choose from.
As everyone has repeatedly told you, the Assassin is the Ninja and the Shadowdancer. And there will be no Illusionist class, because it is a Wizard build.
They are trying to keep the monsters... monsterious. Making them PC races would give them a human face.
There still is the Illusionist, Necromancer, Soulknife(mind), Knight, a renamed,expanded Shadow Dancer, and more that I can't think of at the moment. There are some that want the Assassin printed into a PHB (I am not one of them) while others think a simular class can be done with the name Ninja. There is a good amount of classes to choose from.
As everyone has repeatedly told you, the Assassin is the Ninja and the Shadowdancer. And there will be no Illusionist class, because it is a Wizard build.
Okay, first off, The Assassin is more a combination of the Shadowdancer and the Assassin. There's potential for a seperate Ninja class (i'd suggest Elemental Striker or Controller)
The Illusionist is a Wizard build, but a Shadow Controller could still work in a similar but different veign. Actually, the Shadow Controller could incoporate ideas of the old Illusionist and Necromancy to cover both parts.
I'd also like to see the introduction of the Elemental power source with classes for each role. I don't really care how they flavor them, since I'll probably just end up re-flavoring them anyway ;).
Your assumption that the Ninja is to far Oriented in the Oriental background to be a general class, or that the Assassin and the Ninja is to close to one another, is not the only consideration for it's inclusion in the Shadow Power Source.
My hope, one that, admittingly, is dimmed significally, is that the Assassin isn't taking up the spot for the Shadow Dancer like class. A class entry in a published book, a Ninja or another "new" class, isn't out of the question. Not everyone wants the DDi, and more often that not, a lot of subscribers have it for the tools, not the advertisement... err, sorry, the Magazines that are a shadow of what they were when it was still in the newsstand.
Now, I have to say that the mags toward the end of the run, before Wizards let it be known that the license wasn't being renewed, was mediocre at best. This was not because of a lack of effort, but because the 3.5 system was frayed and getting out of hand. The hybrid books near the end, the "4th edition test" ones, amped up power munchkin sweetness and Dragon expanded on the min/maxing to the point of unplayability. This eased up when the end was near, and the wrap up ended up being some of the best material in a long time. This DDi stuff, it doesn't even compare.
And I have repeated my want for a Shadow Dancer like class to actually be published, in a book, without the negative name of Assassin, and able to shadowjump up to a total a distance at will...
The Shadowdancer is never going to be a seperate class. The Assassin ate it and took its stuff. Period.
And uh .... Assassins can shadowjump at will. Maybe you should actually use that DDi account of yours for once and actually read the class, which you constantly and apparently proudly proclaim an absolute lack of knowledge of.
I liked the Shadow Dancer, I doubt we'll see it as a class, but it may crop up in some form as a Shadow Controller.
Or rather, the Assassin has nicked some of the Shadow Dancer's stuff, but that doesn't mean someone else didn't nick the rest.
Having said that, a lot of what remains of the Shadow Dancer is available to other classes or as feats. The only thing missing is summoning shadows (but of course there are other summoning spells).
I would like to echo those asking for a necromancer. I've been longing for a dedicated necromancer since 4e was released. I've tried refluffing the shaman, but it's really not the same. So please, pleasepleaseplease please let the shadow power source be in PHBIV, and please let the necromancer be one of the previewed classes.
EDIT: just read the rumor about a "Player's Option: Heroes of shadow" book. While I'm happy to have some news of the shadow power source, and an expected release date, I'm a little dissapointed that the shadow classes aren't appearing in a "Proper" player's handbook. Not too much, though, since I always thought a dedicated book for a single power source was a better way to introduce new classes anyway.
I'm more dissapointed that it's going to be paperback. Between not being in a PHB and not being hard cover, that's really going to give people the impression that the shadow classes aren't "real" or "official" in some way.
That said, I still want the necromancer to be previewed beforehand. "Soon enough" just isn't soon enough for me.
They are trying to keep the monsters... monsterious. Making them PC races would give them a human face.
There still is the Illusionist, Necromancer, Soulknife(mind), Knight, a renamed,expanded Shadow Dancer, and more that I can't think of at the moment. There are some that want the Assassin printed into a PHB (I am not one of them) while others think a simular class can be done with the name Ninja. There is a good amount of classes to choose from.
As everyone has repeatedly told you, the Assassin is the Ninja and the Shadowdancer. And there will be no Illusionist class, because it is a Wizard build.
Just posting this to repeat it, just in case.
I am curious about the Player's Option books though. Sounds very "optional".
And I have repeated my want for a Shadow Dancer like class to actually be published, in a book, without the negative name of Assassin, and able to shadowjump up to a total a distance at will...
The Shadowdancer is never going to be a seperate class. The Assassin ate it and took its stuff. Period.
And uh .... Assassins can shadowjump at will. Maybe you should actually use that DDi account of yours for once and actually read the class, which you constantly and apparently proudly proclaim an absolute lack of knowledge of.
You mean without having to be beside one guy and teleporting to an enemy type.... say I want to go from the corner to over by that tree?
Hmmmm....
Your missing the point, though. My contention is that the Assassin will be completely ignored when it comes to deciding what to do with the future classes. If a "clone" is released as a Ninja, no one will really mind. Nothing is gonna have the "shrouds" that the Assassin has (that is an exclusive that it can keep, almost as bad at the insta-kill from the previous edition) and I believe the abilities will be a bit looser than what it is for the Dragon Class.
Oh wait ...
yeah, not seeing what your trying to say here.
Let's see.. Published Class in the FR book, Published class in the Eberron book, Published class in the DDi....
yeah, not seeing what your trying to say here.
Fixed that for ya.
Electronic publishing is part of the modern era now. I read my Toronto Globe & Mail on my computer. Same as getting it from a newstand. Better even.
Fixed that for ya.
Electronic publishing is part of the modern era now. I read my Toronto Globe & Mail on my computer. Same as getting it from a newstand. Better even.
Yeah ... he has this strange obsession with claiming that electronic publishing is not real pubslishing. Or that continual support in Dragon isn't real support ...
A sad, sad day.
Well, seems that the Assassin (name and all) is coming to the printed page after all. There is one of the small soft covers that will cover the Shadow power source all by itself, and it mentions the Assassin, Necromancer and Hexblade in the preview page of the coming soon pamphlet in my local Gaming Store.
A sad, sad day.
Why?
I'm also sad that the book's going to be a paperback. I don't care if it's small, I would have loved a hardcover for my precious necromancer.
All that said, I'm so happy to hear a release date for shadow that I almost don't care. The main thing I'm sad about is the lack of a beguiler/shadowcaster/illusionist type character. It's clearly a more then appropriate shadow source character concept, one that could easily be quite distinct from other illusionist types we've seen already.
I wonder if they'll expand the assassin concept of 'shrouds' to the other shadow classes. It could be a great thematic link, that could also mark the distinctions between the shadow classes in the fluff. Assassins apply their shrouds to their victims, layering on dark magic to make them vulnerable to a deadly strike. Hexblades could also have 'shrouds', applying them instead to their weapon, creating a deadly weapon to slay their enemies. Necromancers would apply their shrouds to corpses, animating the dead with their magic in this way.
Whatever they do, it's too far away. I very much hope we'll get a playtest of the necromancer before then. Mostly because I'm impatient and want to actually play with one, but also because I want my favorite class to be ass balanced and functional as possible, and a playtest preview could help work the kinks out of a class that has a lot of potential issues.
It is a bit sad that something advertised as a 'ddi exclusive' isn't going to be exclusive anymore. I wish it hadn't been advertised as such in the first place.
Trust me, that's not why thaX is sad. He's sad the class exists, period.
So we get:
Assassin = Striker
Necromancer = Leader?
Hexblade = Defender?
I really hope they had more classes to add like maybe a Shadow Controller, otherwise it's Martial all over again. Speaking of martial, Martial Controllers would be nice.
- Alchemist / Bomb Launcher Class (AoE Attacks, Debuffs, some buffs)
- Trapsmith Class
Example: Guerilla
(It's not impossible for such classes to exist. Polearm Fighter + some feats [Net/Bolas?], tends to be the typical argument for the Martial Controller not being needed, although the fighter can easily be a Defender/Striker just as well as a Defender/Controller same with most other classes you find with Primary Role/Secondary Role)
Only three Shadow Power Source classes? Bah Humbug!!
So we get:
Assassin = Striker
Necromancer = Leader?
Hexblade = Defender?
I really hope they had more classes to add like maybe a Shadow Controller, otherwise it's Martial all over again. Speaking of martial, Martial Controllers would be nice.
Assuming that it is only three classes, I think Necromancer is more likely to be a controller than a leader. Which would work quite well since I have thought that having a shadow eader would have been a bit of a stretch myself.
The Shroud mechanic, though a bit over the top for 4th edition, is at least workable and not completely ridiculous "insta-kill" like the past incarnations of the class.
My hope was that the same Shadow Dancer theme could be used without the cheap shrouds or having the name "assassin" attached to it. Call it Ninja, or a new name, but not the mercenary killer.
It isn't that the Assassin exists, it is that it is called the "Assassin." This name confers a basic convocation of a paid murderer, one that cares not one wit for others.
No it doesn't. Plenty of people over the past year have repeatedly given citations why that's false. But why should I expect you to suddenly gain enlightenment?
They usually work alone, can not be trusted, and do not do well in a group setting.
Completely, absolutely, and blatantly false. Not only that, but there are historical precedents that consistently prove you wrong. But hey, I suppose you enjoy being wrong.
My hope was that the same Shadow Dancer theme could be used without the cheap shrouds or having the name "assassin" attached to it. Call it Ninja, or a new name, but not the mercenary killer.
It's a good thing that not all assassins or Assassins are mercenary killers then. Again, history proves you wrong. And Assassins (and Rogues) are 4e ninjas. We are not going to get a class named Ninja, and we don't need a class named Ninja.
Where is word of this "Player Options" book coming from,
From this very thread (and ENWorld) last week:
www.enworld.org/forum/4e-discussion/2570...
Looks like we're getting the shadow power source in March, but not in PHB4.
and does it mean the end of the PHBs?
No one knows.
1. A Golemist like in Meiville's Iron Council. I guess it doesn't need to be a separate class, it could be a sub-build of a summoner wizard but I would like to see all new powers for it.
2. More martial classes. I know I'll get flamed for it but I thought that a monk should have been a martial class and the psionic striker should have been the soul knife.
3. As far as martial classes go I would also want to see an alchemical/bombardier/tinker/engineer class. The artificer is great but there needs to be more support for low magic campaigns.
5. I want to see the dualist/swashbuckler/daredevil class. I know it is another class that could be a build of a fighter or rogue but there is design space here for more.
Sry if these have been brought up in numerous threads before... just my 2cents.
It isn't that the Assassin exists, it is that it is called the "Assassin." This name confers a basic convocation of a paid murderer, one that cares not one wit for others.
And the name "ninja" contains the exact same connotations in Europe (hence the rather silly "Teenage Mutant Hero Turtles back in the 80's). There are a number of names of classes that are either poor in descriptive value (Rogue, Fighter), or carry strong negative connotations (Warlock, Warlord). Sometimes a name is just a name, and sometimes negative connotations can be beneficial to players wishing to role play antiheroes or heroes struggling against shadowed pasts.
I'm not exactly sold on the name assassin, either, but the class is a strong concept, and there aren't a lot of better names for it. Assassin has legacy value, and the shrouds mechanic bares close resemblance to the studied death attacks of previous editions.
It isn't that the Assassin exists, it is that it is called the "Assassin." This name confers a basic convocation of a paid murderer, one that cares not one wit for others. They usually work alone, can not be trusted, and do not do well in a group setting.
The Shroud mechanic, though a bit over the top for 4th edition, is at least workable and not completely ridiculous "insta-kill" like the past incarnations of the class.
My hope was that the same Shadow Dancer theme could be used without the cheap shrouds or having the name "assassin" attached to it. Call it Ninja, or a new name, but not the mercenary killer.
So Ninja's can be trusted, are famous for working in teams and work well in group settings?
For starters, you don't actually have to go around calling yourself an Assassin. It's likely an Assassin wouldn't tell people he's an assassin. That's like a Rogue going around telling people that's he's a famous cat burgular.
The name confers a profession, it doesn't confer alignment and it has no bearing on what an Assassin is like as a person.
Assassin's don't call themselves such sometimes, but the work they do (murder for hire) denotes a singular work ethic and not attaching themselves to others. There is a reason that Terry Pratchett does not have an ongoing character in his Discworld Novels that is an Assassin, the exception being the head of the Assassin's guild, who is more of a manager now.
The class itself was overpowered to game breaking proportions in the 1st edition, and was a last gasp in a kit book in 2nd, still overpowered. In 3rd, is was basically an NPC PrC (Evil Alignment restriction) that still had some over the top abilities. I believe that the change over to 3.5 changed that to any non good, but I still considered it an NPC PrC.
Now, this current form has "shrouds" that is like having to declare a sneak attack in advance.
The preview book in the store had mentioned "Various new builds" that may mean that the full class may still be exclusive to DDi while the splat has a couple new builds for it. I wonder if the other two classes will be in the PHB4, and if the builds will be previews (of a sort) .
Not all assassins are murderers for hire, Not all assassins are murderers for hire, Not all assassins are murderers for hire, Not all assassins are murderers for hire, Not all assassins are murderers for hire, Not all assassins are murderers for hire, Not all assassins are murderers for hire, Not all assassins are murderers for hire, Not all assassins are murderers for hire, Not all assassins are murderers for hire;
Assassins work in groups, Assassins work in groups, Assassins work in groups, Assassins work in groups, Assassins work in groups, Assassins work in groups, Assassins work in groups, Assassins work in groups, Assassins work in groups;
Ninjas kill people for money just as often as assassins, Ninjas kill people for money just as often as assassins, Ninjas kill people for money just as often as assassins, Ninjas kill people for money just as often as assassins, Ninjas kill people for money just as often as assassins, Ninjas kill people for money just as often as assassins, Ninjas kill people for money just as often as assassins.
I realize asking you to accept reality is asking too much at this point, but I figure I had to try.
Ninjas overall have a bigger purpose than single contract killings, and usually do not go alone. They have a sense of honor that a typical Assassin would spit at.
To be far, there are the occassional Assassin that kills for more than contractual concerns. Warped zealots mired in political policies, a lone nut, or the rare exception of one that learned his skills to better the world. (why one would think killing single individuals would be the answer is another debate)
Sorry, your not gonna convince me otherwise.
Your problem with the name is silly and you should just get over it. Learn what something is before you dislike it out of hand. There is alot of history when it come to assassains and you should not let the modern meaning cloud your judgement. I don't expect this to change your mind but if it does great, if not it just shows how closed minded you are.
"Stories of the lone assasin working in the cold are a fable, in the real world whole teams of support are needed to infltrate, and get to a target"
By the way, Michael Weston High level hybrid Monk Assasin, Sam Axe High level Fighter, and Fiona Glenair High level ROuge... a team you don't want to mess with, and they don't even have a leader.
Repeating it over and over still won't make it true....
No, but history and facts do make it true.
Ninjas overall have a bigger purpose than single contract killings, and usually do not go alone. They have a sense of honor that a typical Assassin would spit at.
Cite your proof that assassins don't have a code of honor. Immediately. Oh that's right, you can't. Because you're making this crap up.
To be far, there are the occassional Assassin that kills for more than contractual concerns. Warped zealots mired in political policies, a lone nut, or the rare exception of one that learned his skills to better the world. (why one would think killing single individuals would be the answer is another debate)
You really do like pulling things out of no where.
Sorry, your not gonna convince me otherwise.
Oh, I know it's too much for you to realize that reality does not confirm with your irrational beliefs or your insistence on completely ignoring facts or history. I do this so you can't damage new posters who may be foolish enough to believe someone so divorced from reality.
ThaX you should learn historically where the word assassain come from before making snap judgements. You would change your mind fast.
It won't. We've presented him with proof before, and he refuses to acknowledge it.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashshashin
The original assassins were special cadres of holy Muslim warriors. You might think of them as another type of paladin, in fact.
Ninjas on the other hand...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninja
I will admit, most of my precoventions are based on the icon, not the historical figure of the Assassin. I am playing a game full of preconceved notions.
It isn't the Assassin that plays with Teddy Bears and puts pretty bows in their hairs, but the dirty, spiteful, loners that is the Fantasy Archtype that most think of.
The problem isn't the class in this new addition, but that they used the term Assassin knowing the history of the name in this game, overpowered game breaker in the 1st edition, a kit that bent the rules in 2nd, and a PrC that had a death attact that ended up being "dm's whim" rather than a well thought out mechanic in 3rd. (They did make it an NPC class with the Evil restriction in 3.0)
It becomes an excuse in this game, one to be an inconsiderate player and do actions that do not go well in a group setting. It gets players riled up, and breaks up games. This is the problem I have with the "Assassin."
Quote history all you want, I talk of the Assassin within the D&D game that has nothing to do with our History.
I am playing a game full of preconceved notions.
And if you could ever get over that and realize such notions are meaningless and, as you've amply demonstrated, counterproductive, we could actually get somewhere.
Quote history all you want, I talk of the Assassin within the D&D game that has nothing to do with our History.
Too bad the Assassin you talk of isn't the DnD Assassin and never has been either.
So you're not refering to D&D in all your examples.
You can take the 4e Assassin and do whatever you want with it. You can make a Paladin of Bahamut and still be a rampaging mad man rather than an upholder of Justice and Paragon of Virtue or whatever.
Assassins in 4e aren't aliged.
I realize that the character are the exception to the rule. My main worry is the player that will use the assassin as that loner that agitates the group, instead of another character in the group.
I liked it better as an NPC PrC with the Evil restriction.
Hexblade
or
Necromancer
Whichever of those is more impressive. That's what I'd like to see them playtest. And soon.
Yes, I referenced the cartoon in response to the thinking that Ninja's are loners.
I realize that the character are the exception to the rule. My main worry is the player that will use the assassin as that loner that agitates the group, instead of another character in the group.
I liked it better as an NPC PrC with the Evil restriction.
In my last campaing, we had an Avenger since level 11 and an Assassin (me) since level 17. Both lasted until level 30 and survived the BBEG.
The avenger was a much more disruptive, lone-wolf, than the assassin. The same can probably be said about Warlocks. Actually, it's more about the character's background and RP than the class he plays.
Back on topic, yeah, hexblade or necro. I'm really hoping to see the latter. 'Course, I'm afraid that we're just not going to get any more playtest classes. Not any real reason to think that, just this gut feeling I've been getting lately that they don't intend to do that anymore.
Might be just my inherent negativity kicking in now that my longed for necromancer class is finally appearing on the horizon.
I can guess what a Hexblade will be like and i'm excited about that so I can wait till it's release to play one.
Necromancer - no idea what they'll do.
It becomes an excuse in this game, one to be an inconsiderate player and do actions that do not go well in a group setting. It gets players riled up, and breaks up games. This is the problem I have with the "Assassin."
Not to put too fine a point on it, but it sounds like you're talking about a traumatic experience you personally experienced. As if one of your "friends" played an assassin in an earlier edition, started acting like real jerk, & your DM didn't step in soon enough (or at all) to reign him in.
You shouldn't blame a game for your "friend's" bad behaviour.
Mostly, it was the 1st edition Assassin within the 2nd edition rules (the DM played a hybrid of the two edition like most others at the time). I also had a friend try to use the kit, and once that campaign ended I threw the little soft cover in the garbage.
The Shadow Step is like conditional, right, from ally to enemy or something? Not at all like the shadow step the previous edition had. I don't consider the Assassin the replacement for the Shadow Dancer, and hope (most likely in vain) for a replacement in an upcoming book, PHB4 or the new Shadow Power thingy.
1. real psionic striker full of augments and such.
2. necro. most likely a pet based controller
3. shadow defender, likely hexblade. (on a side note, I wish to see a pet based defender if only to get all roles with a pet and not have to hybrid or mc)
4. kind of want a new defender mechanic like you protect someone rather than inhibit your enemies and punish them instead you help your allies and benifit those that are hit.
5. I know it likely wont happen but I can still dream, a martial defender, I dont care melee or ranged I dont care what base stat or stats I just want an official one and yes I know gladiator theme in ds is supposed to be martial controller like but its not a class is it. all homebrews I have found dont quite fit this because they kind of force you to fight a certain way. The best one I have seen so far is the guerilla by someone on these boards but doesnt quite fit in a fantasy setting quite so well except if you play the sniper like one.
so wizards, being one of the few younger crowd (i am 22) that has played every edition and multiple types of your games and bought many of your books, I would like to see this. I will send this straight to you if I have to!
2. necro. most likely a pet based controller
3. shadow defender, likely hexblade. (on a side note, I wish to see a pet based defender if only to get all roles with a pet and not have to hybrid or mc)
Necromancer and Hexblade are confirmed as coming out next year.
5. I know it likely wont happen but I can still dream, a martial defender...
Done since PHB1. :P
I'm kind of vaguely brainstorming ideas for a "bounty hunter" as a martial controller. He'd throw traps. Pin targets down with bolas, tethers, & crossbows. Things like that.
1. real psionic striker full of augments and such.
YES PLEASE! I can't stand the monk class
Oh you must be refering to... oh wait there is no actual martial power sourced controller yes you can make a controller out of almost any class but the diffrence is that it is not said to be a controller and not nessarily good at it or at least not quite as good at it as a dedicated controller and thus far the classes that say they are controllers well they seem pretty good at being controllers.
now honestly I dont care for hundreds of classes, but I would care for lots and lots of support for a fewer number of classes I think there should be maybe, maybe, maybe, slightly more than 4 classes in every power source, 1 to fill out every role.
edit: oh darn sorry about the putting martial defender down and sorry to rant about something that was my mistake. but as for the rest of it, it still stands.
edit: weaver, I do not like classes that force you to use certain weapons at all because that forces you into a very limited selection of tactics. I dont mind implements because there are so many diffrent types of implements but when you have to enchant multiple specific weapons then you got to have money or hope you are lucky enough to find one. There is no power that specifies that you must use a certain weapon with it but there are requirements you have to meet such as using two weapons or some such, now if you had something like a general guide as a requirement such as that it would make me happy but thus far I am still gonna have to give my attention to the guerilla even though there isnt much support or the fact that it adds a few new mechanics, but at least it is more general.
Also greatfrito also said that he would like to see a hexblade and a necro but nobody shot him a quick jab to the ribs, not a painful jab but a jab none the less.
I was just pointing out they were confirmed because you said that the classes probably weren't coming and I thought you would be glad to know that they were in the pipeline.
oh ok yeah thats right those two have been confirmed but wait thats not a phb 4 which means that there is a posibility that we will only see them as ddi stuff, also I have never actually seen where it has been confirmed for next year.
Player's Option: Heroes of Shadow, a book in the same format as the essentials (6" by 9" paperback, ~300 pages, ~$20us). There's a thread about it on the board, here.
In fact, there's some going speculation that there won't even be a PHBIV, that the new 'Options' format may be a replacement.
Up to now, each new PHB has introduced a new power source. Shadow is a good bet for 4. Each PHB has also continued a power source of the book directly preceding it, so I'd say Psionics is also a good bet.
Of the 3 PHBs we have thus far, 2 deal with Arcane, 2 with Primal, 3(!) with Divine and only 1 with Martial and Psionics. So for the 3rd power source, I'd say Martial would be nice. What classes it should offer, I don't know but we can speculate.
Shadow Classes - 4
Blackguard = Defender
Assassin = Striker (for those of us who don't subscribe to DDI :P)
Hexblade = Leader
Necromancer = Controller
Psionic Classes - 1
??? = Psionic Striker (true psionic, not like the monk. I agree with previous statements that this is needed)
Martial Classes - 1
??? (I seriously have no idea. I doubt very much that the martial controller will ever be printed. A mount focused class could be possible. My guess it that this would be a Striker (secondary defender))
Alternatively, PHB4 could focus on just 2 power sources: Shadow & Elemental, giving us 8 classes (4 of each, obviously), but this would break the precedent set by the current 3 handbooks.
This all just to get the thread back on topic ;)
K-man
Shadow is no longer good bet for PHB4 when there's probably not even going to be a PHB4.
I agree. I think that there will not longer be any more PHB's released. Instead each March we will have a Power Source book. 2011 is Shadow. 2012 is ?????
on a related note, i hope that there will be a fourth shadow class: witch (shadow leader).
Shadow is no longer good bet for PHB4 when there's probably not even going to be a PHB4.
Actually, this does make sense in a way. Consider the contents of each PHB.
- had (an introduction to 4E), races, classes, skills, feats, equipment, rules and rituals
- had races, classes, feats, equipment and some rules updates
- had races, classes, hybrids, skill powers, feats and equipment.
Instead each March we will have a Power Source book. 2011 is Shadow. 2012 is Elemental
Safe bet.
But it doesn't nullify the question of "What class(es) would you like to see?" (just to PHB4 part) and with only one power source per book, I'd say we may get 6 classes. Possibilities:
- Necromancer
- Hexblade
- Blackguard
- Assassin
- Witch
- ?
K-man
- Necromancer
- Hexblade
- Blackguard
- Assassin
- Witch
- Psionic Striker
- Necromancer
- Hexblade
- Blackguard
- Assassin
- Witch
- ?
Meh, a 'Witch' is an adherent of the reallife religion 'Wicca'. Your about as likely to see a 'Zoroastrian' class or a 'Shintoist' class.
An alternate name is more likely, like Latin 'Veneficus', meaning 'black magic witch' (who curses people), but literally meaning 'poisoner'.
Too bad the name Sorcerer is already taken. Its actually more appropriate as a Shadow class, since it specifically means a black magic 'curser', and derives from a cognate of 'sort' in the sense of using lots for divination with the spirits of the dead.
Of course, its a D&D tradition to misuse and reappropriate historical names. But I doubt theyl officially offend reallife religionists, like Witches or Buddhists.
As a minimum, i'd expect
2 psionic classes
an alternate striker would be good, not sure on the other
4 elemental classes
1 for each
Then i'd still like to see
Divine:
Caster Striker or ranged Striker
Primal
Alternate Leader and Striker
If Darksun introduces class kits, then we may see more in PHB 4 as well.
Really depends on the theme of the PHB4.
Shadow is no longer good bet for PHB4 when there's probably not even going to be a PHB4.
I agree. I think that there will not longer be any more PHB's released. Instead each March we will have a Power Source book. 2011 is Shadow. 2012 is ?????
I certainly hope that isn't the case. They promised a PHB every year. That is one of the few promises they have kept.
But I doubt theyl officially offend reallife religionists, like Witches or Buddhists.
Too late. See the nagpa in MM3. A 'nagpa' is a Buddhist who is not a monk (it was originally a Tibetan word for a lay priest, but it's since become more generalised). But, in D&D, it's an evil, greedy, treacherous monster trapped in an endless cycle of reincarnations... Oops!
The original nagpa from the Mystara setting were emphatically not evil, probably because the devs hadn't yet forgotten where they got the name from.
I actually think most Buddhists (and Wiccans) are secure enough in their beliefs not to be offended by this sort of thing, though. As long as WotC doesn't introduce a 'jihadist' class, I think they're pretty safe from reprisals by disgruntled religious groups. ;)
I actually think most Buddhists (and Wiccans) are secure enough in their beliefs not to be offended by this sort of thing, though. As long as WotC doesn't introduce a 'jihadist' class, I think they're pretty safe from reprisals by disgruntled religious groups. ;)
Ah someone missed the easily offended Wicca(n?) from around the time of 4th edition's release. It was sort of entertaining. Man that was an eternity ago now.
everything a Witch would probably be is already covered by the Warlock, Druid, Cleric, Wizard, and Shaman
There's also the problem that it's a terribly bland name. Some classes, like 'fighter' and 'rogue', are sufficiently well-established that having a boring name isn't a significant weakness (and can even be seen as a strength, since part of the attraction of these classes is that they can be used to portray a large variety of character archetypes). But if WotC are going to introduce an entirely new class, they're probably going to try to come up with a more interesting and evocative name for it.
Then again, they gave us the 'seeker', so what the hell do I know?
Ah someone missed the easily offended Wicca(n?) from around the time of 4th edition's release.
Obviously I did. I would argue that such people represent only a tiny minority of Wiccans, though. The only 'easily offended Wiccan' I've encountered online (on a neo-pagan forum I used to frequent years ago) turned out in the end to be a fundie Christian whose online persona was based on what he thought Wiccans were like. Luckily, he was a total idiot and outed himself after a few weeks by bragging on another (Christian) site, where he presumably thought none of us would ever dare to go, about how he had us all fooled (which he didn't - most of us had already realised he wasn't quite 'right'). I'm still not sure what he was hoping to accomplish, other than just being annoying, though.
The only religious types I've personally encountered who were really genuinely touchy about their own faith have all been either Christians or Muslims.
I would argue that such people represent only a tiny minority of Wiccans, though.
Oh I'm sure they are, you just reminded me of that incident so I felt I had to mention it. Probably could have worded my mention better though.
Promised? What do you mean promised? They said yearly PHBs were the release plan, and they've changed the plan. If it means new books are more focused and coherent, all the better, I say.
Oh, I am sorry, I just assume that when someone says something that they mean it. I know when I say "it is my intention to do x, y or z" then I do my utmost to do x, y or z. Not say "things change so now we will give you a, b and c instead."
Don't get me wrong, love the game, I play it weekly and enjoy it but I hate the way WotC does customer relations.
Dusk Blades would be great I could see them being AWESOME in 4ED right now the only arcane defenders are Swordmages who either have really good defenses and average DPR or high DPR and average Defenses. It would also be nice to have an Arcane Defender who could do stuff like build walls or had a power set that literally turned him into an Arcane Defender such as MAGE ARMOR, MAGIC WEAPON, FORCE SHIELD, ENLARGE PERSON. A class feature that allows him to retrain powers from any arcane class based on his discipline would be a great idea.
Um... why not just design new powers for the swordmage? Seriously. We already have a class that's "I'm a defender who combines arcane magic and swordplay." If you can't find the powers you want for the concept, ask WotC to add powers, not a new class that will have the kinds of powers you're missing. Mage armor is a class feature now, with a few feats and a power or two that expand it. Magic weapon is an artificer power now, since spells are class-specific, and it fits artificer the best. And I don't know what you're going for with the "can take powers from any arcane class" thing. It just doesn't sound right to me. But then again, I have suggested that some arcane powers be made generic spells that any arcane class could have. Like fireball. It should be just as accessible to sorcerers. Currently, that works by reinventing fireball as a sorcerer spell, rather than saying either class can learn it. A little gratuitious in my opinion, but that's what WotC is doing.
And Pyke_Moonshadow, I think malisteen is right. As far as I know, WotC never promised to do 1 PHB a year for the entire run of of 4e. When they released 4e, it was their plan to do a PHB a year. I see nothing wrong with, after a few years of them doing that, deciding that there are better approaches and trying something new. I'd say it's better for them to change their plan than release, say PHB 7 in a few years, after they've run out of good ideas, just for the sake of keeping their word. There's a point where it's acceptable to talk about changing plans if they look untenable.
And Pyke_Moonshadow, I think malisteen is right. As far as I know, WotC never promised to do 1 PHB a year for the entire run of of 4e. When they released 4e, it was their plan to do a PHB a year. I see nothing wrong with, after a few years of them doing that, deciding that there are better approaches and trying something new. I'd say it's better for them to change their plan than release, say PHB 7 in a few years, after they've run out of good ideas, just for the sake of keeping their word. There's a point where it's acceptable to talk about changing plans if they look untenable.
Let's just say I disagree that we have reached the point of untenablility and leave it at that.
Um... why not just design new powers for the swordmage? Seriously. We already have a class that's "I'm a defender who combines arcane magic and swordplay." If you can't find the powers you want for the concept, ask WotC to add powers, not a new class that will have the kinds of powers you're missing. Mage armor is a class feature now, with a few feats and a power or two that expand it. Magic weapon is an artificer power now, since spells are class-specific, and it fits artificer the best. And I don't know what you're going for with the "can take powers from any arcane class" thing. It just doesn't sound right to me. But then again, I have suggested that some arcane powers be made generic spells that any arcane class could have. Like fireball. It should be just as accessible to sorcerers. Currently, that works by reinventing fireball as a sorcerer spell, rather than saying either class can learn it. A little gratuitious in my opinion, but that's what WotC is doing.
also, multiclass feat + power swap feat = done
And Pyke_Moonshadow, I think malisteen is right. As far as I know, WotC never promised to do 1 PHB a year for the entire run of of 4e. When they released 4e, it was their plan to do a PHB a year. I see nothing wrong with, after a few years of them doing that, deciding that there are better approaches and trying something new. I'd say it's better for them to change their plan than release, say PHB 7 in a few years, after they've run out of good ideas, just for the sake of keeping their word. There's a point where it's acceptable to talk about changing plans if they look untenable.
Let's just say I disagree that we have reached the point of untenablility and leave it at that.
Sounds fair to me. And I agree with you there.
The Swordmage has always had a utility that let it increase its size.
Its power selection already has a wide variety of magical augments for its weapons, though its wall power selection is limited.
Also, High Dpr/ low defence, low dpr/high defence seems like a fair trade off between builds. The paladin has a similar balance. The Warden's mostly just a big bag of HP with low dpr. And the fighter is a striker in defender's clothin.
Striker - Assassin
Defender - Hexblade
Controller - Necromancer
Leader - Hexer
I've done a little reading on the subject (emphasis on little), and it seems to be about right. Assassins do great strikes against single targets; Necromancers seem to be much like wizards in their control of magic, though in 3.5 they seemed to incorporate clerics and druids as well; Hexblades seem the best armed and armored of the group, while Hexers seem to need better Intelligence and Charisma.
Just my 2 cents.
If they did do a witch (which I really don't think they will) it would be much more appropriate as a primal leader than a shadow leader. As for what I want to see in general, I agree another Psionic Striker who uses PP wouldn't hurt. They could call it something like Sentinel or Tracer, but I REALLY do not want ANOTHER weapon-using Psionic class. I really hope they give the BM and Ardent Ki Foci in Psionic Power. For Elemental classes, I want to see somwthing like the runepriest, where they have a generic class feature that gets layered on with elemental riders.
Perhaps, for example, a defender whose mark does ongoing fire damage if he picks a fire rider on a power he just used, or immobilies them if he chose ice, and so on. A leader who gives different bonuses depending on the element he's using might tread on the Runepriest, but meh.
If they did do a witch (which I really don't think they will) it would be much more appropriate as a primal leader than a shadow leader.
i agree with you. unfortunately, that window seems largely closely. If that is true, then shadow source seems like the next best fit for a witch class.
At this point, honestly, I just want to hear that there will be a PH4, hardbound.
The article that went up today sounds like confirmation that Players Options: Heroes of X will be the new Player's Handbook line.
I was going to provide a quote, but now I'm struggling to find it. So I'll just link the article:
wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/dramp...
At this point, honestly, I just want to hear that there will be a PH4, hardbound.
The article that went up today sounds like confirmation that Players Options: Heroes of X will be the new Player's Handbook line.
I was going to provide a quote, but now I'm struggling to find it. So I'll just link the article:
wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/dramp...
And from the sounds of the same article they wont be hardbound. Trade Paperback size is same as the original books but soft bound.
Hopefully we'll still see Elemental Power source classes in future but it looks like the next batch will be Shadow.
Heroes of Shadow does seem to be offering options related to a theme, it mentions Clerics getting Shadow powers so if there was a Heroes of Elements book, it would offer new Elemental classes and elemental options for classes.
I do hope they'll show us new classes for old power sources, e.g. New Psionic classes and hopefully more of the old power sources too.
i hope they make the rogue soon, i love that class.
??? Um... we've had the rogue class since the very beginning of 4e? It's in PHB1, so need for it in PHB4 - which may only come if they move away from the Essentials/Heroes of X model it looks like they'll be moving to.
I hope the essential model fails so we will stay with what we have been using for the past 2 years. It works and as the old adage says, If it ain't broke don't fix it. While there have been quite a few things errataed it is still for the most part the same game that started 2 years ago. This esential line is something very different but with the same game mechanics. I would rather see less products per year than to see this edition change.
*sigh*
Essentials is 10 books and done, and is not an edition change in any event.
*sigh*
As for PHB4, I seriously hope we don't see one. There's plenty of classes out there, I don't think we need more.
As for PHB4, I seriously hope we don't see one. There's plenty of classes out there, I don't think we need more.
But we are getting more. It's already been confirmed that Players Options: Heroes of Shadow will include the assassin, hexblade, and necromancer.
If this is wizards last ditch hope to make money off this edition
Every product in every consumer related business is a last ditch hope to make money. Always has been, always will be.
i hope they make the rogue soon, i love that class.
??? Um... we've had the rogue class since the very beginning of 4e? It's in PHB1, so need for it in PHB4 - which may only come if they move away from the Essentials/Heroes of X model it looks like they'll be moving to.
Cant you read sarcasim?
i hope they make the rogue soon, i love that class.
??? Um... we've had the rogue class since the very beginning of 4e? It's in PHB1, so need for it in PHB4 - which may only come if they move away from the Essentials/Heroes of X model it looks like they'll be moving to.
Cant you read sarcasim?
Oh. No, I can't read sarcasm.
who's being sarcastic?
who's being sarcastic?
Dont be a dick