Assassin here: www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/drfe/2... .
Well, there sure is a lot of shadowy, misty, illusiony stuff in there! (Leira would be proud. ::sniffle:
And while there was lots of death, I didn't notice any necrotic keyword listings per se.
So...Any new thoughts on the future shadow classes in light (or dark!) of this? Where do the Necromancer and Illusionist base class ideas/theories stand now? How does the definition of the Shadow power source seem to be shaping up?
I would expect Hexblade to be a defender, maybe another striker.
Illusionist is a build of Wizard now, so I wouldn't hold on to the thought. Don't know if the Necromancer will be supported at all since it's "evil".
So that leaves control and leader, and I don't have an idea for either of them really.
I am betting a hexblade/Black guard character type for defender
I also see an illusanist/ Necromancer for COntroler
I still see their being a Necromancer. A necromancer is no more 'evil' than an assassin, in fact they were less evil back in previous editions (there was no alignment restriction as opposed to assassins). And various books have explored how you could have a necromancer that was non-evil.
I suspect that not all of their powers will be related to raising corpses as zombies, some of them will be calling on vengeful incorpeal spirits, and others will be about inflicting necrotic, poison, cold and psychic damage, with plenty of effects that daze, blind or weaken.
Hexblade I definitely see as a defender. Their 'hex' or whatever it's called now will be a way of defending their allies by cursing them with a mark, that brings great misfortune if they attack anyone else.
I still see their being a Necromancer. A necromancer is no more 'evil' than an assassin, in fact they were less evil back in previous editions (there was no alignment restriction as opposed to assassins). And various books have explored how you could have a necromancer that was non-evil.
I suspect that not all of their powers will be related to raising corpses as zombies, some of them will be calling on vengeful incorpeal spirits, and others will be about inflicting necrotic, poison, cold and psychic damage, with plenty of effects that daze, blind or weaken.
Hexblade I definitely see as a defender. Their 'hex' or whatever it's called now will be a way of defending their allies by cursing them with a mark, that brings great misfortune if they attack anyone else.
Hexblade's Curse definatly has marking potential,
It would be really cool to have the Hexblade's Curse markings ystem offer a choice as to the detriment to the marked creature attacking like the 3e version did.
Maybe a choice between damage, a penalty to defenses/attacks/damage, weakening the marker target.
Oh, all the wonderfully wicked options.
Necromancer can be a good controller option.
The assassin is an great striker.
But what about the Shadow leader?
I know that WotC have said they don't feel compelled to create each role for each power source, but what what might this one look like if they decide to make one?
How about a Ghostwalker as another shadow striker. It could be a secondary controller or defender depending on which build you choose.
Shadow leader? Nothing comes to mind yet. But how cool would it be to rip someones shadow apart (along with a chunk of life energy) and feed it to your ally!
It seems to me that Leader might be the one missing role from the Shadow power source, like Controller is (for now) missing from Martial... After all how can you heal with shadow?
Maybe the necromancer is the leader. He brings his allies back from the dead...
Necromancer makes more sense to me as a Leader than a Controller.
Yeah a necromancer as a leader, their healing is from their mastery of death. They take life and give it type thing, or maybe the syphon life from one being and give it to another.
So then what about controller? Illusionist is a sub of wizard again so what other ideas for a shadow controler do people have.
I could see the Beguiller back, as a Shadow Controller to go along with the Necromancer and Hexblade (and exclusive Assassin).
Beguiller would be like a Dark Bard, more like the Cunning Bard, but less on the music and poetry, more on the deception, illusion, lying, trickery, and such.
If the Invoker is what happens when you take the Devoted Cleric far enough it becomes a controller, and the Paladin is what happens when you take the Battle Cleric far enough it becomes a defender, this is our model for making a new class like this - Beguiller is what happens when you take the Cunning Bard so far it becomes a controller. However, the dark characteristics of the Beguiller easily transform it from Arcane to Shadow.
It would make a new Illusion-based class, to supplement some Wizards and some Bards and some Assassins, and would do it in a Shadowy, liarful way. Like the flavour of a rogue, only as a caster, rather than a weapons-user. If Assassin is a Magical Ninja to the Rogue's more realistic Ninja, then the Beguiller would be a caster to the Rogue's weapons.
I could see the Beguiller back, as a Shadow Controller to go along with the Necromancer and Hexblade (and exclusive Assassin).
Beguiller would be like a Dark Bard, more like the Cunning Bard, but less on the music and poetry, more on the deception, illusion, lying, trickery, and such.
If the Invoker is what happens when you take the Devoted Cleric far enough it becomes a controller, and the Paladin is what happens when you take the Battle Cleric far enough it becomes a defender, this is our model for making a new class like this - Beguiller is what happens when you take the Cunning Bard so far it becomes a controller. However, the dark characteristics of the Beguiller easily transform it from Arcane to Shadow.
It would make a new Illusion-based class, to supplement some Wizards and some Bards and some Assassins, and would do it in a Shadowy, liarful way. Like the flavour of a rogue, only as a caster, rather than a weapons-user. If Assassin is a Magical Ninja to the Rogue's more realistic Ninja, then the Beguiller would be a caster to the Rogue's weapons.
I like.
A necromancer is no more 'evil' than an assassin, in fact they were less evil back in previous editions (there was no alignment restriction as opposed to assassins).
I remember the 1E AD&D Necromancer that appeared in Dragon magazine (I might even still have that issue lying aroudn somewhere). You could be any alignment at the start. However, as you went up in level you slowly shifted to evil, and you eventually became a lich.
No idea on 2e Necros. But at least in the beginning, they were meant to be evil.
I suppose what matters is what type of Necromancer you are. Use powers that draw on Necromantic energy? Not necessarily evil. Experiment with bodies, cutting them up and putting them back together like some sick Mengele experiment to make undead servants or see how things work, raising undead... probably evil.
Defender: Hexblade. Protects his allies by hexing his enemies.
Controller: Shadowcaster. Uses Constitution as a main stat and bends the raw power of the Shadowfell to his fingers.
Leader: Necromancer. With mastery over death comes mastery over life, and thus the Necromancer can channel both into his allies and his enemies.
We need another class though - since Assassin isn't in PH4. That's why I propose a second Controller, the Beguiller. It's different enough from the Shadowcaster without losing the shadow concept.
Also, despite the history with the name Shadowcaster (it's the "original" shadow class), I've always preferred to call them Shadoweavers.
I have to completely disagree with the idea as the Necromancer as a leader. Shadow based necromancers are not masters over life and death, they are the masters of making dead animuses work again through infusing them with shadow stuff. Were this to be attempted on a living creature there are basically only two outcomes....well okay three if you count death. 1) creature becomes undead 2)creature remains living but ends up acting like a mindless undead anyways Really neither of those options are particularly good.
2)creature remains living but ends up acting like a mindless undead anyways. Really neither of those options are particularly good.
Hmm... Actually, I think it would depend on the duration.
the Warlord can give a Basic attack to an ally. the Psion (at level 3) can have an enemy attack another enemy. If a Necormancer can infuse an animus with a compulsion, make an animus even with a soul dance thike a puppet on strings...
Some ideas for future Shadow classes.
Necromancer (Shadow Controller [or Leader]): Necromancer could work either as a Controller or Leader. Because a big draw of the necromancer is the hordes of minions, I'd say Controller with a secondary focus on Leader would work best. Undead hordes would work like movable walls - the necromancer would be able to reposition them with a minor action, and they'd make a basic attack against each adjacent foe each turn. Other powers would include a lot of necrotic, acid, and poison attacks.
If you wanted to go with the other way around (A Leader Necromancer with a secondary Controller focus, similar to how the Warlock is a Striker/Controller), the necromancer might have a mechanic that lets him gain temporary healing surges when he kills enemies. This is balanced by the fact that the necromancer's "healing word" power drains one of his healing surges to use, since the necromancer steals life from others to heal.
Beguiler (Shadow Controller): An illusionist/shadowcaster class that manipulates the shadows to befuddle and trick his enemies. Would combine a roguish skill set with the ability to manipulate enemies and enemy positions through the use of illusions. Powers might include luring enemies toward (or driving them away from) a certain location with a shadowy illusion, or covering the enemy in a cloud of darkness that obscures their vision.
Nightstalker (Shadow Striker): A striker class focused on emulating the powers of the undead. Would have a lot of powers like ghoul touch or vampiric touch which drain life from or weaken enemies. It's highly probable that we'll get a second shadow striker class, and the assassin covers the "shadowy, stealthy killer" angle, so a more proactive, offensive variant of the necromancer might fit the bill.
Hexblade (Shadow Defender): A defender class based on using the powers of the shadowfell to curse enemies. The hexblade's curse would kick in whenever the enemy aimed at a target besides the caster.
Here is what I expect:
Defender: Hexblade (has a curse marking mechanic)
Leader: Necromancer (focuses on having undead armies)
Striker: Assassin was my best thought and they are Dragon only
Controller: Witch (come on, the powers are called Hexes!)
I expect one of two things to happen.
1) Necromancer will be a Leader, and there will be a 2nd (after the Assassin) Striker, so that the PHB will have one of each role.
2) Necromancer will be a Controller, and there will be 1 Leader, 2 Controllers, 1 Defender, and 0 Strikers.
It's possible that the entire Shadow power source will be published as DDI exclusives.
It's possible ... but not likely.
Lots of interesting ideas! Thanks for discussing. {wow, quoting now is...eek. i'm gonna try to use some color and see if that helps.}
I would expect Hexblade to be a defender, maybe another striker.
Illusionist is a build of Wizard now, so I wouldn't hold on to the thought. Don't know if the Necromancer will be supported at all since it's "evil".
So that leaves control and leader, and I don't have an idea for either of them really.
Just to get technical here, there is no "Illusionist" build for wizards. There is a series of illusion-themed powers that wizards can select as they go from level 1 to 10. Swordmages similarly have a selection of elemental-themed powers presented together in an article, but that also is not a build and hardly makes them an Elemental power source class.
Before the Assassin article there was already an argument that there may not be an Illusionist base class from the Shadow power source. However, the fact that many of our first Shadow class's basic powers are illusions seems like possible evidence to the contrary. Additionally, the devs stated in the intro (or was it Ampersand?) that future power sources might overlap a bit with current ones and that they were okay with that.
I still see their being a Necromancer. A necromancer is no more 'evil' than an assassin, in fact they were less evil back in previous editions (there was no alignment restriction as opposed to assassins). And various books have explored how you could have a necromancer that was non-evil.I suspect that not all of their powers will be related to raising corpses as zombies, some of them will be calling on vengeful incorpeal spirits, and others will be about inflicting necrotic, poison, cold and psychic damage, with plenty of effects that daze, blind or weaken.
I agree. I don't think the entire Shadow power source will be so morally complex that it needs to be presented online only. Btw, cool ideas for powers.
Shadow leader? Nothing comes to mind yet. But how cool would it be to rip someones shadow apart (along with a chunk of life energy) and feed it to your ally!
Gross and horrific, yet cool! Perhaps a Necromancer leader could "reallocate" healing surges around the battlefield. (Oh wait, except monsters don't have surges, do they? Darn.)
If the Invoker is what happens when you take the Devoted Cleric far enough it becomes a controller, and the Paladin is what happens when you take the Battle Cleric far enough it becomes a defender, this is our model for making a new class like this - Beguiller is what happens when you take the Cunning Bard so far it becomes a controller. However, the dark characteristics of the Beguiller easily transform it from Arcane to Shadow.It would make a new Illusion-based class, to supplement some Wizards and some Bards and some Assassins, and would do it in a Shadowy, liarful way. Like the flavour of a rogue, only as a caster, rather than a weapons-user. If Assassin is a Magical Ninja to the Rogue's more realistic Ninja, then the Beguiller would be a caster to the Rogue's weapons.
This extension of other classes is a neat way to look at things. I especially like the concept in the bolded part about a caster who uses spells like a rogue uses daggers.
I have to completely disagree with the idea as the Necromancer as a leader. Shadow based necromancers are not masters over life and death, they are the masters of making dead animuses work again through infusing them with shadow stuff. Were this to be attempted on a living creature there are basically only two outcomes....well okay three if you count death. 1) creature becomes undead 2)creature remains living but ends up acting like a mindless undead anyways Really neither of those options are particularly good.
Another cool direction for Necromancers. There was a bit about Assassins trading part of their soul to the Shadowfell "just like other Shadow classes." Perhaps a future shadow class (controller? Necromancer?) will force this "infusing" onto other creatures temporarily; that would certainly fit with the term HEX. Although I disagree that Necromancers couldn't be leaders, I AGREE in regards to them not being portrayed as "masters of life" as well as death. That might fit logically, but it feels off (imho) in terms of flavor.
Controller: Witch (come on, the powers are called Hexes!)
Yup...a "witch"-type class came to mind for me as well with the term hexes. 
In other speculation...I know this has come up elsewhere before, but it now seems more clear (to me at least) how a single Shadow class might subsume both the Necromancer and the Illusionist (not that I'm arguing that should happen). What would your opinion be if in lieu of two separate classes we had a single shadowcaster controller with an illusionist/psyche build and a necromancer/corpse build or something like that? (Reminds me of the FRCG 3e PrC Shadow Adept, I think.)
Also, I've avoided it long enough...what exactly is the hexblade?
{Edit: Hey, my preview didn't have all the white quote boxes! And what's with all the huge spaces?? Lol...I'm going insane.}
Just to get technical here, there is no "Illusionist" build for wizards. There is a series of illusion-themed powers that wizards can select as they go from level 1 to 10.
I'll take it you don't have Arcane Power, because not only is there an Illusionist Wizard build, but a large portion of the powers from 1-30 are Illusion powers. There is also an Implement Mastery devoted to Illusion, the Orb of Deception (which keys off of Charisma, BTW).
I think it is fairly likely that we won't see an illusionist class as a separate class. Of course, I got the feeling the Battlerager Fighter was supposed to be a Barbarian derivative, and we still have the Barbarian class, so just about anything is possible.
The battlerager is a more martial focused barabarian, since the new barbarian is primal powered (with the spirit calling like powers and what not). I think the battlerager and 4e barbarian are two extrememes of what the 3.5 barbarian was supposed to represent. My 2 cents on the subject.
But yeah Arcane Power devoted a lot of space to the Illusionist build, with PP's even, and so I don't think Illusionist is gonna happen.
The necromancer is a possible controler (since people don't like the idea of them healing), whatabout then a blackguard as a defender, and hexblade as leader ( could that even work). Should shadow power source even have a leader?
My bad! No, sadly I don't have Arcane Power yet. 
(Haven't written up a CB wizard in a while either, apparently.)
Necro does seem more like a leader, but they have already given other classes necromantic abilities. it could become some other wizard/class build like illusionist.
I'm expecting to see Shadowcasters as a shadow controller... from 3.0's supplement that included pact and true name magic.
But yeah Arcane Power devoted a lot of space to the Illusionist build
It did, didn't it? I think that was one of the only things that bothered me about that book and about 4e this far in general. It was a bit disappointing that a big swath of the wizard section was reprinted powers from Dragon. XD
On the Necromancer, remember that summoning is more of a controller trait than a leader one.
A Controller Necro would be able to summon the dead to rise from the ground or appear from the air, throw curses to drain the life out of huge areas of the battlefield, and debilitate his enemies with disease and despair and death itself.
A Leader Necro would have to have healing capabilities, and his summons would be more akin to the shaman's, buffing allies rather than being a focal point of destruction. This would mean his summons would be less focused on damage and status effects than on providing bonuses to surrounding allies. His hexes would be more defensive in nature, less likely to reduce a foe to a quivering mass of diseased jelly than to provide armor and hit bonuses to other people. In short, making him a Leader would water down the necromantic essence of destruction and death inherent to the class.
Necromancers lead their minions, but that doesn't make them Leaders. A Leader buffs the party members, improves their abilities, and heals them when they fall. This is not the Necro's job. He isn't concerned with the living. Combat Necromancy is about dominating the battlefield, crushing the enemies, binding their corpses to your service, and laughing at the lamentation of their significant others. He is a Controller, hands down.
I could easily see the necromancer stealing life energy from his allies to give it to the guy who's about to fall over. It would be like the artificer healing powers, where he would draw on any ally's surges to heal the party. Many of his attacks could steal energy from opponents and dump it in his buddys. He could also do stuff like letting his allies tap into their own life energies to fuel their attacks, giving attack and damage bonuses at the cost of hp or healing surges.
I think the "manipulation of life energy angle" should be played up in a necromancer class, and the "vasy hordes of undead" should be de-emphasized. Any undead that are called should be summons that share the necromancer's actions or walls/zones.
On the Necromancer, remember that summoning is more of a controller trait than a leader one.
A Controller Necro would be able to summon the dead to rise from the ground or appear from the air, throw curses to drain the life out of huge areas of the battlefield, and debilitate his enemies with disease and despair and death itself.
A Leader Necro would have to have healing capabilities, and his summons would be more akin to the shaman's, buffing allies rather than being a focal point of destruction. This would mean his summons would be less focused on damage and status effects than on providing bonuses to surrounding allies. His hexes would be more defensive in nature, less likely to reduce a foe to a quivering mass of diseased jelly than to provide armor and hit bonuses to other people. In short, making him a Leader would water down the necromantic essence of destruction and death inherent to the class.
Necromancers lead their minions, but that doesn't make them Leaders. A Leader buffs the party members, improves their abilities, and heals them when they fall. This is not the Necro's job. He isn't concerned with the living. Combat Necromancy is about dominating the battlefield, crushing the enemies, binding their corpses to your service, and laughing at the lamentation of their significant others. He is a Controller, hands down.
THIS is the poop. I think it's thematically and mechanically on the money. Necromantic leader stuff isn't "bad" or "wrong" at all, I'd say, but I might have to agree with it being a secondary thing.
Since (as I now know) there is a straight-up illusionist Wizard build, illusiony stuff may play second or third fiddle to death and darkness when it comes to Shadow power source hexes. It'll obviously be somewhat present in the idea of mystery, concealment, and shadows, but maybe not as front and center as an illusionist base class.
Also, remember what was (awesomely, imho) done to the Druid and the Cleric. We may find ourselves with two "Necromancers": a death summoner controller and a soul-manipulating leader (distinct from the Shaman, of course).
Lastly, Shadow defender: EXECUTIONER! Assassin, Executioner, Necromancer, and Exorcist...how badass does that power source sound now?! 
I heard there were hopes for the Shadowdancer to be a class. If warden can be expanded into its own class, I'm sure Shadowdancer could be too. It'd make a great Striker.
Necromancer is a Controller. Duh.
With the term "Hexes," I see how a Hexblade could be a Defender, as well as how neat it'd be to "hex" people.
I'll say perhaps the Beguiler for the Leader, if only because I don't know any older concepts otherwise. Perhaps they'll make some new concept for us to use.
Necromancer is a Controller. Duh.
Dear god, it's so simple. How did we not see it before?
Nothing wrong with having two controllers, Beguiler-ish deception and Necromantic might, each a different side of shadow. It's about time we got a little more asymmetry. Martial's getting lonely as the only one source that doesn't have to fit the grid. Combine them with the stab-happy Assassin and the dread knight-ish hexblade, and you've got a good source flavored around offense and destruction, heavy on the damage, light on the healing and defense, just like it should be.
I think a leader that summons could be pretty cool. Just make the summons slightly sub par, then give the leader a bunch of powers that boost "all allies."
On the Necromancer, remember that summoning is more of a controller trait than a leader one.
The Artificer, a Leader, has a summoner build. It pretty much proves it's possible for the Necromancer to be a Leader.
Necromancer is a Controller. Duh.
Or not.
Nothing wrong with having two controllers, Beguiler-ish deception and Necromantic might, each a different side of shadow. It's about time we got a little more asymmetry. Martial's getting lonely as the only one source that doesn't have to fit the grid. Combine them with the stab-happy Assassin and the dread knight-ish hexblade, and you've got a good source flavored around offense and destruction, heavy on the damage, light on the healing and defense, just like it should be.
I almost feel two Controllers are more likely than a new Striker, though I imagine people will whine about the only Shadow Striker being DDi exclusive if that happens. As if there's not a single other class (Swordmage) that has been done the same way at all.
keeping something like that DDi may be smart move for their part. It rewards people who already subscribe, and incourages others to buy a subscription.
I stoped playing 3.5 before beguiler came out so not familiar with it, but could be fun. I'm not sure how I feel about the necro though. But yeah I could deal with a lack of leader, it may not be the best for the power source. I would recomend 2 controllers or 2 defenders since strikers are faily common at this point.
So far I'm not really into any of the Controller concepts that I'm hearing about; I Necro Controller would be way too much like a Wizard, If you want to be a Controller necro, just be a Wizard.
The Beguiler is hard to see being that unique either; If they use their spell like a rogue uses daggers, wouldn't they be strikers, and at that point you just have a more ranged Assassin, and if it's a controller what would be it's theme that makes it different than a Illusionist?
So far I'm not really into any of the Controller concepts that I'm hearing about; I Necro Controller would be way too much like a Wizard, If you want to be a Controller necro, just be a Wizard.
Let me take a crack at it. As a Necro, your day to day activities will include....
-Sending your custom monstrosity into the fray, a specialized bodyguard who travels with you like a pet or loyal minion, your first line of defense.
-Empowering the lingering diseases that run through an opponent's body, plaguing them with sudden illnesses until they collapse in a festering heap, or blast them with repulsive and revolting waves of horrid energy to weaken the body and the will.
-Drawing the life directly out of bleeding foes, replenishing your life energy with theirs.
-Turning friend into foe, reviving the fallen enemies as shambling servants to feed your undead army.
-Command a varied and variable host; bind the wailing spirits of the restless dead into sinister specters, shuffling corpse guards, clacking and cackling skeletons, or swarms of animated bits and body parts imbued with malicious will.
-Be the absolute master of minion flexibility; detonate stray corpses or your own minions, devour flesh to replenish their strength, or fuse multiple forms together into a horrid monstrosity of flailing limbs.
Mechanically...
-Overwhelming tide: the wizard is a shock and awe controller, firing off quick effects and instant destruction. The necro would be more akin to the guardian druid's growing area effects, getting stronger as time passes and more fuel is added to the fire, more corpses and energy to feed the horde and develop their endgame.
-Minion mastery; not only would the necro fulfill the standard controller shtick of minion clearing, he would be a master of turning the odds against the opponent, using the bodies of the fallen for his own devices, gathering minions of his own from the ranks of the dead.
-Variable builds; you have conditional effects through disease and death, damage through necrotic sources, and summoning dead minions. But you also have the potential for several sub-builds; a pet system wherein you create your specialized, customized monstrosity that journeys with you from battle to battle, a minion pool that allows you to unleash quick-yet-fragile servants immediately into the fight, or corpsecrafting your very flesh to change yourself, imbuing the necro with various undead traits to allow him to thrive individually.
That necro you described had me up until the end, no grafting (feats maybe)
But you inspired me: Necro Defender. Weird I know, but hold on. You have a 'pet' a creature that you actually use to fight, like how the shaman uses his spirit instead of wading in himself. it's weird but i would like to see anothe rclass like that at somepoint.
That necro you described had me up until the end, no grafting (feats maybe)
Aye, feats, or dare I say it, given the monk's ability to modify their own body and enchant their fists....equipment. >:D
A Necro leader, however, may be able to do fancier things with his minions.
Raise Skeletons: Summon 3 skeletons in squares within range. (summons can flank) As a minor action, you may command each of them to Aid Another. As a Reaction, you may have one make an OA for minion damage.
A Necro leader, however, may be able to do fancier things with his minions.
Raise Skeletons: Summon 3 skeletons in squares within range. (summons can flank) As a minor action, you may command each of them to Aid Another. As a Reaction, you may have one make an OA for minion damage.
Me like.
Well, just remember we could see the necromancer split into more than one class. Controller, leader, even defender ideas...they all sound like they have potential for coolness.
I really like the gradual "overwhelming tide" controller concept. 
...And the leading undead minions like chess pieces one, too.
The main reason I see Necromancers (at least, a class actively called Necromancer) as a Controller is because their fluff has always been more about the summoned creatures and 'waves of death' type powers than anything that seems Leaderish. Remember, a Leader's role is to help the other party members by boosting AC, healing, giving extra attacks, repositioning, and other such things. While a Necromancer technically is a Leader to their summoned minions, that still makes them more of a Controller to the rest of the party. I admit a Leader(ish) Necromancer could be done, but I don't think it would be very convincing.
Personally, I think the Illusionist (or the Beguiler, as others have brought up) actually makes a better possibility for a Shadow Leader. Fooling enemies, fooling friends, it's all the same to an Illusionist- and it makes them a natural, I think.
I could see a "Hexblade" and/or "Forsaken" Shadow Defender, the first channelling necrotic energy through their weapon to blight and curse their foes and make them weak (I actually tried to assemble a class like that, come to think of it) and the second channelling that energy into themself to mimic the powers of the Undead. A "Wraithblade", who uses illusions and phantasms to throw his foes off so he can kill them and shield his allies also makes sense.
A second Shadow Striker might be a sort of "Death Mage", a Shadow Sorcerer who uses all of the really nasty "Death Magic" spells from fantasy past. Boiling the blood in your veins, exhaling a bone-shattering gust of wind so cold it strips the flesh from your bones, calling swarms of shadowy fliers that strip you down to bloody gobbets of meat, ripping the heart from your chest with a gesture, that sort of thing.
But what do I know?
Split the necromancer.
Necromancer: Shadow Controller - master of animating corpses and manipulates necrotic energy - undead minions and necrotic damage
Thaumaturge: Shadow Leader - master of life energy - steals life energy from foes and infuses allies
Necromancer can easily fit any of the four roles.
Controller: Area affect damage & debuff spells in the form of limiting conditions, summons and pets to disrupt enemy formations and target more enemies per turn.
Leader: Grant allies temporary hit points (through animating the dead flesh around their wounds), channeling hp from enemies to allies, debuffs in the form of penalties to attack, defenses, & damage (functionaly similar to buffing / healing allies), summons and pets to aid allies a la the shaman.
Defender: One tough pet that marks enemies, summons that gain extra attacks against enemies triggered by the tough pet's mark, hexes that debuff individual enemies, or channel HP from the enemy to the necromancer or pet. This is the worst fit, but could still easily work.
Striker: Seriously, why hasn't this been mentioned, yet? Debilitating touch attacks and death spells (which translate to 4e as high damage single target spells with ongoing damage on top), some life draining abilities, and a class pet specializing in hurting enemies a la the ranger.
So yeah, any of these could easily be a necromancer, or we could even see more then one, to the point that it's almost pointless to speculate. The only things almost assured are:
1) some type of minions - whether through summoning, a class pet, or both
2) necrotic damage - either mixed with cold or poison damage or with an extra class feature to overcome the ridiculously common resistance to necrotic.
As for other Shadow Classes - who knows? I'd like to see some undead controlling abilities spread out over two or three classes. I'd like to see at least one more striker - the shadow power source really should lean striker, imo. One interesting thing about the assassin that might spread to other Shadow classes was its multiple class feature powers, including one usable at will. If I were designing it, we'd see:
Hexknight: Defender with Sriker secondary. Curse enemies to mark - if they attack someone else they trigger the curse - gaining vulnerability to all damage you cause in the future. Where other defenders say "don't attack my allies or you'll regret it right now" the Hexknight says "don't attack my allies or you'll regret it even more in the future". Decent weapon attacks. Shares assassin's ki focus.
Example Hexknight Class Feature: Hexknight's Curse. All Hexknights know the Hexknights's curse power. Enemies under your curse suffer terrible retribution should they attack your allies. Minor action, close burst 5. The enemy is marked by you. If they make an attack that does not include you as a target they take necrotic damage equal to your |stat| mod and gain vulnerable 5 to damage from your attacks until the end of your next turn. Vulnerable 10 at level 11, vulnerable 15 at level 21. You can target only one enemy with your Hexknight's Curse at a time. Other Hexknight powers gain additional affects against your curse target or trigger when your curse target makes attacks that don't include you.
Necromancer: Leader with controller secondary. Pet Class with daily multi-summon powers, encounter buffs and debuffs (auras centered on self or pet, or touch attacks delivered simultenously through self and minions), and at will touch attacks. Debuffs are generally penalties to attack or defence or the weakened or slowed conditions. At will power to buff or heal ally slightly whenever a creature dies nearby. Pet and Summons are corporeal undead - multiple minions, balanced by the summons being actual minions - 1 HP each and no damage rolling. Healing abilities come at a cost - granting temporary hit points or buffs at the expense of healing surges or later debuffs. Corruption theme. Undead grafts as implements?
example class feature: Aura of Despair - a Bleak Necromancer possesses the Aura of Despair, channeling the life energy of his enemies to heal his allies. Whenever an enemy is bloodied or reduced to 0 hit points within three squares of the necromancer or his pet, one ally within three squares of the necromancer or his pet immediately regains 2 hit points, plus the necromancer's |stat| mod if the enemy ones not a minion. Increase to 4 hit points at 11th level, and 6 hit points at 21st level.
example class feature: False Life - all necromancers know the false life power, draining the essence of their allies to provide them temporary bursts of unnatural vigor. minor action, close burst 3 (centered on self or pet). One ally within the burst spends a healing surge, but does not regain any hit points. Instead they gain temporary hit points equal to their healing surge value +d6, and may roll a saving throw against one affect that a save can end. Usable twice per encounter. Scales as healing word.
example hex: summon skeletons: lv1 daily. "one or more skeletons bursts from the ground and attacks your foes with their claws". Standard action. Close burst 5. You summon one skeleton in the area. If there are any corpses of small or medium creatures in the area, you may summon up to two additional skeletons, one per corpse, which must start in the same square as the corpses. The skeletons have movement six, one hit point, and provide flanking. You may have each of the skeletons make a move action when you make a move action. Once, as a free action on the turn you summon them, and additionally as a standard action in subsequent turns, you may make a |stat|+2 vs. AC implement attack with each skeleton against an enemy adjacent to it, dealing 5 + |stat| damage. Additionally, the skeletons add +5 additional damage to any successful attack made by an ally flanking with them.
Example hex: puppet master: lv 13 encounter "Your enemies, and even your allies, jolt and twist, attacking at your command" close burst 2, centered on self or pet, targets all creatures in burst, implement, |stat| vs. will. Allies in the area may opt to be automatically hit by the effect. Creatures hit make a basic attack against a creature of your choice within their reach, including themselves. They have combat advantage for these attacks, and deal additional necrotic damage equal to your |stat| modifier. Afterwords, targets are slowed (save ends). bonus: if you have the right class feature, affected allies gain an additional bonus on the basic attack role equal to your |secondary stat| mod, and gain the same bonus on the save vs. slow.
Example item for necromancers: Enchanted Knucklebones, level one expendable. up to five of these knucklebones by be scattered into adjacent squares as a minor action. Each knucklebone is treated as the corpse of a medium humanoid creature for the purposes of effects that target corpses, and can only be targeted by such effects once, after which they are expended and may not be used again. Necromancers might gain a ritual to create a certain number of these per day for free.
Shadowdancer: Striker with Controller secondary. Extra striker damage in the form of class feature at will stances, leting the dancer shift from offense to defence, with an additional stance per class build. Stances can give the dancer bonuses to hit and damage, bonuses to defence and movement, or otherwise. Several of the class's powers will have different riders depending on what stance you're in when you use it. PrCs teach new dances or enhance old ones. All of this is augmented by daily summon powers for incorporeal undead 'backup dancers' which share the beneficial effects of your current stance, and let you target more enemies at once by attacking when you attack.
Beguiler: Controller with Striker secondary. Haven't thought as much about this one.
The main reason I suppose I advocate the Controller style Necromancer is simple. While it is true, as malisteen points out, that the Necro could be anything, the controller fits the traditional build the best.
Consider, if you will. Does a Necromancer typically...
Heal wounds, or inflict them?
Break curses (and other save-inducing things), or cast them?
Mend conditions, or create them?
Protect, or destroy?
Cure diseases, or spread them?
Leaders do the former. Controllers do that later.
Undeath, typically, involves a whole boatload of offense. The archetypal necromancer is the black-robed figure cackling alone in a crypt, sending wave after wave of menacing minion against his opponents. His servants fling themselves at the enemy with horrid malice, ripping, tearing, biting, clawing, doing anything they can to consume the targets of his ire, sacrificed for the cause at a moment's notice. He sends waves of horrid magic, terrible hexes that wither limbs, weaken organs, crush hope, inflict despair. He destroys, he decimates, he brings death.
His foil character is the cleric. The shield of the faith, the one who exorcises the minions, counters the horrid energy, breaks curses, revives the injured, preserves, protects, and brings life. The leader.
If the Necro is a leader, it would dilute his undeath flavor, focusing far too much on protection, healing, saves, and all those things that undeath abhors. If he is a defender, he'd lose his squishy-caster nature, the waves-of-darkness vibe, and the ability to control a horde. Likewise, being a striker would be too narrow a focus; what's the point of being a necro if you can't have a small army of skeletons rather than being restricted to just one.
The Necromancer is all about control. Control of minions, sacrificing them without concern to destroy his enemies, hence the wave-after-wave evocative image of undead hordes. Control of dark forces, curses, hexes, horrid powers that wither and winnow. Control of death, inflicting it upon all who meet him. He isn't a people person. He isn't a protector, a healer, a defender, a hexbreaker, or a leader of men, reliant upon mortal hands to accomplish his goals. He's undeath incarnate, and woe upon those who provoke his fury, for his malice binds the bones and seals the souls of the damned to bring doom upon the living.
Edit: can you tell that I have too much time on my hands? XD
Edit: can you tell that I have too much time on my hands? XD
To be fair, this is the WOTC forums, and it's probably safe to assume you aren't alone.
To be fair, this is the WOTC forums, and it's probably safe to assume you aren't alone.
True! 
Well obviously there a lot of reasons why it isnt too likely, and I suppose its really sentimentality on my part, but I'd really like to see the blackguard return- in some capacity.
Wizards; here's a protip.
Stop Previewing Strikers. I know you think "But strikers are teh hawtness!" but frankly there's more interesting things you can preview, such as Leaders or god forbid the Shadow Controller.
Also your class, is not an Assassin. Assassin is just someone that kills people for $.
What you made is the Shadowdancer.
Also your class, is not an Assassin. Assassin is just someone that kills people for $.
What you made is the Shadowdancer.
Also your class, is not a barbarian. Barbarian is just a non-civilized person.
What you made is the Totemist.
Also your class, is not an druid. Druid is just a celtic priest.
What you made is the shapeshifter.
A name is a name. Rage about it all you want but the class is still called assassin.
Assassin is something that is a Rogue already. Infact we already have a paragon path just for that sort of thing. And now we get a class, that functions identically to the previous editions Shadow Dancer with some extra trimmings thrown on top and that's an Assassin?
One of 3e's biggest problems was the I Fight With a Shoe so obviously I'm not just a fighter!. It irks me to see 4e is starting to tread right down that path.
I Like the Assassin's powers and abilities. It's very befitting what it is, which is the Shadowdancer.
Assassins are just ninjas (the mythical type not the historic type). But 4th, it seems, doesn't want region/culturally specific classes...so ninja becomes assassin.
and yes the ninja did kill the shadowdancer and take his stuff.
It still doesn't negate what I pointed out.
For the record:
as⋅sas⋅sin
/əˈsæs
ɪn/
–noun
1. a murderer, esp. one who kills a politically prominent person for fanatical or monetary reasons.
2. (initial capital letter) one of an order of Muslim fanatics, active in Persia and Syria from about 1090 to 1272, whose chief object was to assassinate Crusaders.
So an assassin is not "just someone who kills for $."
Or you could actually act intelligently in the first place and respond accordingly. And not "ZOMG HE ATTACKED!"
I said in the first post, that it was not an assassin, and that they already had a good working name for the class they have "made". (more like ported)
But then asking people to actually think and read someone's post before they post is asking for much. Apparently too much.
Or you could actually act intelligently in the first place and respond accordingly. And not "ZOMG HE ATTACKED!"
I acted perfectly reasonably. There was no aggression in my post.
Or you could actually act intelligently in the first place and respond accordingly. And not "ZOMG HE ATTACKED!"
I acted perfectly reasonably. There was no aggression in my post.
Actually you did. "Rage all you want" Sound familiar? See there's a big difference between Raging and commenting. You aren't the only one "smart" enough to make commentary on the interwebz without it being Nerd Rage.
You see, you implied that my post was nothing but Nerd Rage. When frankly it's not.
Actually you did. "Rage all you want" Sound familiar?
Sure. You were raging and still are.
fraid not. No veins bulging here.
One definition of "rage" not commonly cited is "a verb meaning to hold sway with unabated violence." You behaved belligerently when you were challenged, ergo you were raging.
2. (initial capital letter
And #2 is essentially known as the Avenger in 4e, mixed with a bit of witch-hunter, but still I think of Hashishin when I think of Avengers.
Wizards; here's a protip.
Stop Previewing Strikers. I know you think "But strikers are teh hawtness!" but frankly there's more interesting things you can preview, such as Leaders or god forbid the Shadow Controller.
Also your class, is not an Assassin. Assassin is just someone that kills people for $.
What you made is the Shadowdancer.
You have no evidence they think striker's are "the hawtness!", you assume the leader and controller will be more interesting.
You think the Assassin is just someone that kills people for $. Which is demonstratably false.
You compared the name of the class to a RL equivolent, ignoring this is a fantasy character in a fantasy world with a fantasy origin.
You think the class is the equivolent of the Shadow Dancer, dispite it not having the ability to hide in plain sight at will, have no ability to summon shades and it having a striker ability that takes time to develop (like the 3e Assassin takes rounds to build up to a kill).
You messed up with your post. That's pretty much it.
1) What's in a name? A rose by any other name would still smell as sweet. After all, 'wizard' and 'warlock' mean functionally the same thing. A 'druid' is just a particular culture's 'cleric', and in any event doesn't resemble a D&D 'Druid' at all. Any character could be a 'Rogue' - heck, my last 3e character, a Dread Necromancer, was a rogue by the dictionary definition, and I can't remember the last bard I saw that wasn't a rogue. And 'Fighter'? That doesn't mean anything at all. I mean, every D&D character fights. Seriously. Assassin is just a class name. The class 'Assassin' is no more the same as the word 'assassin' then the class 'Rogue' is the same as the word 'rogue'. And frankly, the class 'Assassin' has that name for the same reason that the class 'Rogue' does - that's what that concept was arbitrarily labeled in some earlier edition of D&D. Frankly, unless I see some summon powers, the class Assassin reminds me more of the 'Assassin' PrC then the 'Shadowdancer' PrC, anyway.
2) The Assassin is not preview content. PHBIII isn't out yet, it's much too early to be previewing material from PHBIV or V (and sadly, the Shadow power source is hardly guaranteed to be in IV). The Assassin is Dragon-exclusive material - something to make the DDI subscription seem more enticing. And I'm sure it was chosen in part because the name would be somewhat controversial, and the class itself might feel slightly redundant next to the rogue and avenger.
3) I'm glad to see that neither of you are angry, raging, or flaming. So maybe now we can get back to the topic at hand - which is "what might the Assassin class imply about the designe of future Shadow classes?", not "Argument thread about the name or alleged redundancy of the Assassin class #12."
On topic - The Assassin isn't jumping out with a lot of clear mechanical hooks. Unlike the Psion, for instance (hey, look, a previewed controller), there isn't any distinct mechanic that might be directly applied to other classes within the power source. There are a few general traits that are worth noting, however.
1) More information to track. The Assassin's core features require the player to keep track of cumulative counters over several rounds. This is a minor break from typical 4e precedent, where conditions are either on or off. A couple of the Assassin PrCs give the player additional pools of tokens to track (including soul counters - something we're likely to see on either the necromancer or its PrCs). One might speculate that as the Psionic power source was willing to varry the core power structure, so the Shadow power source might be willing to expect more attention of the player. This might be further expressed in cumulative tokens for other Shadow classes (I could easily envision a shadow Defender with some sort of cumulative marking effect), or more generally as other mechanics that also require additional attention (perhaps a necromancer with multiple pets or summons functioning at the same time).
2) The Assassin has multiple class feature powers that help enhance it's thematic connection to shadow and its utility in and out of combat. It's possible that other shadow classes may also have encounter and at will class feature utilityish powers in addition to the core role-function features and powers.
3) The Assassin has a heavy focus in stealth and teleportation. However, this may be more a focus of the class then of the power source as a whole.
On the other hand, the Monk is psionic, and has basically nothing to do with the other psionic classes, mechanically. This is because the Monk was originally in the 'Ki' power source, which collapsed and subsequently saw it's classes either dissolve or get folded into other power sources. The Assassin, with its 'Ki Focus' and thematic similarity to the 3e Ninja, is probably another Ki refugee, and as such likely tells us absolutely nothing about what the other Shadow classes will look like, especially when you consider that development for other Shadow classes probably only just started, and even then only if they're going to be in the PHBIV and not PHBV
Stop Previewing Strikers. I know you think "But strikers are teh hawtness!" but frankly there's more interesting things you can preview, such as Leaders or god forbid the Shadow Controller.
Well, a few issues with this:
1) It's not a preview. It is a full blown class made exclusively for Dragon.
2) There may or may not be a Shadow Controller made yet. Probably in the works, but seeing as it likely won't be out until PHB4 in 2011 at the earliest, there really isn't anything to preview. Besides, why preview somethign that won't be out for a year and a half? There's stuff coming out sooner that is more worthwhile to preview.
3) Strikers are popular. They're catering to their fan base. I can't blame them for that.
Some further ideas for classes:
Witch (Shadow Leader): Focuses on draining energy from enemies in order to aid allies. Will likely have a lot of curse powers that debilitate enemies, giving the witch a secondary controller role. May also have a few charm/dominate powers, but not as much as a psionic class or beguiler.
Likely stat arrangements are Charisma primary, with Dexterity and Constitution as secondary.
This seems to make sense as a leader class (since the reveal of the Seeker makes a primal witch less likely), and frees up the necromancer to become a Controller class (which it fits better as, IMO). An alternate name for the class could be Medium, representing someone with the ability to talk to the dead.
Other ideas include:
Necromancer (Shadow Controller): A summoning class with a lot of necrotic and poison blast attacks. INT primary, STR (or CON) and WIS secondary.
Beguiler (Shadow Controller): A rogue illusionist who uses the shadows to befuddle enemies. INT primary, DEX and CHA secondary.
Hexblade (Shadow Defender): A warrior who defends his allies by debilitating enemies with powerful curses. CHA (or INT) primary, STR and CON secondary.
Channeler (Shadow Striker): Instead of becoming one with the shadow like the assassin, the channeler takes on the properties of ghosts, vampires, ghouls, and other undead. Has both melee and ranged builds focused on offensive necromancy. INT primary, STR and DEX secondary.
images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://w...
In that link designer James Wyatt says something to the effect of "We haven't designed the Duskblade for 4e yet." Could have been an off handed comment, but also could mean they have been batting the idea around. Maybe the update will make duskblade a shadow class as opposed to arcane.
I like Omni's Idea of the Witch being a sadow class. The idea of the Witch as a leader makes sense to me. She could curse her enemies to buff her allies. I'm also reminded of an old class from way Way WAY back in the day from an ancient issue of Dragon, I think it was called the Incantatrix. The Incantatrix was very witchlike. I remeber the class being pretty cool, but the coolest thing about her was that she could steal memorized spells from a spell casters mind at random & cast them the next round. Maybe for 4th ed she could steal daily powers at random.
Maybe they could send some archeologists down into the ancient catacombs under the ruins of the abandoned TSR Headquarters building and unearth this particular piece of Arcana. I'm sure it couldn't hurt to bring it over and add some unique flavor to the Witch, and thus to the Darkness also.
Somewhere it was mentioned as well the idea of dual powersources. It could be that Duskblade is the first of them, Shadow/Arcane. When that idea gets included, the potential for so many more classes pops up, and makes one wonder whether some classes wouldn't have been better served with a dual powersource, as opposed to only one. I can't wait to see the other Shadow classes though, it makes me excited just thinking about it. Especially the Leader and the Controller, those ones should be interesting to see.
I think the important thing to note from that discussion is that assassins are the 'ki user' of the shadow powersource, and that they used to have full discipline powers, like the monk.
To me that, more then anything, is a confirmation that the assassin used to be in the ki powersource before it collapsed, and has nothing more to do with the rest of the shadow source classes then the monk does with the rest of the psionic classes. Which is to say, nothing what so ever.
The Assassin gives us no hints to the rest of the Shadow source at all. Not what the classses will look like, not what the mechanics will work like and not when the release is likely to be. Guesses about the shadow source are just as much shots in the dark* now as they were before the release of the assassin.
* pun intended
I think the important thing to note from that discussion is that assassins are the 'ki user' of the shadow powersource, and that they used to have full discipline powers, like the monk.
To me that, more then anything, is a confirmation that the assassin used to be in the ki powersource before it collapsed, and has nothing more to do with the rest of the shadow source classes then the monk does with the rest of the psionic classes. Which is to say, nothing what so ever.
The Assassin gives us no hints to the rest of the Shadow source at all. Not what the classses will look like, not what the mechanics will work like and not when the release is likely to be. Guesses about the shadow source are just as much shots in the dark* now as they were before the release of the assassin.
* pun intended
It's indeed probable that the assassin was a former Ki class. It may have even been called the "ninja" early on in development, and got changed to "assassin" after it moved to the Shadow source. I'm guessing that the shugenja and wu jen will reappear in the Elemental source, or get incorporated into those classes. The samurai will either become a multiclass specialization like the gladiator or assassin, or a brand new Martial or Psionic class which attempts to set itself apart from the fighter or monk.
As for the shadow classes, the Necromancer is pretty easy to guess. There will probably also be some sort of shadow illusionist/trickster class, hence the Beguiler. Anything else is mere speculation until we get previews for PHB4 (or wherever the Shadow source appears, though I can't see Elemental coming out before Shadow since there's less unique material to imagine there).
I really like the "traded a piece of their soul for shadow power" or "let part of their soul die" shadow fluff for assassins. It didn't sound like (in the podcast) all shadow classes would have that exact trade-off per se, but I figure they may at least have that sort of grim touch. Any interesting ideas for how that feel could play out in these other shadow classes we are hypothesizing?
For example, perhaps the witch has to cut him or herself off from society and become a hermit in order to maintain power. I don't know much about beguilers.....aren't they more roguish than tragic???