I miss the totemist class. It was a cool class. I liked the incarnum races..
Will totemist be a ki or a primal class?
Though incarnum was the use of soul energy that wasn't developed yet, so it would be a very different take on the ki power source, since ki is from your your own body and soul and incarnum is derived from external places and borrowed from the universe. It would be weird to turn your soul into an item for use. Can't be healthy.
I hope the ki power source doesn't only have asian classes. Ki is use of the soul as a sourse of power and is not limited to the asian type classes, at least in the d&d game setting.
I hope the ki power source doesn't only have asian classes. Ki is use of the soul as a sourse of power and is not limited to the asian type classes, at least in the d&d game setting.
Don´t worry. I have read some ki classes will not be eastern flavor.
The following is what we have heard about the Ki power source:
- Ki power is power from the soul. - This bit of information was latched onto by Incarnum fans as proof the Ki power source will be taking things from Incarnum. It does not say that.
- Ki will be drawing heavily from Wuxia. - This means expect "mystical" martial arts.
- Ki will not be the Asian power source. - What this means is that classes based on Asian Archetypes will not be shoehorned into the Ki power source just because they are Asian. This does not mean that some Ki classes will not be Asian inspired.
- The Monk is likely to be a Ki Striker.
I would prefer they make a new power source for incarnum anyway, if they ever do.
I miss the totemist class. It was a cool class. I liked the incarnum races..
Will totemist be a ki or a primal class?
So do I. I have said it before and I might as well say it once more, if Incarnum returns I would like to see it use mixed power sources. This is because while Ki might be soul power, it seems to be more about inner soul power. Incarnum may have included some of that, but it was more about drawing upon ambient soul energy from the universe. Mixing Ki with other power sources seems to me to be a good way to recapture that, though maybe I'm just being too narrow minded with my interpretation of Ki in the first place.
Having said that, my 4e version of the Totemist would be a Ki+Primal. Soulborn and Incarnate would both be Divine+Ki but have different roles. I could also see expending old incarnum prestige classes into full classes, such as the Necrocarnate which would be Ki+Shadow.
. . . It would be weird to turn your soul into an item for use. Can't be healthy.
I know it's an anime reference and as such may cause an uproar, but it works for characters in Bleach, many of whom wield swords that are a literal manifestation/aspect of their own soul.
I know it's an anime reference and as such may cause an uproar...
*flips a table*
GET TEH ANEMAYS OUTTA MY D&D!!!1!Well...with one power source per year, I think incarnum's day is a long ways off (if it ever comes).
Who says we're only getting one new power source per year? With Arcane, Divine, Martial, and Primal all having 4+ classes (PHB2) and a Power book (Arcane in April, Divine in August, Primal in October) by the end of 2009, it would seem to me that PHB3 will need at least 2 new power sources.
Having said that, I still don't see Incarnum making a return before 2012 and PHB5, unless it is fully folded into the Ki power source.
Having said that, I still don't see Incarnum making a return before 2012 and PHB5, unless it is fully folded into the Ki power source.
I really hope it has it's own power source. Ki just doesn't cut it. It wouldn't really make sense. Incarnum is external soul energy that is otherwise unused by the universe as of yet. That just isn't ki. Incarnum easily has the potential for it's own power source. If they bring it back....two thousand and a quarter years from now, it better show the classes listed with the incarnum power source.
While Incarnum has a very loyal fanbase, it has a very small fanbase. Magic of Incarnum was one of 3rd Edition's worst selling sourcebooks. Between that fact, and the unified power structure, I doubt we'll see an 'incarnum' power source. Folding it into Ki seems most likely.
This is true. I can only hope. Perhaps it will come out when WotC run out of the more popular ideas. But that's just wishful thinking. I only really played the totemist, anyways. If they brought the totemist back as a primal character I would be pleased. That was the best part of incarnum. It wouldn't be difficult either. Basically the totemist just took the abilities of magical beasts for himself. Just give him a set of gloves that can bind to him to make claws and a few other items that can bind and change every turn to make him adaptable and give him a few of the monsters qualities from the monster manual and BOOM! Perfect Totemist.
While Incarnum has a very loyal fanbase, it has a very small fanbase. Magic of Incarnum was one of 3rd Edition's worst selling sourcebooks. ...
I've heard this before, and MoI must've been fairly unique in this regard. I gather that of those few who actually bothered to buy the book, most swore by it.
It makes me wonder why this book didn't sell very well, if those who used it found it so great. Too different, perhaps?
Who says we're only getting one new power source per year?
Eh, it's anyone's guess what the composition of future PHBs will be. I'm willing to bet they're just going to put in one new power source per PHB, using the rest of the book to expand on already established sources. OTOH, they might introduce two new sources per PHB. Regardless, Incarnum is most definitely a long ways off.
I've heard this before, and MoI must've been fairly unique in this regard. I gather that of those few who actually bothered to buy the book, most swore by it.
It makes me wonder why this book didn't sell very well, if those who used it found it so great. Too different, perhaps?
MoI was a one and only kind of book. Really neat mechanics that no other class could match in any game that I ave ever played. The problem was getting used to it. It offered A LOT of customization, even midway between battles, where you could invest what was called essentia into soulbound items you created and make them more powerful on the fly and then change it the next round to suit what was happening. Incredibly unique. It's truly original and incredibly fun once you get a feel for it.
MoI was a one and only kind of book. Really neat mechanics that no other class could match in any game that I ave ever played. The problem was getting used to it. It offered A LOT of customization, even midway between battles, where you could invest what was called essentia into soulbound items you created and make them more powerful on the fly and then change it the next round to suit what was happening. Incredibly unique. It's truly original and incredibly fun once you get a feel for it.
So would you say, that it was well written and designed, but that it was too complicated? Or perhaps that it wasn't what enough people "thought of as D&D"?
After all, it's hard to believe that a book which was so popular with the folks who bought it wasn't "good" by at least some metric.
So would you say, that it was well written and designed, but that it was too complicated? Or perhaps that it wasn't what enough people "thought of as D&D"?
After all, it's hard to believe that a book which was so popular with the folks who bought it wasn't "good" by at least some metric.
Both. It was definitely different and a lot of players who are die hard fans of the traditional d&d would not find it easy to integrate incarnum into their campaigns. It was also kind of difficult to et used to, in that it had so many changeable components. You could make so many soulmelds per day, and so many soulmelds could be bound only to certain parts of your body, called chakra, at certain levels. You had so many "essentia" points that you ould invest in your soulmelds per level, and you could change the distribution of these points each round to adapt to the situation. There are a lot of soulmelds to choose from. A soulmeld normally gives you one ability, binding a soulmeld to a particular part of your body, gives you an extra more powerful ability, so that means two abilities possible for each oulmeld, of which you can have up to 9 and bind up to five. The essentia invested boosts all the capabilities of each ability in a soulmeld.
Example. I make the soulmeld "rage claws" Normally they are brown, furry gloves with fingers tipped in small harmless claws. These gloves allow you to stay conscious at negative hp. For every point of essentia invested in this soulmeld, you can stay alive and conscious at an extra -3 hp. So if you invest 1 essentia, you are alive at -13 hp, in 3.5, death was at -10.
If you bind that soulmeld to your hands chakra, the fur becomes a part of your hands and the claws grow and harden into your own. You are granted a natural weapon, the claws, as dealing 1d6 damages and you can make two attacks. For every point of essentia invested in this soulmeld you get a +1 bonus to attack and damage rolls. So having 2 points of essentia invested in this bound soulmeld gives you +2 to attack and damage rolls and you stay alive and conscious until you hit -16 hp. So yes....pretty complicated, hard to keep track of.
This is only one of the many, many possibilities this book offered. Very well written and designed.
#1 - The races introduced with the book were incredibly lame. Nothing inspirational about them, and even the artwork made them look like Star Trek aliens.
#2 - Only one class in the bunch covered an original concept, the Totemist. All the others seemed to be rehashes of already-covered concepts. But hey, if you really had to have another Paladin-esque class, you'll know where to look.
So, to sum up, it felt like mechanics for the sake of mechanics. They had come up with a new power source for 3e D&D, but then rolled a natural '1' when coming up with cool hooks to entice people to try it.
The problems I had with it was:
#1 - The races introduced with the book were incredibly lame. Nothing inspirational about them, and even the artwork made them look like Star Trek aliens.
#2 - Only one class in the bunch covered an original concept, the Totemist. All the others seemed to be rehashes of already-covered concepts. But hey, if you really had to have another Paladin-esque class, you'll know where to look.
So, to sum up, it felt like mechanics for the sake of mechanics. They had come up with a new power source for 3e D&D, but then rolled a natural '1' when coming up with cool hooks to entice people to try it.
There was a very large difference between soulborn and paladin. Soulborn had helpful auras, created soulmelds(all of which had powers and abilities the paladin couldn't hope to achieve) had the same essentia adaptabilities as the other two classes and could change it all from day to day(including the soulmelds, their binds and abilities)changing him in various ways. It had no lay on hands or spells. The only thing that gave it the feel of a paladin was the alignment factor, the aura of their alignment, and they didn't get to bind their soulmelds til lvl 4, like paladin didn't get spells til lvl 4. There is no other class that does what ANY of the incarnum classes can do.
The races sucked, I agree,but some had extra essentia and that was helpful.
Sure, mechanically they were different, but themeatically....well, IIRC, there was even an "adaptation" sidebar that said that all Paladins and Blackguards in a setting could easily be replaced by Soulborn. At that point, I imagine most DMs were like "Oh, so this class more or less covers the same ground as the Paladin & Blackguard, but with a whole subsystem and new mechanics to learn. Now, why exactly do we need this again?"
That was because their abilities relied on the exact same alignment factors that the paladin and blackguard relied on. They had to be some combination of either chaotic/lawful and good/evil. No neutrals allowed. If they strayed from their alignments, they become ex paladins or soulborn. Nothing else is AT ALL the same, making it an entirely ifferent class.
How much did you even read of the class abilities, anyway? No offense, but I don't see any good reason you should see them as similar. It has less of a similarity to the paladin than the barbarian has to the fighter.
Who says we're only getting one new power source per year? With Arcane, Divine, Martial, and Primal all having 4+ classes (PHB2) and a Power book (Arcane in April, Divine in August, Primal in October) by the end of 2009, it would seem to me that PHB3 will need at least 2 new power sources.
Exactly, the current speculation for the PHB III (2010) is Ki, Psionic and Shadow Heroes.
How much did you even read of the class abilities, anyway?
Yes, believe it or not, I understand the mechanics in the end are very different. That doesn't change the fact that it's just another way to represent the same old holy/unholy warrior concept (kind of like the Divine Mind, Crusader, Holy Liberator, or one of the other incarnations of the concept). Mechanics for the sake of mechanics.
That being said, I think that "incarnum" elements will be distributed between Primal, Ki, Psi, Shadow and Divine. Incarnum alone doesn't really strike me, and others I know, as all that interesting.
Also, the Binder, as far as vestiges go, has been more-or-less confirmed to be eaten by the Warlock.
I think that's why everyone seems to love the Totemist the most. It was unique. It not only had mechanical differences, it let you play a totally different "type" of character- someone who was a creepy amalgamation of all kinds of different monster parts. It was great.
As far as I'm concerned, they could scrap every last bit of the Incarnum system except that one, and simply recreate the Totemist in some way. Except that I'm pretty sure that in 4e, with its mostly standardized class mechanics, they'd want the Totemist to work with the at will / encounter / daily system.
I could actually write one up, to be honest. I know how I'd go about doing it. I'm not sure that 4e will though. Its only worth their time if the number of people who not only liked the Totemist concept but who would be accepting of a totemist who didn't work mechanically like he used to were great enough to justify the expense.
What I'd do: each encounter or daily power you pick represents some kind of soul meld. When you select them, you get some basic, always on ability, and probably a cosmetic alteration. You also get whatever ability the power itself grants. I'd completely skip points of essentia. I might keep chakras around though, to help control what abilities you can select- so you could only get one hand chakra meld, for example.
This would preserve the basic concept of a weird amalgamation creature, but it would probably anger the Incarnum fans who loved the mechanical aspects of reinvesting their essentia. I don't know if a solution could be found that satisfies both desires without also making the system fit poorly in the overall context of 4e, and appeal poorly to new players.
Chill out, Ausolium. Its pretty clear that the Soulborn was meant to represent an Incarnum based Paladin.
I think that's why everyone seems to love the Totemist the most. It was unique. It not only had mechanical differences, it let you play a totally different "type" of character- someone who was a creepy amalgamation of all kinds of different monster parts. It was great.
As far as I'm concerned, they could scrap every last bit of the Incarnum system except that one, and simply recreate the Totemist in some way. Except that I'm pretty sure that in 4e, with its mostly standardized class mechanics, they'd want the Totemist to work with the at will / encounter / daily system.
It did represent a paladin flavored concept, but it was a far different experience and any amount of flavoing could be changed to keep it from seeming like a paladin. The totemist was indeed the BEST part of incarnum, I think they should combine incarnate and soulborn. That would make a good class and leave out unecessary classes. What other class is really like the incarnate or totemist? None. It's as different as they come. Incarnum as a whole is unique, because you gain one or more abilities from wearing or binding items that you create from unused souls and gives you a lot of abilities no other class can match. The Avatar for both of these classes is clear evidence of that.
It occurs to me that one could easily re-fluff and change the power source on the Druid to do the totemist. Focus on beast-form attacks ... instead of 'claws of the tiger', you sprout Sphinx Claws that are glowing blue energy, and so on and so forth.
You couldn't give a druid the actual abilities of a totemist no matter how hard you tried. It just can't be done. You could reflavor the druids abilities to LOOK like the totemist abilities, but you wouldn't get the effects of the totemist soulmelds. nor would you have essentia or chakra binds and the totem chakra. So the reflavoring idea is REALLY limiting.
While Incarnum has a very loyal fanbase, it has a very small fanbase. Magic of Incarnum was one of 3rd Edition's worst selling sourcebooks. Between that fact, and the unified power structure, I doubt we'll see an 'incarnum' power source. Folding it into Ki seems most likely.
It's worse than that. Some people bought the book without looking at it too closely, and ended up hating it. My copy was one of two in a gaming group I recently left, and only one person out of seven actually liked the book - the other owner. I personally loathed it.
The mechanics were actually better than average, for a 3.5 product, but the concepts presented are better suited for their own setting than even the most permissive fantasy setting I can imagine. I was trying to figure out how it would fit into an existing setting, but it was rather like trying to drop the Imperial Guard and some Space Marines from Warhammer 40k into the Forgotten Realms, and then trying to pretend they'd been there all along. Someone, somewhere, might be able to make a good campaign out of why those elements are in the setting, but they stick out so badly that they have to be a central fixture.
If other people enjoyed Incarnum more than I did, that's great. But I, for one, am hoping that Incarnum was nothing more than a rules experiment. If any bit of the fluff makes its way to 4E, it will mark at least one book I'm not buying.
You couldn't give a druid the actual abilities of a totemist no matter how hard you tried. It just can't be done. You could reflavor the druids abilities to LOOK like the totemist abilities, but you wouldn't get the effects of the totemist soulmelds. nor would you have essentia or chakra binds and the totem chakra. So the reflavoring idea is REALLY limiting.
See, this attitude is why I don't think that Incarnum will show up in 4e. A significant portion of the love its fans hold for it stems from the mechanics. The mechanics are dead in 4e. You're not going to get the full, elaborate chakra/soulmeld/essentia thing in 4e. Its just not going to happen, for the same reason that the Warlock doesn't use the Binder's mechancis, and for the same reason that psionics isn't going to use power points.
4e has ditched the idea of complex mechanical sub systems for each class. Instead, each class gets a different power selection. If you can't translate what you like about Incarnum into a selection of powers with perhaps a minor mechanical overlay, then don't expect to see it in 4e.
See, this attitude is why I don't think that Incarnum will show up in 4e. A significant portion of the love its fans hold for it stems from the mechanics. The mechanics are dead in 4e. You're not going to get the full, elaborate chakra/soulmeld/essentia thing in 4e. Its just not going to happen, for the same reason that the Warlock doesn't use the Binder's mechancis, and for the same reason that psionics isn't going to use power points.
4e has ditched the idea of complex mechanical sub systems for each class. Instead, each class gets a different power selection. If you can't translate what you like about Incarnum into a selection of powers with perhaps a minor mechanical overlay, then don't expect to see it in 4e.
You're right, of course. If they do show up, the incarnum classes will operate by the same power structure as the PHB classes do, with at-will, encounter, and daily powers (as will psionics, shadow, ki, elemental ...). Mechanically, they would be identical to the extant classes, which is precisely why reflavoring a druid into a totemist works perfectly, despite certain objections above.
See, this attitude is why I don't think that Incarnum will show up in 4e. A significant portion of the love its fans hold for it stems from the mechanics. The mechanics are dead in 4e. You're not going to get the full, elaborate chakra/soulmeld/essentia thing in 4e. Its just not going to happen, for the same reason that the Warlock doesn't use the Binder's mechancis, and for the same reason that psionics isn't going to use power points.
4e has ditched the idea of complex mechanical sub systems for each class. Instead, each class gets a different power selection. If you can't translate what you like about Incarnum into a selection of powers with perhaps a minor mechanical overlay, then don't expect to see it in 4e.
You seem to underestimate WotC. They could incorporate an old complicated mechanics system into 4e and make it simple. Hell, they don't need to have soulmelds outside of powers that grant some small lasting benefit after an odd attack and the features can cover plenty. They don't have to brink back the exact system. WotC could do it without muh problem. Wouldn't be that difficult. Just like every other class is still basically the same as it was.
Soulmeld groups could easily fit into certain builds and could be required for certian powers. This would make for a very unique class. You guys have no creativity if you really think they couldn't simplify incarnum.
You seem to underestimate WotC. They could incorporate an old complicated mechanics system into 4e and make it simple. Hell, they don't need to have soulmelds outside of powers that grant some small lasting benefit after an odd attack and the features can cover plenty. They don't have to brink back the exact system. WotC could do it without muh problem. Wouldn't be that difficult. Just like every other class is still basically the same as it was.
Soulmeld groups could easily fit into certain builds and could be required for certian powers. This would make for a very unique class. You guys have no creativity if you really think they couldn't simplify incarnum.
Except how most classes are, in fact, completely different in how they operate, with at best superficial similarity to how they behaved in previous editions. The system is fundamentally different, and each individual class interacts with it in ways that are very unlike anything that came before 4E.
The only decent thing about MoI was the system, and it doesn't work in 4E. The only way to port a set of classes to 4E is to examine them at a conceptual level and redesign them from the ground up.
Except how most classes are, in fact, completely different in how they operate, with at best superficial similarity to how they behaved in previous editions. The system is fundamentally different, and each individual class interacts with it in ways that are very unlike anything that came before 4E.
The only decent thing about MoI was the system, and it doesn't work in 4E. The only way to port a set of classes to 4E is to examine them at a conceptual level and redesign them from the ground up.
You aren't creative either.
Simple: Take away essentia, one of the hardest parts. Make a small set of soulmelds part of a build. Some powers don't work with certain builds if you don't have the soulmeld to use the power in that build. Each power could have a special effect for chakra bound items and binding could occur less often and for fewer soulmelds at a time. That is basically everything right there. Adding a small bit of essentia wouldn't be that bad. Now tell me how that would be so hard? You can literally take any idea and convert it to this system with symplicity, which I think is one of the best parts of 4e.
You aren't creative either.
Simple: Take away essentia, one of the hardest parts. Make a small set of soulmelds part of a build. Some powers don't work with certain builds if you don't have the soulmeld to use the power in that build. Each power could have a special effect for chakra bound items and binding could occur less often and for fewer soulmelds at a time. That is basically everything right there. Adding a small bit of essentia wouldn't be that bad. Now tell me how that would be so hard? You can literally take any idea and convert it to this system with symplicity, which I think is one of the best parts of 4e.
You'd have to build those powers and special effects from the ground up, just like creating any other new class. You'd have to pick which classes you're converting, what role you'd put them in, design useful, interesting and unique features that fit the concept and 4E mechanics, and follow it up with thirty levels with several appropriate powers. It takes a lot of creativity and effort to convert just one class, let alone several. 4E is easy to modify, but creating large chunks of good content is a huge task.
You'd have to build those powers and special effects from the ground up, just like creating any other new class. You'd have to pick which classes you're converting, what role you'd put them in, design useful, interesting and unique features that fit the concept and 4E mechanics, and follow it up with thirty levels with several appropriate powers. It takes a lot of creativity and effort to convert just one class, let alone several. 4E is easy to modify, but creating large chunks of good content is a huge task.
Alllright. It's SOOO difficult.
Alllright. It's SOOO difficult.
In 4E, unlike 3.5, each class has a role. As such, to properly convert a class, you're going to have to trim away many aspects of the class that don't fit one role, and pad out and emphasize the ones that do. You'll have to take a hard look at mechanics, and recognize which central aspects of the subsystem you're working with simply don't work at all with the new system no matter how you fudge them, and scrap them. The ones that can be converted will need some serious reconfiguring to fit into the 4E system, and that's never going to be very much, because the default assumptions are so dissimilar. From this modest chassis, you're going to have to come up with unique and worthwhile class features for 4E, thirty levels of powers, several Paragon Paths, and relevant feats. All of these aspects have to work work substantially differently from what another class does, in order to justify doing the work at all, but they have to be reasonably balanced and role-appropriate as well.
This isn't something you can knock together in a day, or even a week, even with a decent team of people. It takes a lot of time and effort and consideration and trial and error and frustrating redesign. If this was not the case, we would have had fully functional and complete Druid, Bard, and Barbarian classes months ago. And between you and me, I'm glad they're focusing on those, rather than some bizarre blue-glowy soul-magic stuff that resembles nothing fantasy-related I've ever encountered.
In 4E, unlike 3.5, each class has a role. As such, to properly convert a class, you're going to have to trim away many aspects of the class that don't fit one role, and pad out and emphasize the ones that do. You'll have to take a hard look at mechanics, and recognize which central aspects of the subsystem you're working with simply don't work at all with the new system no matter how you fudge them, and scrap them. The ones that can be converted will need some serious reconfiguring to fit into the 4E system, and that's never going to be very much, because the default assumptions are so dissimilar. From this modest chassis, you're going to have to come up with unique and worthwhile class features for 4E, thirty levels of powers, several Paragon Paths, and relevant feats. All of these aspects have to work work substantially differently from what another class does, in order to justify doing the work at all, but they have to be reasonably balanced and role-appropriate as well.
This isn't something you can knock together in a day, or even a week, even with a decent team of people. It takes a lot of time and effort and consideration and trial and error and frustrating redesign. If this was not the case, we would have had fully functional and complete Druid, Bard, and Barbarian classes months ago. And between you and me, I'm glad they're focusing on those, rather than some bizarre blue-glowy soul-magic stuff that resembles nothing fantasy-related I've ever encountered.
I never said it would be incredibly easy either. I just think they could do it. I dout it would be much difficult than the other classes since the majority of making the class would be to trim away the bulk to give it a role and a 4e feel. I was kidding with you, so no offense. :P
I missed a incarnum monk-like class. I mean a incarnum class without armour.
The first time I read something about incarnum I thought it would be like the force from Star Wars universe, or the chacra from manga/anime of Naruto, but I was wrong.
A soumeld for 4th ed wouldn´t be very difficoult. I would be a primal or ki power, but it would fill a body space for magic item. There would be a special bonus for that power each encounter, and better bonus wich it would be used only once a day.
(And incarnum it wasn´t a cool name, I´m sorry).
A soumeld for 4th ed wouldn´t be very difficoult. I would be a primal or ki power, but it would fill a body space for magic item.
I seriously doubt they'd have any of the powers occupy a body slot. They removed the innate armor from Warforged because PCs should be able to use the cool stuff they find and build; forcing the incarnum classes to sacrifice magic items doesn't fit into that design paradigm.
You couldn't give a druid the actual abilities of a totemist no matter how hard you tried. It just can't be done. You could reflavor the druids abilities to LOOK like the totemist abilities, but you wouldn't get the effects of the totemist soulmelds. nor would you have essentia or chakra binds and the totem chakra. So the reflavoring idea is REALLY limiting.
I am sorry to inform you, but any class of any kind that is released will have basically the same 5 different variations on a theme powers that every other class has.
damage
damage and status effect
damage and shift
damage and grant bonus to ally
damage and grant penalty to enemy
Reflavoring only goes so far and after that it gets boring and repetitive. Not saying the complicated subsytems need to return but something definitely needs to be done to differentiate the new classes besides the trading card game power descriptions.
If you read back a page, you'll find that in my first post in this thread I posited a way to translate the Totemist into 4e.
My comments about whether WOTC ought to translate Incarnum into 4e are directed towards a different matter. Let me spell it out carefully, because I might not have been as clear as I meant to be.
1. WOTC should only update Incarnum if it will sell well.
2. There are two types of people who might purchase an Incarnum product. People who liked Incarnum in 3e, and people who, for whatever reason, did not. So lets call those fans and new customers.
3. When Incarnum is updated for 4e, it will have to have significant changes to its mechanics. Mechanically, it will need to work very similarly to other classes. Not 100% the same, of course, but similarly. So a 4e version if Incarnum might have one or two class abilities that mimic the old Incarnum system, but that's all, and it will probably only have those if the class abilities serve to make the character function in a tactically distinct manner.
4. New customers will not be attracted to 4e Incarnum because of its mechanical systems, because it won't have unique mechanical systems. They will only be attracted to it if it can be used to create thematically interesting and unique characters.
5. This means that every Incarnum class except the Totemist is right out. The other Incarnum classes, once you remove the mechanical system, are just reprints of existing classes. The totemist alone is a genuinely unique concept. The druid does kind of step its toes now, but I think there's enough of a gap for a Totemist class to exist.
6. So next consideration- how many existing fans will enjoy a 4e totemist? To answer, I think you have to divide those fans into two groups. First, the ones who like Totemist primarily because of the flavor, because of the whole "horrible amalgamation of monsters into one creature" thing. Those people might like a 4e Totemist. Second, though, you have the fans who like Incarnum and the Totemist primarily because they love the mechanical subsystem of 3e Incarnum.
7. That's going away. They're not going to get that. They might get one or two class abilities that function as a sort of tribute to the Incarnum subsystem, but that's it.
8. So how many of those will be lost?
I'm just not convinced that there's a big enough market out there to justify all that work.
As such, if you want to play incarnum in 4e, IMO the best you can do is retain the flavor. The power sources one should consider when making an "incarnum" based character for 4e is Psi (for "shaping" ability), Primal (for the totemist), Divine and (rarely) Ki (for "soul" related flavor).
If one wants to use unique mechanics while retaining the flavor, and dosn't care that the rules are not "official WotC" material, you can check out Eldrich_Lord's excellent Class Compilation thread for fan-made Incarnum stuff. See the link in my siggy for that.
But I've looked at a few homebrew attempts to convert Incarnum ... and what I've seen is convoluted tables and chakra binds ... that just come out to the same power structure of other classes. So what's the point?
This is not to say I don't want to see Incarnum in 4e, I'm just not sure what its advocates want.
The question becomes: What would you want from 4e Incarnum? Don't get me wrong, I really liked MoI, it's a pity I didn't get the opportunity to play an Incarnum class.
But I've looked at a few homebrew attempts to convert Incarnum ... and what I've seen is convoluted tables and chakra binds ... that just come out to the same power structure of other classes. So what's the point?
This is not to say I don't want to see Incarnum in 4e, I'm just not sure what its advocates want.
I like the totemist most of all, making items that give him the abilities of already existing magical beasts in various combinaions that can change everyday. Those items can be bound and produce more potent effects.
1) Package encounter and daily powers based on the soulmelds you pick. Each time you'd get a new daily power, you learn 2 new soulmelds, but you can only have one soulmeld shaped for each power. Each soulmeld has one encounter and one daily power, and binding it to a chakra unlocks higher-level powers that replace the existing ones. I haven't done the math on how many at once, etc, but I think that works. (This was straight-up how the Incarnate class worked in the file I saw)
2) Have essentia replace implements. Basically, after a short rest you can redistribute your essentia between your soulmelds, with the amount in each giving you an enhancement bonus to attack and damage. (This is my own idea, which wizards can totally have if they just print the d*** thing. If they need help, they can call me.)
Voila! The core concepts are there, it fits with 4e power levels in theory, and everyone is happy.
*edit*- The source for the PDF i saw is here: http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1054605