If there’s something you’d like to see us address that you think we’re overlooking,

[Kask]

I just read the sample PDF of Trailblazer.

Now, if I'm not mistaken it basically says that you have monitored complaints of what was wrong with 3.x and attempted to fix it. Fair enough. I didn't see anything in the PDF about reigning in full casters for being overpowered compared to other classes. Did you ignore this critical problem, make other classes more powerful to be on par with full casters, or make full casters less powerful?

Looking forward to your answer as I'm in the market for a D&D 4.0 alternative...

[Wulf Ratbane]

Originally Posted by Kask

I just read the sample PDF of Trailblazer.

Now, if I'm not mistaken it basically says that you have monitored complaints of what was wrong with 3.x and attempted to fix it. Fair enough. I didn't see anything in the PDF about reigning in full casters for being overpowered compared to other classes. Did you ignore this critical problem, make other classes more powerful to be on par with full casters, or make full casters less powerful?

Looking forward to your answer as I'm in the market for a D&D 4.0 alternative...

I must not have worded it such in a way that you recognized it, but a class rebalance is definitely a big part of Trailblazer.

You should recognize the groundwork for this in the preview, where I discuss class/monster HD balance, the "spine," etc.

EDIT: As you might imagine, this is one of those sections we're almost fighting over, it's such fun to work on. I'll point GlassJaw at this thread and see if he wants to run through a quick Hit List of the changes we've discussed, class by class.

[Kask]

Originally Posted by Wulf Ratbane

I must not have worded it such in a way that you recognized it, but a class rebalance is definitely a big part of Trailblazer.

You should recognize the groundwork for this in the preview, where I discuss class/monster HD balance, the "spine," etc.

EDIT: As you might imagine, this is one of those sections we're almost fighting over, it's such fun to work on. I'll point GlassJaw at this thread and see if he wants to run through a quick Hit List of the changes we've discussed, class by class.

The PDF shows that casters (who were mcuh more powerful than non-casters in 3.x) are now even more powerful. Unless you've given non-casters incredibly powerful class abilities they will lag even further behind.

[Wulf Ratbane]

Originally Posted by Kask

The PDF shows that casters (who were mcuh more powerful than non-casters in 3.x) are now even more powerful. Unless you've given non-casters incredibly powerful class abilities they will lag even further behind.

We won't be bootstrapping all the classes all the way up to the cleric's level, no. We will narrow the gap.

The spellcasters take a couple of hits on the top end (more permissive saving throws, higher AP costs on rest/recovery) and the melee classes are getting a boost up. Some of those boosts are in the spine, some of them are in class abilities, and some of them are "hiding" in other rules subsystems (sneak attack anything; crit anything; combat reactions; etc.)

[GlassJaw]

Originally Posted by Wulf Ratbane

EDIT: As you might imagine, this is one of those sections we're almost fighting over, it's such fun to work on. I'll point GlassJaw at this thread and see if he wants to run through a quick Hit List of the changes we've discussed, class by class.

I can give a quick overview, sure. I'll just note that Wulf and I took a pretty systematic approach to the class rebalance. Nothing is being added for the sake of just adding cool crunch.

Barbarian - DR is getting a boost. Few other small tweaks.

Cleric - nothing new, aside from the overall caster changes

Druid - nothing new, although Wild Shape and Animal Companion are being tweaked to be easier to use during play.

Fighter - The fighter is getting some additional bonus feats that we are calling "Expert Weapon Proficiency". I don't want to give away too much but it's a way for a player to really customize their fighter. Kudos to Wulf on this system.

Monk - Let's just say we are bringing back some of the 1ed feel to the Monk.

Paladin - The paladin is probably one of the classes that is getting the most "stuff" but it largely follows existing mechanics. We are also relaxing the paladin's alignment restrictions and even incorporating them into the class features. I really like our new paladin. It's the class I want to play the most from TB, especially considering I always found the paladin to be annoying.

Ranger - The ranger gets a couple more abilities and Combat style has been expanded.

Rogue - Sneak attack and Trap sense are being improved. Number of special abilities and special ability slots both increased.

Sorc / Wiz - The Sorcerer and Wizard aren't getting much new but the new spellcasting system expands on the roles of the sorcerer being the "blaster" and the wizard being versatile.

[Kask]

Thanks for the info guys. I'll give it a read when it publishes.

Best,

[Wulf Ratbane]

The change I like most to the Ranger and the Paladin was giving them access to the full Druid and Cleric spell lists (at 1/2 caster rate). They'll cast more spells at a faster rate of advancement and cap at 5th level spells.

There are a couple of Ranger and Paladin spells that didn't crossover on the Druid or Cleric lists, and we've granted these as class features instead.

[Lord Zack]

In the GM Day Preview it says you got rules for Solo and Elite monsters. But what about minions?

[Wulf Ratbane]

Originally Posted by Lord Zack

In the GM Day Preview it says you got rules for Solo and Elite monsters. But what about minions?

Minions (in the 4e sense) are not well-balanced for play, so they are not a part of Trailblazer.

In order for a minion to pose a credible threat, its "spine" needs to stay on par with the party, as does its damage output. You can scale their hit points (as we do for elites and solos), but leaving the "threat level" as is, while scaling back hit points, means that you have a lot of glass cannons running around the battlefield. That's not desirable.

The "lowest form" of creature is the standard creature, with its standard statblock, as presented. If you had an encounter budget of X, then you could use eight creatures with a value of 1/8 X-- this works out to 6 CR lower than a single creature worth X points.

I don't recommend using more than 8-10 of any particular creature (specifically, I wouldn't more than double the party size), as Lanchester's Square Law will quickly bust up the whole combat. You'll end up with either a TPK or a hugely asymmetric win in the PCs favor.

That is not to say that you couldn't use more than 8-10 creatures for the whole encounter-- just that the "minion" component of your encounter shouldn't be more than 8-10 of the little suckers. Building up the balance of your encounter, you should use bigger/better creatures.