D&D 4E New Information on 4E Classes from Races & Classes Book

[Mercule]

Strange that not much is mentioned about the Ranger, in particular when it was hinted that the ranger killed the scout and took his stuff.

Well, yeah. But, immediately afterwards, he sneaked into the woods and went into hiding. He was "unavailable for comment at press time."

 

[Fifth Element]

Rather, the reason they exist is for the feeling of "Ah ha ha! You've activated my trap card! And now I'll attack your life points directly!"[/SIZE]

Not entirely. Immediate actions were introduced to allow more options and flexibility in the strictly turn-based initiative system, allowing reactions to others' actions other than by using a readied action.

 

[Lord Zack]

First, the article said:

I'm certain that there will be some "Hey, you, take some divine-inspired damage" ala Flamestrike and other "Calling down the might of my God on your ass" spells.

Second, a lot of what you described sounds more like a multi-classed cleric than a straight cleric. Remember that, from what we've seen, multi-classing appears to let you get access to the powers of other classes, so a cleric could pick defender-y abilities, or controller-y abilities, to accomplish this.

Also we're told that some classes will have some abilities which help bridge the roles - the Warlock, a striker, getting some area-effecting controller abilities; the Paladin, a defender getting some Leader-like abilities.

Yeah, but my point is that there are some clerics who should not be leaders at all or only to a small degree, but rather strikers, controllers or defenders, as part of they're class design. I don't think the leader roles is so essential to the cleric class that it should be the only role it fills.

 

[Rechan]

Yeah, but my point is that there are some clerics who should not be leaders at all or only to a small degree, but rather strikers, controllers or defenders, as part of they're class design. I don't think the leader roles is so essential to the cleric class that it should be the only role it fills.

So, how does a cleric that is a defender differ from a paladin, exactly? Isn't it the same thing, if you insist on having the militant cleric?

Besides, if 3e is any indication, we'll have a boat load of classes and variant soon enough, if not from the various books, then from 3rd party stuff. We'll have a divine controller and a divine striker soon.

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

Given that trapfinding is a feat, and I'm willing to bet you can pick up skills like Stealth and Perception, et al, then why bother taking the rogue class if you don't want to sneak attack?

Well, from what we've been hearing about the 4e fighter, the class isn't really designed for dex-based "swashbuckler" characters. (There have even been hints that you have to dip into other classes' stuff just to use two-weapon fighting.) I think a lot of people were hoping that if this was the case, they could use the rogue class instead to make powerful melee fighters WITHOUT depending on skulking around like a "traditional" rogue.

Maybe ranger/fighter will be the ideal swashbuckler multiclass? /Shrug.

 

[Singing Smurf]

Given that there are Alienist PCs in games, I don't think it's that far out there in the realm of possibility.

The puns! They burn!

Also, I really hope the "darkness between the stars" warlock is still in the PHB. It would work well with Xoriat in Eberron, and Xoriat has already been described by Keith Baker as a warlock power source in the pages of Dragon.

 

[Gundark]

I'll probably get jumped on for this, but that Warlord ability feels awfully "video-gamey" to me.

JUMP....JUMP....JUMP...JUMP (hey slow day at work)


Okay bad joke.

I'm actually looking forward to the warlord (which I'll call the solider IMC)

 

[Andor]

You know my first thought about the 'Stars and the Darkness between them' thing is the Dark Templar from Starcraft and their void channeling. Apparently that's just me though.

Also I note this: "In addition, since characters can buy any kind of feats they want, it is mentioned that you could turn a Wizard into a 3E-style Warmage or Duskblade by buying weapon, armor and melee attack feats, as 4E Wizards no longer suffer from arcane spell failure in armor."

Hmmm.... It seems significant to me that they say this can be done by buying feats, rather than by dipping into the Fighter class. It make me curious about their 'improved' multi-classing system.

 

[Rechan]

Well, from what we've been hearing about the 4e fighter, the class isn't really designed for dex-based "swashbuckler" characters. (There have even been hints that you have to dip into other classes' stuff just to use two-weapon fighting.) I think a lot of people were hoping that if this was the case, they could use the rogue class instead to make powerful melee fighters WITHOUT depending on skulking around like a "traditional" rogue.

Maybe ranger/fighter will be the ideal swashbuckler multiclass? /Shrug.

1) Fighters can use higher dex in their armor. So I don't think it's Impossible.

2) They don't have to skulk. With so many things giving rogues access to their sneak attack damage, they can apply that damage under multiple conditions.

 

[FadedC]

Yeah, but my point is that there are some clerics who should not be leaders at all or only to a small degree, but rather strikers, controllers or defenders, as part of they're class design. I don't think the leader roles is so essential to the cleric class that it should be the only role it fills.

Well I think they are moving away from the cleric as the multipurpose bag of tricks that has the potential to fight as well as a fighter. If you want to be a divine striker, controller or defender then that should be a completely seperate class, rather then attempting to balance all of these roles in a single class. As somebody else already said the paladin is a perfectly good option for the martial cleric type, and no longer comes with all of the old paladin baggage.