So after reading the classes in full what do people think?

[Sashi]

And the solution is apparently to only have magic blow up things.

A more elegant solution might have been nice.

Magic does LOTS of other things. Check rituals, Clerics, Gnomes, etc. What you're actually upset about is that the wizard blows things up and inflicts status ailments instead of having the entire universes power wrapped up in his pocket. Well too bad, the Wizard's role is no longer to be ^(O_O)^ MAGIC!!! ^(O_O)^ It's to be a controller, that's his role in the party.

The previous editions wizard fell into the "Buffy Trap". In Buffy the Vampire Slayer, the Slayer is the one with all the God Points, they do the awesome stuff, and everyone else plays second fiddle to them. There are lots of ways to overcome this:

Ars Magica says "yes, wizards are super powerful, and everyone gets a Wizard, and your wizard only gains power if he stays home and studies instead of adventuring and turning people inside out"

Buffy says "There may only be one Slayer in the party, and the game must emphasize character interaction and storytelling, to the point that it doesn't actually matter there is only one character in the party actually capable of injuring the bad guy."

Both of which are, mayhaps not "elegant", but at least workable solutions. Neither solution, however, is conducive to classic D&D play.

D&D (pre 3rd ed) says "Wizards are the most powerful class, nanny nanny boo boo. Thibbt. Maybe he'll take pity on you and give you some of his mojo (in the form of buffs), or maybe he'll just turn the enemy inside out."

D&D (4th) says "The cycle of suckertude ends now!

No class requires another class to buff them to be effective! (bye bye buff spells, which were possible to buff a wizard up past a Fighter's own combat ability).
Take out the "use once to totally pwn an encounter through 'creative solutions' but then the DM stops allowing that" spells (bye bye Illusions). Take out the Save Or Die - AKA win the encounter with a single saving throw - spells (bye bye ... lots of spells), and what do you have left?

You have blasto spells and status effects. Plus some of the more combat-oriented "utility" spells.

What do you not have? You don't have the "feel good magic", the capability of doing really stupid and silly things with your magical ability, just to remind yourself how magical you are.

I'm okay with this, and so are you. When did Gandalf ever fly around hobbiton casting fireballs into the air and summoning feindish hamsters into the town square? He blew smoke out of his pipe in the shape of a 4-masted ship. An effect easily within the realm of Prestidigitation.

 

[Darth Cyric]

Re: Ranger

Looks like I made a good guess about the Ranger as being a Striker who minors in Controller. Many of his powers have the choice of either teeing off on one enemy or spreading the punishment. No, the Ranger will never be a full-on replacement for the Wizard in the Controller role, but I'd say he is probably as close to a "Martial Controller" as is feasible and as we're ever gonna get.

And that's not the only reason multi-hit attacks rock. The ability to stack ability modifiers to damage in the same round, extra chances of critical hits (especially important with a magic weapon) ...

Careful Strike got hit with the nerf bat since DDXP, but that's okay, because Twin Strike is bloody sick.

If he Ranger has one glaring weakness, it's that almost all of his powers attack AC, while the Warlock (especially) and even the Rogue have quite a few powers that attack other defenses.

 

[lutecius]

The solution is simple...want to disarm traps? Take Perception and Thievery as class skills and search for them and disarm them. Same way the rogue does it.

Want to slow people down? Sleep spell.

Want to cover a pit? I'd suggest a shovel.

In fact, I'm not entirely sure, but using a shovel MAY even be a more creative solution, since it's not listed on your character sheet to suggest the idea to you.

If those spells were broken, maybe they could have ...gasp...fixed them, instead of just scrapping them.
Couldn't illusions have an appropriate DC, just like traps?
And unlike rogues, wizards in previous editions couldn't use their abilities at will. If a wizards wastes a spell slot to send a creature into traps that may or may not exist, he might regret it later.
It would just take a little more work and playtesting to balance things and anticipate possible abuses.

I am not saying that every individual wizard should be as versatile as he was in previous editions, just that his powers and build options could be more varied and less focused on blasting.

 

[TikkchikFenTikktikk]

Just finished my first read of the classes from my copy.

Warlords and Warlocks: meh.

Paladins: wtf is going on here?

Wizards: withholding judgement until we've played with one in our group for a while

Fighters: yep

Clerics: yep

Rogues: yep

Rangers: looks like trouble

 

[WhatGravitas]

Paladin:
This class threw me for a loop... A lot of powers I did not see coming that I am still trying to get used to the flavor of in my head. He can link the parties minds so that can talk in battle, teleport all over the place with a good number of his powers, and over all just do some messed up stuff. I mean I can understand that they are the hammer of the gods striking in their name and all... but ya mind links and teleporting was not what I had in mind.
Over all thought: good defender just messed up flavor.

I start to think of the paladin as Jedi.

Cheers, LT.

 

[hong]

I start to think of the paladin as Jedi.

Cheers, LT.

Big sword, but no light armour.

 

[WhatGravitas]

Big sword, but no light armour.

Hmm... then: Boba Fett the Jedi?

Cheers, LT.

 

[Rechan]

My opinion? I LOVES IT.

I agree with the OP: Clerics kick ass. Paladins also kick ass. In fact, I'm playing KotS and I'm disappointed the DB Paladin is built strength focused, with a poor, poor Wisdom. I'd much rather be Cha focused, but hey. Though I did notice a shortage of Paladin-specific feats, and the "Channel Divinity" powers for both classes (plus feats) really do nothing for me.

Warlocks and Rogues are badass.

Warlords and Wizards Make my mouth water.

Rangers and fighters aren't bad. I'd actually enjoy playing one. Fighters with their combat superiority and challenge are scary, especially with the right feats.

 

[sukael]

If those spells were broken, maybe they could have ...gasp...fixed them, instead of just scrapping them.
Couldn't illusions have an appropriate DC, just like traps?
And unlike rogues, wizards in previous editions couldn't use their abilities at will. If a wizards wastes a spell slot to send a creature into traps that may or may not exist, he might regret it later.
It would just take a little more work and playtesting to balance things and anticipate possible abuses.

I am not saying that every individual wizard should be as versatile as he was in previous editions, just that his powers and build options could be more varied and less focused on blasting.

The point isn't to (entirely) remove versatility... it's to keep non-combat powers from taking up slots for, basically, combat-only powers.

So, non-combat stuff becomes rituals, which don't take up any known slots - just some component expense each time you use them.

 

[Sashi]

If those spells were broken, maybe they could have ...gasp...fixed them, instead of just scrapping them.
Couldn't illusions have an appropriate DC, just like traps?
And unlike rogues, wizards in previous editions couldn't use their abilities at will. If a wizards wastes a spell slot to send a creature into traps that may or may not exist, he might regret it later.

Except this paradigm is gone. Would you expend a Daily power to disarm a trap? Because if there was an Encounter power of "summon a monkey made of force that sets off traps" the party literally never has to worry about traps as long as they can take a short rest.

It would just take a little more work and playtesting to balance things and anticipate possible abuses.

Because after 30 years of D&D we're just that close to perfect balance for Polymorph?

I am not saying that every individual wizard should be as versatile as he was in previous editions, just that his powers and build options could be more varied and less focused on blasting.

Well too bad, it's not happening. The Wizard has been assigned the "controller" job, which means "blasto". It does not mean "blasto, or shape changing, or buffs, or charms, or illusions, or cherry-picked bits of all of them". Because the former is possible to balance, the later is not.