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

[Alkiera]

This is pretty much retarded. Magic is the technology of D&D. If all the most brilliant minds of every race have spent thousands of years studying magic and haven't come up with better ways to do things, then Wizardry is a complete and utter waste of time.

And yet, in all the editions there have been, all the official settings, there was one... One... that actually treated magic like technology, and did as you suggest; Eberron wasn't even invented by anyone at WotC/TSR, it won a freaking contest.

Mind you, I love Eberron, for that very reason; but out of the many fantasy settings out there, both D&D and fiction/literature, very very few treat magic like technology. There are all kinds of excuses why; magic users are rare, magic is very hard to understand, and/or inconsistent in practice. The whole 'magic is inherently chaotic, and therefore impossible to apply logic to' idea.

Frankly, I think the real 'reason' is that all legends of magic come from by-gone eras, from before there was much in the way of logical thought or scientific process or methods. Heck, the idea of cause and effect, and the difference between causality and coincidence is pretty new, in the grand scheme of things. Because of this, people go the 'magic is not technology' route to maintain a sense of the fantastic. It's wild, crazy, MAGIC! Not just a smart guy with fancy tech.

 

[Kzach]

Nice way to get people to admit they downloaded got the books early

 

[Alkiera]

Retarded is insisting that wizardry is the only form of magic in D&D, when obviously it is not. Apparently combat wizardry focuses around manipulation of elemental forces, plus a smattering from other areas of magic. Excellent. By not giving everything and the kitchen sink to one class, we open up the game for other classes.

Or in other words, your wizard must die so that my shadowcaster can live.

I like the way you put this: The fighter would be the melee wizard, if the fighter could also sneak attack like the Rogue, rage like the Barbarian, and control the battlefield like the Knight. And switch between wielding sword and shield, a 2h weapon, TWF, and a bow, all during one fight. And be better than the Rogue, Barbarian, and Knight at any of those things. Except skills, because dumb fighters can't do skills, just like arcane magic can't heal.

 

[Nifft]

Think homebrew.

It's much easier to cobble together a few new feats than it is to put together individual "pacts" for each and every deity in your campaign setting.

If you were here before 4e had a forum, you would know I think "homebrew" a lot.

But hey, take "easy" if that's your bliss. I'll start working on "good".

Cheers, -- N

 

[Thasmodious]

My lingering worry leading up to 4e was that wizards would lose some of their wizardliness conforming to the powers framework. This counterbalanced in my mind because fighters, my favorite class, appeared to be awesome (and are).

Having seen them now, I am very impressed with the design. Using the old, reliable spellbook, wizards still have their options, rock the rituals and remain balanced. I really like the way it turned out. More generally, all the classes seem pretty cool. Nothing seemed to changed my decades old personal preferences. I'm just glad playing fighters will be fun again.

 

[Saeviomagy]

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

A more elegant solution might have been nice.

You mean like rituals?

 

[Boarstorm]

If you were here before 4e had a forum, you would know I think "homebrew" a lot.

But hey, take "easy" if that's your bliss. I'll start working on "good".

Cheers, -- N

Hit a nerve, eh?

I'm just suggesting that not everyone has the kind of time to devote to personalizing clerics to fit every single deity. Divinity feats seem like a good compromise of functionality and ease, to me.

If you have the time to do it for your campaign world, more power to ya. But many people don't, and it's my belief that rules should cater to the majority and allow expansion by those who wish to put the effort into it.

For me (and I suspect for most of the silent masses), clerics are fine as written. And that's a good thing. Some people don't like the cake they've been fed and are given the power to make their own. That's also a good thing.

It means we all get what we want, ultimately. You just have to work harder for the payoff than I do.

 

[Kirnon_Bhale]

I don't have the books yet but....

I am very sure that I read on the forums somewhere that the clerics were specifically designed as generic because not everybody would be playing default DnD, but it was also suggested that the channel divinity feat like the Pelor one from DDxp be swapped out for one of the other class feature channel divinity to enable you to start with some built in differences off the bat.

 

[Nifft]

I am very sure that I read on the forums somewhere that the clerics were specifically designed as generic because not everybody would be playing default DnD, but it was also suggested that the channel divinity feat like the Pelor one from DDxp be swapped out for one of the other class feature channel divinity to enable you to start with some built in differences off the bat.

Here's the thing: Warlocks start out with one of three Pacts. This gives them a "curse" benefit (something cool that happens when one of their special designated targets dies), and a specific at-will power.

BUT! (and this is the cool part) But, they also have little notes in their Encounter powers which say, "If your pact is XXX, instead of just 1, you thingy the jobber by 1 + your Int bonus". That's encouragement for people to stay "within pact", but you aren't actually punished for choosing other Encounter powers.

It'd be nice if there were similar notes in some of the Cleric Encounter prayers: "if you worship the Queen of Ravens, this effect deals radiant damage equal to your Cha modifier even if you miss". That kind of thing.

Probably easy enough to add, but why couldn't they do it? (I'll be doing it for the deities specific to my setting, of course; but prolly it'll be vaguely amenable to generic PoL.)

Cheers, -- N

PS: Also, some of those Channel Divinity powers are rather weak in Heroic tier. Perhaps they start to shine brighter at higher levels.

 

[Boarstorm]

In retrospect, Nifft, that's an idea I could get behind.