PHB3 cover!

I can see room for an Archivist class. The Archivist was buitl up around being a monster hunter (monster knowledge powers). Something that functions like a ranged Avenger would be rather cool to me.

You can check out some cool videos of an Archivist class here.

Pure. Awesome.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad


Here is a sneaking suspicion I have for the divine classes in PHB3:

There will be two new classes. They will be called something like, "crusader," and, "priest." The crusader will be a single primary stat defender designed to replace the paladin. The priest will be a single primary stat leader designed to replace the cleric. Viola! No more problems with dual primary stat classes. :erm:


(I'm thinking here about how the Bo9S crusader was essentially designed as a replacement paladin.)

Think of the :):):):)storm there will be, if you're correct. It'll be glorious. :cool:

I'm going to agree with previous posters and say that the primal/divine subtitle is probably just a red-herring, or a mistake. Or at least, I hope. I'm interested to see what further distinctions can be found between power sources.

Although if WotC doesn't think they can make separate power sources any more distinct than they are, I'd rather have them expand existing ones than produce something lame.

Doubt it. Just releasing more powers for those classes fixes all their problems and we're likely to see that in Divine Power. No need for an entirely new class.

A divine striker that's more of a caster would be neat. As would a healer class that doesn't deal damage but buffs the snot out of their party to compensate.
There was little fuss over the sorcerer handily displacing the warlock as the arcane damage-dealer, and the warlock certainly didn't get less MAD with Arcane Power, so ppaladin's predictions shouldn't be dismissed out-of-hand. WotC isn't above patching by displacement.
 


Mmmm, bug people.

Though with 4e's "Everything, now with more sexy!" mantra, I'm half expecting bug-bewbs. :hmm:
1) Practically everything that was female in 3e had boobs. Need I show you the MM pic of the Harpy and her droopy boobies? Or the Medusa and her scaly boobies?

2) Even though the female Dragonborn do have breasts, I... don't really find them all that Sexy.

3) I think a bug chick could be sexy*. I could show you pictures...

Yeah yeah, I know. Damn furries. :p

*But that's before you account for the risks. Being a male insect is hazardous to your health.
 


I don't want to derail this tooooooooo much, but briefly:

1) If those weren't actual mythical beasts that were normally depicted as female, and often with exposed breasts (including in previous editions), thus granting the artists the creative license, not to mention artistic significance, you'd have a point. Notice how no one's pointing out the gazongas on the 4e succubus...same thing for those guys.

2) I didn't mean to imply direct erotic appeal in "more sexy." I think the concept and art direction is broader than that, and probably comes from a place of seeing PC's as player avatars.

3) Whatever knocks your socks off, dude. Post pix up at the Circvs. ;)
 

Everyone goes for the Elan. I was rather fond of the Maenads. The crystal encrusted skin was just an awesome feature. I always wanted to play a Maenad Barbarian/Wilder who gained his psychic abilities from a wellspring of Supernatural Anger. If I could have found a way in 3.5 for it not to suck, I would have.
 


I was actually a fan of most of the PsiHB races. Half-giants were keen, Maenads saw the most play in my game, Elan had a weirdness to them, the Giths have been keen for always, the Thri-Kreen have a soft spot in my heart, and the dromites are keen. The Xephs were always a little weak in my mind, but they had their own schtick that was all right. I'd like to see all of them in print again, and it will be interesting to see which races the 4e folks think have enough "traction" to be in the PH3.
 

Remove ads

Top