Heroes of Shadow Table of Contents

[gyor]

If it makes you feel better about the shaman i think that the Ravenkin paragon path will be a shadow pp for primal classes just a guess.

Actually there is a set of class features that can be traded between builds. The cavaliers summon mount which is both a class feature and a level utility power so both blackguards and opaladins which am betting with be called divine champions when re released, can gain them as level 6 utility powers. The blackguards servant of vice is both feature and power takable by cavaliers and champions as powers. The divine sanction of champions is baked right into paladin powers and feats so both blackguards and cavaliers can use it. Use may want to refluff of course such as calling it summon unholy steed and summoning an fiendish horse or shadow or purple dragon. Or summon servant of virtue or divine servant. The former could be a latern say and the latter a small imp sized angel. Divine Sanction could became addictive complusion or enforced virtue.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Wizard and Mage are the least different of 4e/Essentials pairings. You could easily put everything under the same heading:

Even clerics and warpriests could be listed this way, with a notation of "if you want a streamnlined creation, you can choose to be a warpriest focused in a single divine domain"

Yeah, I agree. Honestly when creating a character I'd hardly care one way or another Wizard vs Mage, it is like 'puce' vs 'reddish-brown'. There are now and then things that require an implement mastery or a mage school, which is a bit annoying. For some of the other classes it is rather more significant. Personally it isn't a huge big deal, just that it is the price of adding new layers of differently designed classes. Not sure it was a good design decision in the long run. That's neither a criticism of Essentials for what it is taken on its own nor a criticism of the older stuff. The whole system has just become less wieldy.

 

[Klaus]

Yeah, I agree. Honestly when creating a character I'd hardly care one way or another Wizard vs Mage, it is like 'puce' vs 'reddish-brown'. There are now and then things that require an implement mastery or a mage school, which is a bit annoying. For some of the other classes it is rather more significant. Personally it isn't a huge big deal, just that it is the price of adding new layers of differently designed classes. Not sure it was a good design decision in the long run. That's neither a criticism of Essentials for what it is taken on its own nor a criticism of the older stuff. The whole system has just become less wieldy.

After HoS comes out, I'll be able to say more, but for now I can say this: when I wrote my part of HoS, Essentials wasn't even out.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

After HoS comes out, I'll be able to say more, but for now I can say this: when I wrote my part of HoS, Essentials wasn't even out.

Right, and I'm all in favor of options for all of them. I'm just getting the feeling we now need more options because sometimes you have to have different ones for different class variations. lol. I like them all. I'll buy HoS for sure because it will be cool for sure. It will all be good Really want to see your stuff too!

 

[MerricB]

After HoS comes out, I'll be able to say more, but for now I can say this: when I wrote my part of HoS, Essentials wasn't even out.

You do know that means you won't recognise what you wrote, don't you, Klaus?

Cheers!

 

[Klaus]

Right, and I'm all in favor of options for all of them. I'm just getting the feeling we now need more options because sometimes you have to have different ones for different class variations. lol. I like them all. I'll buy HoS for sure because it will be cool for sure. It will all be good Really want to see your stuff too!

I'm eager to see their final form, as well!

From the ToC, my contributions that made it are:
- Shade
- Vryloka
- Feats
- Paragon Paths: Battleweaver, Dusk Oracle, Ravenkin, Veiled Master
- Epic Destinies: Keeper of the Everflow, Marshal of Letherna, Twilight Tribune

 

[Aegeri]

I would expect the necro-builds of the mage to have the same as the pyromancers ability to bypass fire resistance.

Which would therefore make all the powers in the book for the non-essentials classes (or just what they could use) utterly useless. They absolutely 100% need FEATS that *everyone* can take in this book that boost necrotic as a damage type. If they don't, the book will be flat out useless for anyone except the essentials classes granted the ability to bypass necrotic resistance. Not to mention even aside from resistance, necrotic just needs support the likes that radiant/cold/fire and such have had to be a viable legitimate choice. This is the book to do it in and if it's not there, it will never be there frankly.

 

[WalterKovacs]

For the record, I like Essentials. I don't like to pretend that the new books are not more focused on them as on the PH1-3 stuff.

Implement Mastery and non-domain cleric at-wills were just examples that show that they do only:

A) Essentials stuff compatible with PH1-PH2 classes (Example: Wizard/Mage At-will attack powers)

B) Essentials stuff non-compatible with PH1-PH2 classes (Example: more Mage Schools)

but not:

C) Stuff for PH1-PH2 classes that is non-compatible with Essentials (Examples: New wizard implement masteries, non domain cleric at-will attacks)

Please prove me wrong before attacking me again for my 'Essentials hate' (I'm playing right now more essential classes than PH1-3 ones).

Stuff in arcane power, martial power 1 and 2, divine power and primal power:

See A and C with absolutely no B.

Also, all books and Dragon magazine articles prior to the two Heroes of X books. Nothing but A and C.

So, your argument is basically, the BEST supported classes in the game (especially the wizard) is not recieving even MORE support to the exclusion of newer builds with less support.

Also, ANY summoning power supports the summoning tome mastery. ANY save effect supports the orb of imposition. ANY illusion power supports the orb of deception. ANY situationally specific encounter power is supported by the tome of rediness. The wand? I guess single target spells. Not all of the masteries are specific, some are a bit vaguer.

Of course, until Arcane power, those masteries did NOT have special powers that get bonuses the way that say, a specific warlock pact would. Outside of "orb goes with saves" type stuff, it was pretty much a free for all in terms of bonuses. Similarly, the benefits that schools of magic provide are mostly just the flat bonuses you get as class features (such as pyromancer ignoring fire resistance) which does more towards limiting a mage's choice than making the powers useless when used by anyone else (although I'd hardly recommend a non pyromancer to take nothing but fire spells unless they take similar steps to get around the fire resistance/immunity issue).

 

[Aegeri]

To be quite honest, I have to be brutal here and say I don't have even the barest hint of sympathy for Walking Dad's argument at all. I really am not going to spare any tears for the poor Wizard or Cleric - who have both got several billion books, dragon articles and such with powers in them for those classes. I'll shed many tears over the TRULY forgotten classes who have been entirely abandoned by WotC, like the Artificer, Seeker and Runepriest.

You know, the ones with zero support anywhere and aren't looking like getting any more ever. I'm really not going to be that worried if the original Cleric/Wizard doesn't get a lot out of this book, if you can't make an interesting character out of the billions of options already available for the PHB classes then I just don't know what to say.

 

[WalterKovacs]

Yeah, I agree. Honestly when creating a character I'd hardly care one way or another Wizard vs Mage, it is like 'puce' vs 'reddish-brown'. There are now and then things that require an implement mastery or a mage school, which is a bit annoying. For some of the other classes it is rather more significant. Personally it isn't a huge big deal, just that it is the price of adding new layers of differently designed classes. Not sure it was a good design decision in the long run. That's neither a criticism of Essentials for what it is taken on its own nor a criticism of the older stuff. The whole system has just become less wieldy.

Basically, with the Heroes books they were taking the most popular/core classes and doing them again. So the issue becomes, how do you take the MOST supported classes and not only do something that is new, that is playable on it's own AND with the old stuff, and that isn't overly complicated. Basically, they had to "cut off" the old stuff, at least to some extent, so that the new content didn't automatically include ALL of the old content. It's hard to create a streamlined or beginner's version of a class, that happens to encompass EVERYTHING from the original class and more. Also, by not absorbing the original classes, they don't replace them, giving you different options. In the case of the cleric, you have complete choice of powers, including the new ones, instead of being shackled into the new build.

[And, don't forget, with the old way there were the various "two attack stat" classes which basically were two seperate classes you couldn't tie together without completely ignoring their 'secondary' stat which provide most of your bonuses.]

They ended up with a middle ground of "new classes with familiar names/styles" to deal with the fact that they were trying to make iconic classes accesible to new people when those classes have been so well supported that they have TONS of powers and options available and it would be a diservice to both old and new to just throw more stuff on to the pile instead of at least trying to make a new one. Trying to avoid that whole power creep thing some people worry about. For example, the thief has some ridiculous stuff it can do ... but it also loses access to amazing dailies like knockout.