Adventurer class

[Matthias]

For 4E, it looks as though Fighter is going to be spiced up beyond its 3.X incarnation, what with the whole mugging of knights and all.

If this is indeed the truth, then there should be a replacement to fill the role of generic adventurer. I wouldn't feel as comfortable defaulting a character to Fighter if Fighters were as flavorful as the rest of the classes. The next closest default class would be the Commoner / Aristocrat / Expert trio and I wouldn't care for that either.

So I want to propose to the 4E guys that you add a generic Adventurer class, similar to to the 3.X Fighter or Expert, the generic Call of Cthulhu PC template, or even the d20 Modern base classes.

Example configuration: Medium BAB, d8 hit die, one good save (selectable by the player), 10 selectable class skills, bonus feat slots (assignable to any feat) at 1st level and every odd-numbered level thereafter. Not sure how talents would work.

Naturally the Adventurer should not be so good that it eclipses the 4.0 Fighter (or any other class).

 

[WhatGravitas]

You mean a jack-of-all-trades? The consummate dabbler? Who can do this and that?


Like the bard?

Or more seriously: The factotum?

Cheers, LT.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Factotum has some pretty funky mechanics. I suspect Matthias' request will have to be met from the D20, er, OGL community.

 

[Masquerade]

I was also reminded of the factotum, and, while I like the factotum, I'm not sure how such a class ("the fifth man") would interact with 4e's relatively set roles.

 

[WhatGravitas]

I was also reminded of the factotum, and, while I like the factotum, I'm not sure how such a class ("the fifth man") would interact with 4e's relatively set roles.

Less-than-founded suspicion: The bard is partially such a "fifth man". Perhaps he was left out because of this reason: They wanted to figure out whether he should become a leader or rather introduce such a fifth man in the first book, and went for the latter.

[/random speculation off!]

Cheers, LT.

 

[DreamChaser]

Honestly, I think that the idea of the "Adventurer" or other jack of all trades defeats the point of having classes in the first place. Assuming that the multiclass rules are more functional in 4e, I think that JoAT can be easily created by strategic multiclassing and no space needs to be used on the "I couldn't make up my frelling mind." or "I can't handle the idea that there will be even a single encounter for which I won't have an ideal ability." which is all JoAT character's really are within a party-based system (IMHO).

Of course, in a 1 player game this is not the case.

DC

 

[kenmarable]

Don't want to speak for the original poster, but it sounds like not so much a jack-of-all-trades, but a general "pick up and play" character, for players new to the game, for example.

With a fighter, you make some character creation choices, but in combat for the most part, you are a "I swing at the nearest monster" kinda class that typically does the same thing over and over. Not nearly as exciting as the other classes (which is why I doubt WotC will make a 4e "generic" class), but I think it might be worthwhile for some publisher to create one. I've found it very handy to have a "boring" class that is really easy for someone to pick up and focus on doing one thing over and over. Harder for experienced players to have fun with it and not get bored, but for someone new, it can be an easy entrance to the game.

 

[Matthias]

You mean a jack-of-all-trades? The consummate dabbler? Who can do this and that?


Like the bard?

Or more seriously: The factotum?

Cheers, LT.

I've only seen it in passing but from what I remember, that's similar to what I had in mind.

 

[Aage]

If the multiclass system works out nice this could probably be done with rogue...

 

[chitzk0i]

Fourth Edition characters seem to be designed to bring something specific to the party, whereas this class doesn't do anything, really.