Are the alternate base classes becoming core?

[theredrobedwizard]

Group 1: Dragon Shaman, Warlock/Marshal, Scout, Warblade/Fighter.

Group 2: Swordsage, Fighter, Favored Soul, Duskblade.

So... out of 8 PCs, 1 core.

I don't know what this proves/disproves.

-TRRW

 

[delericho]

While some of my players really like the idea of having the supplements available for use, they seem to very rarely actually use anything from them (except for whatever PrC they have selected; because you have to have a PrC to remain competitive, don't you know).

So, my current party is the first to use non-core base classes. I currently have a Rogue, Wizard, Fighter, Hexblade and Ninja, with one more character to come.

I actually really like many of the new base classes. They add a great deal to the game, especially if you don't go crazy with optimising characters (either to be the best, or out of some misguided notion that you have to stay competitive).

I actually don't see the Warlock becoming a core class in 4e, as it would just take up too much room in the new PHB for all the new invocations. We might see one or two of the classes moved into the core, with the Favoured Soul and the Duskblade being the ones I think are most likely. I expect the base Paladin to be dropped to make room, but otherwise I don't see the core roster changing much.

 

[Wraith-Hunter]

I think that some of the base classes will be core, but I also think that the core classes will be redesigned in the way the new base classes are designed. Less reason to PrC more class abilities etc. I would also hope that they tame the cleric a bit and the druid alot.

 

[Cam Banks]

Of all the new base classes provided in the Complete books, my money is on the scout being the most enduring. It's such a great class, easily one of the better designs from this series of books in my opinion.

Cheers,
Cam

 

[Emirikol]

While some of my players really like the idea of having the supplements available for use, they seem to very rarely actually use anything from them (except for whatever PrC .. I expect the base Paladin to be dropped to make room, but otherwise I don't see the core roster changing much.

I hear you.

Players spend a lot of money on books now (almost as much as DM's) and still use very little. I house ruled a bunch of spells (to force them to use their other books), but they still don't really look much.

It's like buying Jewelry that you never wear.

jh

 

[wayne62682]

With any luck a new edition will include classes like the Duskblade and Beguiler in the Core rules so folks can have a fighter-mage and mage-rogue straight out of the box. Classes like the Knight and Dragon Shaman I think are rather worthless and don't add anything, but the hybrid classes are great and honestly I want more of them so you don't have to wait half the campaign sucking before your character is any good at his concept.

 

[Crothian]

For new classes to become core the PHB would have to be rewritten with them in it. That's what Core means and that's not happening. However it is great to see them getting support and being used.

 

[Sir Elton]

Little by little the various supplements have introduced new base classes - the duskblade, the warlock, the dragon shaman to name a few. It now seems that these classes are considered core. Several WotC now reference them (e.g. splat books introducing "new warlock invocations" and new spells for non core classes). Moreover, players are begging to use these classes. No one wants to play a boring old wizard anymore, they have to be a warlock, a duskblade, or a beguiler. When 4e comes out will these classes be considered core? Will we see a major overhaul of the game to include these classes in the core rules?

I don't like the Warlock. This is simply because I have a variant magic system rules set that does Warlock Invocations with the base spells (Dynamic Spellcasting). When your wizard or sorcerer can dust off any magic spell like a Warlock, it makes the Warlock redundant.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

Moreover, players are begging to use these classes. No one wants to play a boring old wizard anymore, they have to be a warlock, a duskblade, or a beguiler.

That's not a bad thing. This is a game, after all. People want to have fun, and new things are often fun. Don't begrudge them that. Besides, it's simply the novelty of newness drawing them to these new classes. Eventually it'll all even out.

When 4e comes out will these classes be considered core? Will we see a major overhaul of the game to include these classes in the core rules?

I hope so, at least in the case of the Warlock. Some of the other new base classes that have been introduced, like the Scout, seem likely candidates for inclusion as core classes in a potential 4e. Again, there isn't anything wrong with that. Such classes cover archetypes that haven't been adequately addressed by the game before. I think this is especially true of the Warlock, and is why I'm most enthusiastic about that class becoming core at some point.

 

[Greg K]

While I like new base classes and have been using some third party and Oriental Adventures classes since 3.0, the new 3.5 classes from WOTC as a whole have not impressed me. Of the 3.5 classes, the only one that I like is the Beguiler. The scout I'll use in my campaign provided it is the sniper variant from Dragon ( I dislike Skirmish) and the Swashbuckler I'll use until I find a better version. As for the duskblade, psion, knight and Spirit Shaman I will not use them despite their filling missing archetypes as they have, imo, all been better done elsewhere.