Are the alternate base classes becoming core?

The Knight does one of the functions that the fighter was meant to do but couldn't as easily pull off: Tie up some of the enemy with you to protect the squishier members of the party. You can step around, dimension door past, etc., the heavily armored fighter or dwarven defender. The Knight calls you to fight *him*. I could see it replacing the Fighter and Paladin (and Cleric already does the holy warrior bit anyhow).

The Warlock works on two levels: The "never runs out of things to do" caster, and the "no paperwork" caster. I could see it replacing the Sorceror.

The Scout is a nice "nature runner" class, but I don't see it being enough better to replace either the Ranger or the Rogue, although some might argue it could replace the Ranger.

The Psionic, Incarnum and Bo9S classes are different enough in type that I wouldn't see them as "Core". Not that they are not cool, just not "core".

The Oriental classes in the completes are unfortunately different in theme without being significantly different in type. I can't see them replacing any core class.

Beguiler and Duskblade make great core additions, because of the multi-class niches they fill. Beguiller in fact could replace Bard. Arguably, the Warmage might also work for those that just want a "blast em to hell!" kind of magic-user.

Spell-Thief is too specialized to be core. The Hexblade was a nice idea, but the Duskblade does his multi-class niche better, and the "I curse you" power is not really "core".

Swashbuckler would make an interesting light-armored fighter role, except that the Rogue can already pull that off. I don't see it as core. On the other hand, if we have Beguiler and Scout then we have traps covered, so maybe that gives Swashbuckler a way in.

Spirit Shaman might replace a Druid if one thinks the Druid is too powerful, but seems a bit too "niche" in theme. Favored Soul is a spontaneous divine caster but I think a little too "niche" in theme as well (wings?). I think perhaps Spirit Shaman rather than Druid if only to give one divine preparation caster (cleric) and one divine spontaneous caster (spirit shaman).

Dragon Shamans and Marshals have cool powers but are hardly core. Healers don't seem to fill any role that clerics cannot do.

Monks actually answer that theme of people that like bare-handed warrior types. Same with Barbarian - some people just want to go "Hulk SMASH!"

So that would leave:

Cleric (preparation divine)
Spirit Shaman (spontaneous divine)
Knight (meat shield)
Barbarian (meelee damage dealer)
Scout (woodsy guy/traps guy)
Wizard (preparation arcane)
Warlock (uber-simple magic)
Warmage (spontaneous arcane - blaster)
Swashbuckler (light armored warrior) (maybe soup up a bit to become a "Dashing Swordsman" type)
Monk (bare handed warrior)
Beguiler (magic-user/thief)
Duskblade (fighter/magic-user)

Puts me at 12 classes in a Particle-Man 4th ed book. I would throw in various class options though.

I imagine that others would come up with different arrangements of classes, and I don't work for Wotc, so if you disagree with my list, don't worry - you are safe. :)
 

log in or register to remove this ad

My most recently generated character is a half-orc barbarian. Soooo non-core. ;)

That party has a monk/rogue, a cleric, and a warmage. I don't think the warmage is going to drop into the core rules any time soon.

My campaign has a cleric, a fighter/wizard, a ranger/rogue, a druid, and a fighter/holy liberator.

In another campaign we are a cleric, a paladin of freedom, a rogue, a bard/fighter, and a wizard.

In yet another campaign on hiatus we are a bard, a paladin, a cleric, and a wu jen. I certainly do not think that the wu jen is popular enough to wiggle into anyone's core ruleset, either.

Not seeing a lot of the new non-core classes, you know? But I see an awful lot of damn clerics. I would love to see them scaled back a tad (no heavy armor proficiency, that sort of thing). And if any class were going to drop from existence, I would ditch the sorcerer. When I first cracked the 3.0 player's handbook, I developed a twitch that still hasn't gone away.

<twitch>
 

My groups is a fighter, cleric, wizard, rogue, artificer, and fighter/cleric. One non-core. (Its an Eberron game). This despite the fact I allowed EVERYTHING cept Incarnum or the Tome books.

That said, The classes I could see being "core" or commonly played are:

Warlock
Knight
Swashbuckler
Scout
Favored Soul or Mystic (Dragonlance)

I think D&D needs a good, generic "shaman" class (no spirit or dragon) to act as a spontaneous druid-list caster. Otherwise, things are just fine as is.
 

Assuming they were going to make a 3.75 PHB including some of the new base calsses, I think we need to think about the baggage that will come with the new calsses to be included

Warlock 5-8 pages of invocations that only they can use
Bo9S 60 pages of Man and Stances that can be used to a slight degree by another class.
Psionics Again 50 or so page of powers limited to them
Etc

I would see classes that can fit easily under the current Divine/Arcane setup and not casue the PHB to get much larger.

So Beguiler, Duskblade, and Favored Soul could be strong contenders, but tohers are jsut too 'heavy' to fit into the base book.
 


Warlock 5-8 pages of invocations that only they can use

I think, if the warlock goes core, the invocations mechanic will be used for more than just the warlock class. It could replace everything from a bards spells to cleric domains, paladin and ranger powers, and the page count will be "freed up" by removing the sorcerer (with both a spells/day and a spells known chart, those spontaneous casters are expensive in terms of page count).

That's part of why I think other spontaneous casters wouldn't make it in. If you're going to put the warlock in, you might as well have all spontaneous magical abilities use invocation-like mechanics.
 

Kinda/sorta, IMO.

Under my guidance, my group is becoming quite familiar with the new base classes in various suppliments. None have taken up a favourite position yet (though Warlock is quite popular with one guy in the group), the new classes certain have their own appeal to them.

---

For my bit on the tangent about what 4th Edition core classes will look like, here'd my two coppers:

  • Archivist (HoH) and Cloistered Cleric (UA) combined into one light-armoured divine caster.
  • Barbarian - likely stays; hopefully Totem Barbarian (UA) will be featured.
  • Bard and maybe the Factotum (DunScp) combined into one class?
  • Battle Sorcerer (UA) and Duskblade (PHBII) combined. Awesomeness ensures.
  • Cleric and Paladin combined into one "Crusader" or "Champion" class; a heavy-armour divine warrior.
  • Druid (PHB), Spirit Shaman (ComDiv) - need a new base Shaman class that has these as PrCs
  • Favored Soul (ComDiv) and Mystic (DLCS) - I like em, but is it worth it?
  • Fighter (PHB) and Knight (PHBII) combined is actually a neat idea. I wonder....
  • Marshal (MHB) - needs something more, but aspects might be useful for either the cleric/pally class, or the fighter/knight class.
  • Ranger and Scout (ComAdven) into one class would be an effin schweet base class, IMO.
  • Rogue - just as is, with maybe more emphasis on it's theivery aspect, and another base-assassin class which ups the backstab/sneak attack bit.
  • Swashbuckler (ComWar), Thug (UA) - we really need a decent lightly-armoured warrior base class.
  • Warlock (ComArc) - neat new system, with much potential.
  • Wizard - has it's niche.

So, by my count:

Priest ("Archivist/Cloister Cleric")
Barbarian
Bard ("Bard/Factotum")
Battlemage ("Battle Sorcerer/Duskblade")
Crusader ("Cleric/Paladin")
Shaman ("Druid/Spirit Shaman")
Warrior ("Fighter/Knight")
Marshall
Scout ("Ranger/Scout")
Thief ("Rogue")
Cut-throat ("Rogue")
Swashbuckler ("Swashbuckler/Fighter/Thug")
Warlock
Wizard

that's 14. Not too bad, considering that there are over 70 base classes now :p

cheers,
--N
 

Kamikaze Midget said:
I think, if the warlock goes core, the invocations mechanic will be used for more than just the warlock class. It could replace everything from a bards spells to cleric domains, paladin and ranger powers, and the page count will be "freed up" by removing the sorcerer (with both a spells/day and a spells known chart, those spontaneous casters are expensive in terms of page count)..

Seriously, the sorceror only takes less than half a page more than the wizard. Check the PHB.

Invocations would be a lot more. In complete arcane they take up 6 and a half pages (I checked now)

I jsut don't see the warlock as core in a mostly 3.5 version of 4E

Butthen again i don't think 4E will be anythign like 3.5 so the warlock way of using magic will be in ther for sure.
 

I think D&D will always have your three main archetypes: Fighter, Thief, Magic-User. These are reflected by the NPC classes of Warrior/Expert/Adept, and could probably be used as a framework for other classes that spring off them, with optional class options for DMs who wish to use them in their campaign.

Warrior Classes:
*Fighter
*Paladin
*Barbarian
*Monk
++ Knight (optional)


Expert Classes
*Ranger
*Bard
*Rogue
++Scout (optional)


Magic-User Classes
*Wizard
*Sorceror
*Cleric
++ Warlock (optional)
++ Favored Soul (optional)


The optional base classes have always reminded me of the "kit" options in AD&D - especially with the inevitable power creep.

However, since there is no reason to expect this mythical "Fourth Edition" any time in the near... ever, I would say that these extra classes are currently optional content, officially supported by WotC.
 

Kamikaze Midget said:
The one I could see, possibly, is the Warlock, just because it's "more sorcerer than the sorcerer," and is a very cool "dark wizard" archetype.

Although it is a cool dark wizard archetype, I couldn't see it replacing the sorcerer - it is nowhere near as interesting, versatile and useful. Sorcerers are so good that I've not been able to bring myself to play a wizard yet (and wizards were my favourite characters in 1e)

Cheers
 

Remove ads

Top