Best (and worse) new base classes from WotC

[lukelightning]

I hate warlocks, but maybe because I'm prejudiced because of the one that was in my party. This 7th level warlock totally overshadowed my 9th level rogue in both combat and rogue stuff (sneaking around...he could turn invisible...climbing? He could spider climb...sneak attack? His eldritch blast worked on more things and more consistantly and was a touch attack to boot).

Hey, on the topic of rogue-type classes, can the spellthief steal divine magic or is it limited to arcane?

I dislike the Wujen. I don't think an "Asian" wizard needs to be mechanically different from a standard D&D wizard.

 

[carnivore]

The scout class is great for a player who likes to play with minis. In my game, I use both minis and Dwarven Forge stuff so the player with the scout is like a little kid in a candy store.

At first, I was a little annoyed by the scout, but soon learned of it's weaknesses as Merric stated.

I've used some of the other classes as NPC (friend and foe) and enjoy both ninja and marshal. I will be pulling out a new warlock baddie soon. I've also converted an old reoccuring baddie rogue/ranger into a scout who will also be returning.

Not played it but have heard that warmage is rather boring: "BOOM BOOM... that's all I got..."

 

[lukelightning]

Not played it but have heard that warmage is rather boring: "BOOM BOOM... that's all I got..."

Well, some people like that. My first D&D character was a magic-user who pretty much just shot of fireballs and lightning bolts all the time, but part of this was lack of other options in 1st edition D&D but mostly my mentality at the time...and my age.

I just see them as overshadowing blaster sorcerers too much.

 

[Storm Raven]

Irrelevant. I just mean to say that if the DM expects to be able to deplete your damage output, and you have as a damaging class someone whose damage output is not depleted - whether warlock or archer with hundreds of arrows - the DM may be annoyed and feel like the class is overpowered.

Do you feel annoyed that the guy wielding the greatsword doesn't have his damage output depleted?

 

[VirgilCaine]

I hate that the Warlock is styled as some kind of evil-devil-touched person, when at the end of the class, they go ahead and say they could have powers themed to other alignments/powers/etc.
And then there aren't any suggestions for changing the invocation names.
That's just annoying.

 

[Voadam]

FYI, spirits in Complete Divine reference the OA book. In the OA book, outsiders are defined as spirits. Since Summon Monster x summons a celestial or fiendish animal (animal with a template that changes it's type to outsider), they are spirits that the Spirit Shaman can affect.

Celestial and fiendish animals are magical beasts, not outsiders.

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

I didn't allow a scout into my game. The skirmish ability seems more than balanced and easy to apply for most situations, it just doesn't make sense for missile fire to me which was the gestalt warlock concept he suggested by the player (move, eldritch blast ranged touch attack with skirmish damage, rinse and repeat).

Missile fire's fine. I'm really thinking of simply banning ranged touch Sneak Attacks and Skirmish, though-- they're alright in normal games, but in a Gestalt game it's all too easy to qualify for either Sneak Attack or Skirmish damage on every single Blast, and that's just too much.

Not to mention, ray of frost Sneak Attack on Fire creatures is just too wrong.

 

[SteveC]

I don't hate it, but I don't use it.

It seems a bit specialized to me for a core class. I could see it as a core class in a campaign where there are a lot of spellcasters, like Brust's Dragaera. In my campaign, I try to play off mages as a bit more unique, so I wouldn't see a broad body of thiefs dedicated specifically to preying on magic as credible. It would be very much a specialty thing, like I normally think is appropraite for a PrC.

Good point. I think the spell thief is a very interesting class design and one that WotC does not do very often. They have taken something that could be done with a core class + a prestige class and stretched it out over a full 20 levels, resulting in a base class.

This is something that a lot of other companies do with their base classes, and I usually don't like it. In the spellthief's case, I think it works, but I would really not suggest it as a general method to design a class.

What I like about the spellthief is that they have a very unusual set of abilities, and they get their core ability at level 1. You could do a prestige class with much the same results, but you would likely have to smash together all of the abilities quite a bit more, which I don't think I would like nearly as much.

With all of that said, the spell thief fails the "is this class a broad archetype" test badly. It is so specialized that it really does fit the definition of a prestige class much better.

You're also right in saying that it would only really work in a certain kind of campaign. A game where there spells and spellcasters are rare would make the class fairly useless, as would a game with a lot of psionics.

Still, from playing one a bit, it seems to be one of those "do anything and everything, just not particularly well" classes, like the bard. All I can ultimately say is that I'm enjoying playing one, and it doesn't seem overpowered.

--Steve

 

[DungeonmasterCal]

I hate that the Warlock is styled as some kind of evil-devil-touched person, when at the end of the class, they go ahead and say they could have powers themed to other alignments/powers/etc.
And then there aren't any suggestions for changing the invocation names.
That's just annoying.

You mean like these?

http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=370164

 

[Saeviomagy]

I hate warlocks, but maybe because I'm prejudiced because of the one that was in my party. This 7th level warlock totally overshadowed my 9th level rogue in both combat and rogue stuff (sneaking around...he could turn invisible...climbing? He could spider climb...sneak attack? His eldritch blast worked on more things and more consistantly and was a touch attack to boot).

Except you SHOULD be able to sneak attack multiple times per round. If you never do, then you're probably doing something wrong.

And of course with invisibility - it still doesn't cover sound. Your DM should be picking him up every single time with a listen check. I hope that your rogue is a bit better than that.
Not to mention the fact that YOU can get darkstalker, and he can't use it.

Climb? Everyone outshines someone with ranks in climb. Thanks to magic, it's a total waste of skill points, even without a warlock.

I would hope that you've invested in one of your prime class abilities, and have search pretty high? Disable device too? No way the warlock can mimic those

Hey, on the topic of rogue-type classes, can the spellthief steal divine magic or is it limited to arcane?

If it's a spell (or later, an SLA), he can steal it.

I dislike the Wujen. I don't think an "Asian" wizard needs to be mechanically different from a standard D&D wizard.

I agree totally here. I think the wujen is a prime example of "for heavens sake just make up some feats and add the spells to the regular spell list instead of devoting 1/3rd of the books spells to a class that most people will never use". Crap PrC.