Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mustrum_Ridcully" data-source="post: 4202491" data-attributes="member: 710">I think we'll see more classes. Though it depends on how you count? Do you count only Core Classes or also account for PrCs? The Complete Warrior/Sword &amp; Fist equivalent for 4E will not come with new classes, &quot;only&quot; feats, powers, paragon paths and epic destinies. This implies there is still a lot of variance inside each class.But the PHB II will add new classes, including some with new power sources. According to previous blog posts and comments from R&amp;D, classes like the wizard might not be as all-encompassing as they were, to give more room to implement specialists. A Wizard might still be able to cast invisibility or create an illusion, but you won't be able to build a Wizard that only uses illusion. That will be the job of a Illusionist class.A class-based system shouldn't include too flexible classes. A class represents an archetype, not dozens of them. If it does the latter, it's not really a good class. I don't think I'll agree here. if you say &quot;play a Cleric and pretend its a Warlord&quot; is to simple. But use the Warlock, but give him some Cleric powers and restat them so they fit weapon usage instead of some divine damage, you still have mostly done some reflavouring, but in the end, you still have something new.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mustrum_Ridcully, post: 4202491, member: 710"] I think we'll see more classes. Though it depends on how you count? Do you count only Core Classes or also account for PrCs? The Complete Warrior/Sword & Fist equivalent for 4E will not come with new classes, "only" feats, powers, paragon paths and epic destinies. This implies there is still a lot of variance inside each class. But the PHB II will add new classes, including some with new power sources. According to previous blog posts and comments from R&D, classes like the wizard might not be as all-encompassing as they were, to give more room to implement specialists. A Wizard might still be able to cast invisibility or create an illusion, but you won't be able to build a Wizard that only uses illusion. That will be the job of a Illusionist class. A class-based system shouldn't include too flexible classes. A class represents an archetype, not dozens of them. If it does the latter, it's not really a good class. I don't think I'll agree here. if you say "play a Cleric and pretend its a Warlord" is to simple. But use the Warlock, but give him some Cleric powers and restat them so they fit weapon usage instead of some divine damage, you still have mostly done some reflavouring, but in the end, you still have something new. [/QUOTE]

Verification