D&D 4E Directly from a quote- 8 classes in 4e! (well, now subject to much debate)

[glass]

Barbarian strikes me as easy to do as a fighter talent tree; why spend a whole class on it?

Because it potentially makes a good 'pre-built' warrior type for new players?


glass.

 

[The Souljourner]

Well... let's take two axioms. There are 8 core classes.

You're already wrong here. That's specifically been discussed in this thread. His comment was in the context of that specific playtest group only. The only hard data we have is that there will be fewer base classes in the core book than there are now.

The only things which are really up in the air are the bard and the monk, who haven't been mentioned anywhere. The druid is the next least-mentioned, with no mention in black & white but some anecdotal evidence that it's still around.

The other 8 classes (Fighter, Rogue, Barbarian, Cleric, Ranger, Paladin, Wizard, Sorcerer) have all been specifically mentioned, most on more than one occasion. It's certainly possible that some of their names may change, but it seems likely that they're all their own base class.

Maybe the warlord is a base class, maybe not. He's pretty sketchy at the moment. And honestly, "warlord" doesn't sound like a base class to me, it sounds like a PrC. You don't see a lot of 1st level "warlords" running around.

-Nate

 

[charlesatan]

Maybe the warlord is a base class, maybe not. He's pretty sketchy at the moment. And honestly, "warlord" doesn't sound like a base class to me, it sounds like a PrC. You don't see a lot of 1st level "warlords" running around.

Warlord has been mentioned by James Wyatt and claims to fulfill the same niche as the Paladin and the Fighter. Perhaps not 1st-level Warlords but we've certainly heard of 1st-level Bards, so that might be a niche that Warlord might be fulfilling (that or the Marshal). You said it yourself, some of the names might change.

Also, here are the other classes James Wyatt mentioned: Fighter, Paladin, Warlord (tanks), Cleric (healing), Rangers and Rogues (strikers), and the Wizard (battlefield controller). I've seen the Barbarian mentioned but it remains to be seen whether it actually gets included.

 

[Szatany]

he said, IIRC, that warlords and clerics are support, not tank/healing.

 

[Odysseus]

One thing that's been mentioned more than once is classes assimilating other classes. Since they're using the SAGA style classes with multiple talent trees each, I take that to mean the key elements of the lesser class will end up as a talent tree for the greater class.

.

I think the classes are the talent trees.
Its very clear that there are four base "Roles". To me that sounds like the equivalent of four core classes. And following the SAGA style there would be a multiple talent trees for each Role. And each talent tree would be called a class. I think the scope of the talent tree may be expanded from SAGA. But this fits more with what I'm hearing from the designers Q&A than the idea of 8+ core classes.
ps.
Also keep in mind races are classes in 4e as well. That fits more with the idea of what a class is, has changed.

 

[GreatLemur]

I remember somewhere someone saying something like:
Alot of people don't want Eastern (culture) in their western (culture) game.

That always struck me as a pretty weird sentiment. I dunno about you guys, but I ain't running any campaigns set in medieval Europe. I'm at least as likely to have a place for Monks as I am for Paladins.

 

[Remathilis]

I like these guesses very much.

Your Welcome (http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=3711918&postcount=28)

I'm actually going to revise my ideas base on Wyatt's "roles" comment.

FIGHTER (Defender) kills knight, warblade, THS
PALADIN (Defender) kills crusader, THS
CLERIC (Leader) kills healer, THS
WARLORD (Leader) kills bard, dragon shaman, marshal, THS
ROGUE (Striker) kills swashbuckler, maims ninja, THS
RANGER (Striker) kills scout, THS
WIZARD (Controller) maims dread necro, warmage, beguiler, THS
SORCERER (controller) kills warlock and dragon adept, THS

 

[Driddle]

D.Noonan excerpts: "Maybe an example will suffice. I've long used my Thursday night buddies as a testbed for whatever crazy D&D stuff I've been working on. And a few months ago, I dropped the "we're switching to 4e...tonight!" bomb on them. Half of these guys are my fellow designers, so they know the rules as well as anyone. But for the other half, this was out of the blue. They got a 20-minute whiteboard lecture from me on the fundamental rules changes. ...

This tells me that 4th edition is geared toward Thursday night play, and that it will involve whiteboard lectures.

I'm intrigued.

 

[Commonblade]

2 cents

What I think, and this is just my 2 cents...

I think each of the core classes is going to have "Specialist" Classes like the wizard. You don't call a Illisionist a Wizard, he's an Illisionist. So you don't call the Warlord a Fighter he is a Warlord.

Fighter
-Warlord (Marshel Talent Tree)
-Monk (Unarmed Tree)
-Barbarian (Rage Tree)
-Paladin (Holy Warrior Tree)
-Duelist (Mix Monk and Fighter talant trees and you have what everyone wants, I think )

Cleric
-Druid (Nature Tree, Shape Shifter: Specific type like Wolves)

Rogue
-Ranger (Not sure I want to put this here, maybe under fighter, maybe here, but I have this feeling he belongs here )

Wizard
-Specialist Wizards
-Sorcerer

I also expect to see an example character in the Players that is multiclassed and named Gimble and Devis

Edit: Ah Spelling you are my enemy! Thanks Caudor.

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

Rouge
-Ranger (Not sure I want to put this here, maybe under fighter, maybe here, but I have this feeling he belongs here )

Don't forget the cosmetologist tree with the make-up compact and eye liner. Goes right along with the rouge.