Doing my monthly browsing of posts by WotC employees on the WotC boards, I came across these tidbits from Ed Stark:
Ed: (On CW) "The hunter of the dead is a pretty interesting class but I agree that he's not the best at turning undead. He can be pretty good at destroying undead, however, and here's how.
"The hunter of the dead gets a lot of turning attempts per day (once he gets extra turning) but isn't good at sending undead running (which I think he would find somewhat unsatisfying). Instead, he uses his turning attempts for other things. On page 106 of CW we put in a number of Divine feats, all of which require turning attempts to use. Sacred Vengeance is a favorite among hunters, as well as Divine Cleansing and Divine Might.
"If you want a character good at turning undead, you'll find a cleric or one of the upcoming Complete Divine classes more satisfying. The hunter of the dead, however, is excellent at destroying undead in combat. Perhaps he should have an ability that stacks his turning levels and makes him better able to blast undead into dust but we ended up going another way with him.
"I hope that helps, or at least inspires some interesting discussion!"
One question, would there by any chance be a prestige class in the Complete Divine that is exactly similar to the Eldritch Knight but instead of increasing arcane caster levels it increased divine caster levels?
Ed: "Tough question, as the galleys are routing and I don't have a copy handy.
"Still, I think The Hanged Man makes a good point. Unlike arcane spellcasters, most divine casters are pretty efficient in combat anyway and don't need to give up spell progression. I know there are some very combat-focused divine classes in Complete Divine (I'll try to give you a list when we get closer to release), but with the paladin and the cleric as-is, you've got some pretty excellent "divine knights" just to start. Rest assured, we have some prestige classes geared toward them!"
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=173699
Q. I hate the NAME of the Kensai, Ronin or Samurai- but if one simply accepts the Samurai as a "western copy of what they think a samurai is" then it's fine
Ed: "Y'know, we just talked it over around the office and wish we'd put in something like "these are the D&D equivalents of the westernized version of ..." these classes and such. It is too bad, because we really like the classes, but several people didn't like the fact we'd named them what we did."
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=160095
Q. Ok in the complete warrior I think on page 68 it has the Order of the bow initiate Prestige class. On the next page it has a sample Character. My question is how in the world does he get a +30 on damage on his ranged attack. Iit is just on his ranged precision attack.
Ed: "Grum ... ble. I hate making mistakes like this.
"Near as I can reconstruct, the stat block was built prior to a late change in the class. Here's where I see the damage bonuses coming from:
+3 magic (for the magic longbow)
+2 Str bonus (+2 strength bow)
+2 weapon specialization
-----
+7
"Then, when he uses Manyshot, he fires three arrows at the same target (at a -6 penalty) and triples his damage to 3d8+21.
"It looks like whoever did this particular stat block added in a +1 for Point Blank Shot (which still only works within 30 feet) and an additional +2, probably from Greater Weapon Specialization which the prestige class used to give away but no longer does. That would explain the +30 damage bonus.
"Argh. That seem right? Sorry about that."
Q. That would probably explain the numerous other errors in the character as well, such as the fact that he doesn't even meet the prereq skill ranks to have the PRC in the first place.
Ed: "Those skill ranks are just weird. I can't imagine how I missed that in galleys."
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=2537835#post2537835
Q. I heard that somoene talked with Ed Stark, and they are preparing a list of "dead" classes & Feats. Could this be true?
Ed: "Well, yes and no. We consider anything not revised to be official with 3.5. However, we have talked about putting together a short list of non-revised bits of material that should slide out of the game. For example, we all know Ambidexterity is no longer a part of the game.
"If I get something like that together, I will post it. It'll be a pretty short list, though."
Q. That will be nice to see.
What about the stuff that needed revision and has not yet received it, like Circle Kick?
Ed: "We definitely haven't gotten around to everything but, as one of the others posted, if it requires a minimum of effort, we probably won't bother to do it as we figure you can handle it and would rather get stuff out of us that requires much more effort."
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=2537821#post2537821
Q. Just wondering what everyone else thought about the Stone Lord. I'm looking at playing it instead of the Horizon Walker, but am only stopped by the fact that all there abilities are usable 1/day (ballanced for some abilities like Earthquake, but isn't so great for the other smaller ones like Earth's Blood) Anyhow, what do you think about the Stone Lord overall?
Ed: "My opinion is that the stone lord is a pretty solid class even without the special abilities (fighter attack progression, good Fort save) so the once per day use of these abilities (and one ability per level) is pretty cool.
"Of course, I'm biased."
Q. i think it's a cool class, i just wish it wasn't limited to dwarves
Ed: "Remember--it's your game . Your DM wants to let it go for other races, that's up to him/her.
"In my campaign, I have a house rule about racial restrictions. If you want to spend a feat slot to be "raised by X" or "taught by X" (where "X" is the race), I usually give you a minor racially-related benefit and I say you've met that requirement.
"For example, if you were a human who took the "Raised by Dwarves" feat, I'd probably give you something like low-light vision (not quite as good as darkvision, but an improvement) and let you be an "honorary" dwarf for meeting racial requirements for prestige classes, feats, etc. You would not be considered a dwarf for purposes of spells or anything and this is obviously not as "good" as being a dwarf, but you still have all the characteristics of being a human (though you just blew your free feat on this).
"This is just a house rule, though, and it has not been playtested or min-maxed."
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=169031
Enjoy!
Ed: (On CW) "The hunter of the dead is a pretty interesting class but I agree that he's not the best at turning undead. He can be pretty good at destroying undead, however, and here's how.
"The hunter of the dead gets a lot of turning attempts per day (once he gets extra turning) but isn't good at sending undead running (which I think he would find somewhat unsatisfying). Instead, he uses his turning attempts for other things. On page 106 of CW we put in a number of Divine feats, all of which require turning attempts to use. Sacred Vengeance is a favorite among hunters, as well as Divine Cleansing and Divine Might.
"If you want a character good at turning undead, you'll find a cleric or one of the upcoming Complete Divine classes more satisfying. The hunter of the dead, however, is excellent at destroying undead in combat. Perhaps he should have an ability that stacks his turning levels and makes him better able to blast undead into dust but we ended up going another way with him.
"I hope that helps, or at least inspires some interesting discussion!"
One question, would there by any chance be a prestige class in the Complete Divine that is exactly similar to the Eldritch Knight but instead of increasing arcane caster levels it increased divine caster levels?
Ed: "Tough question, as the galleys are routing and I don't have a copy handy.
"Still, I think The Hanged Man makes a good point. Unlike arcane spellcasters, most divine casters are pretty efficient in combat anyway and don't need to give up spell progression. I know there are some very combat-focused divine classes in Complete Divine (I'll try to give you a list when we get closer to release), but with the paladin and the cleric as-is, you've got some pretty excellent "divine knights" just to start. Rest assured, we have some prestige classes geared toward them!"
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=173699
Q. I hate the NAME of the Kensai, Ronin or Samurai- but if one simply accepts the Samurai as a "western copy of what they think a samurai is" then it's fine
Ed: "Y'know, we just talked it over around the office and wish we'd put in something like "these are the D&D equivalents of the westernized version of ..." these classes and such. It is too bad, because we really like the classes, but several people didn't like the fact we'd named them what we did."
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=160095
Q. Ok in the complete warrior I think on page 68 it has the Order of the bow initiate Prestige class. On the next page it has a sample Character. My question is how in the world does he get a +30 on damage on his ranged attack. Iit is just on his ranged precision attack.
Ed: "Grum ... ble. I hate making mistakes like this.
"Near as I can reconstruct, the stat block was built prior to a late change in the class. Here's where I see the damage bonuses coming from:
+3 magic (for the magic longbow)
+2 Str bonus (+2 strength bow)
+2 weapon specialization
-----
+7
"Then, when he uses Manyshot, he fires three arrows at the same target (at a -6 penalty) and triples his damage to 3d8+21.
"It looks like whoever did this particular stat block added in a +1 for Point Blank Shot (which still only works within 30 feet) and an additional +2, probably from Greater Weapon Specialization which the prestige class used to give away but no longer does. That would explain the +30 damage bonus.
"Argh. That seem right? Sorry about that."
Q. That would probably explain the numerous other errors in the character as well, such as the fact that he doesn't even meet the prereq skill ranks to have the PRC in the first place.
Ed: "Those skill ranks are just weird. I can't imagine how I missed that in galleys."
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=2537835#post2537835
Q. I heard that somoene talked with Ed Stark, and they are preparing a list of "dead" classes & Feats. Could this be true?
Ed: "Well, yes and no. We consider anything not revised to be official with 3.5. However, we have talked about putting together a short list of non-revised bits of material that should slide out of the game. For example, we all know Ambidexterity is no longer a part of the game.
"If I get something like that together, I will post it. It'll be a pretty short list, though."
Q. That will be nice to see.
What about the stuff that needed revision and has not yet received it, like Circle Kick?
Ed: "We definitely haven't gotten around to everything but, as one of the others posted, if it requires a minimum of effort, we probably won't bother to do it as we figure you can handle it and would rather get stuff out of us that requires much more effort."
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=2537821#post2537821
Q. Just wondering what everyone else thought about the Stone Lord. I'm looking at playing it instead of the Horizon Walker, but am only stopped by the fact that all there abilities are usable 1/day (ballanced for some abilities like Earthquake, but isn't so great for the other smaller ones like Earth's Blood) Anyhow, what do you think about the Stone Lord overall?
Ed: "My opinion is that the stone lord is a pretty solid class even without the special abilities (fighter attack progression, good Fort save) so the once per day use of these abilities (and one ability per level) is pretty cool.
"Of course, I'm biased."
Q. i think it's a cool class, i just wish it wasn't limited to dwarves
Ed: "Remember--it's your game . Your DM wants to let it go for other races, that's up to him/her.
"In my campaign, I have a house rule about racial restrictions. If you want to spend a feat slot to be "raised by X" or "taught by X" (where "X" is the race), I usually give you a minor racially-related benefit and I say you've met that requirement.
"For example, if you were a human who took the "Raised by Dwarves" feat, I'd probably give you something like low-light vision (not quite as good as darkvision, but an improvement) and let you be an "honorary" dwarf for meeting racial requirements for prestige classes, feats, etc. You would not be considered a dwarf for purposes of spells or anything and this is obviously not as "good" as being a dwarf, but you still have all the characteristics of being a human (though you just blew your free feat on this).
"This is just a house rule, though, and it has not been playtested or min-maxed."
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=169031
Enjoy!
