Essentials Cleric

[Greg K]

...What exactly were you expecting? If 4E didn't interest you before, why were you expecting it to interest you now? .

I was getting interested in giving 4e another look based on PHB2, Martial Power, Martial Power 2, Divine Power, MM2, and MM3.

I liked what I was reading in the Ampersand article until I got to the build. As a DM and player, I don't want WOTC telling me that a warpriest has resurrection or smite undead as class features.

 

[Nightfly]

There will surely be some mechanism for making the original strength-based cleric powers into wisdom-based powers.

It doesn't take errata, though. All you need a class feature for the warpriest: "When you use a cleric power, you may replace strength modifiers to attack rolls and damage rolls with your wisdom modifier". Done. Now the original PH1 strength cleric still exists, but there's an escape route for those who want to avoid the multi-attribute madness of that build.

 

[doctorhook]

I was getting interested in giving 4e another look based on PHB2, Martial Power, Martial Power 2, Divine Power, MM2, and MM3.

I liked what I was reading in the Ampersand article until I got to the build. As a DM and player, I don't want WOTC telling me that a warpriest has resurrection or smite undead as class features.

EDIT: Nevermind, I understand what you're saying.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

One thing I noticed is that this Warpriest doesn't get Ritual Casting as a free feat, which probably explains what "Resurrection" is...

Anyways I like that classes are getting features over the levels. It was something I liked about classes in 3e and Pathfinder. It just feels more special if you get something that's more unique than just another power, which is something that was sort of missing from 4e.

 

[Aegeri]

As a DM and player, I don't want WOTC telling me that a warpriest has resurrection or smite undead as class features.

Seem like things that are fair enough to me. The point isn't to make super flexible builds that make everything else irrelevant, but provide a different option. I would be most concerned if it could just mix and match class features.

 

[ppaladin123]

Yes to all four.

Would you clarify: are there plans to eventually give the "essentials" treatment to the other classes in PHB I & II (e.g. the warlord and the barbarian)?

"I am not at liberty to discuss that yet," is an acceptable answer. I just want to get a sense of what is going to happen to those classes not covered in the two, "heroes" books this year.

 

[Aegeri]

Would you clarify: are there plans to eventually give the "essentials" treatment to the other classes in PHB I & II (e.g. the warlord and the barbarian)?

This is another very good question. I'd love some of the other classes, especially the seeker, barbarian, warlord and others to also get some of this treatment.

 

[The Little Raven]

As a DM and player, I don't want WOTC telling me that a warpriest has resurrection or smite undead as class features.

I have to wonder if you have this same reaction to every edition of D&D (or most other RPGs, for that matter), since it's the standard. Want to play a thief in 2e? You've got Backstab as a class feature. Want to be a Toreador? You have Auspex, Celerity, and Presence as clan Disciplines.

 

[mearls]

Would you clarify: are there plans to eventually give the "essentials" treatment to the other classes in PHB I & II (e.g. the warlord and the barbarian)?

"I am not at liberty to discuss that yet," is an acceptable answer. I just want to get a sense of what is going to happen to those classes not covered in the two, "heroes" books this year.

I am not at liberty to discuss that yet. Sorry!

 

[Aegeri]

I am not at liberty to discuss that yet. Sorry!

Quick everyone, time to make with the rampant speculation so he can glare at his computer and be all "u mad".