Fighter Slayer preview

[Tony Vargas]

I suppose you could look to the monster Soldier role for some possibilities. For instance, there are soldier-role monsters that grab or immobilize instead of marking.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

That's what makes the maneuver terrible: it only works if you don't get your sneak attack against the target. And the given example of why it existed was "a shortbow using rogue who attacks from range", which was bad enough in the first place, let alone after we see what the slayer is capable of from range.

It is still not terrible, just an option you have, when something doesn´t work as intended... an option. Not your default move.

 

[dbm]

I'm surprised no one else has said this already: the Essential Fighter is an old school fighter. Originally, fighters just whacked things, and this is what the Slayer does. This leaps out at me as one of my regular group frequently has played fighters through out the editions and constantly laments that his 4e fighter doesn't do enough damage to be a "proper" fighter.

All the "essential" builds have been more old school to my eye - I think their primary function is to draw in old school players who haven't taken to 4e so far. Kind of a 4e reaction to the demand for retro clones.

Cheers,
Dan

 

[Marshall]

Huh. I somehow glossed that.

Well, good. As I said, I like the idea of a steel-wrapped striker.

Then keep looking. Unless there are some heavy-hitting class features missing from the preview, the DEX secondary nature of the slayer means that despite having Scale proficiency every slayer will be in Hide.

This also slams the door on 4ee not being 4.5. Whole swaths of 4e design tenets have been thrown out the window. The level of errata to non-4ee rules necessary to balance these classes is massive. 4ee classes dont play like their 4e cousins with whole new rules and massive redefinitions of game terms/class features. Combined with all the rules update docs from the last two years, this is a larger sea-change than 3.5 dreamed of.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Then keep looking. Unless there are some heavy-hitting class features missing from the preview, the DEX secondary nature of the slayer means that despite having Scale proficiency every slayer will be in Hide.

Wrong.

depending on race, hide + 16/14 dex is worse than scale armor. Also hide needs con to upgrade.

Only if you chose melee training + 20 dex and con as secondary instead of strength, you will have higher AC than with scale.

Also scale is better armor, because of no ACP, and with scale specialization even no movement speed reduction.

I hope there are some incentives to have strength high in the slayer build, to make melee training a viable choice instead of a powergaming nobrainer...

This also slams the door on 4ee not being 4.5. Whole swaths of 4e design tenets have been thrown out the window. The level of errata to non-4ee rules necessary to balance these classes is massive. 4ee classes dont play like their 4e cousins with whole new rules and massive redefinitions of game terms/class features. Combined with all the rules update docs from the last two years, this is a larger sea-change than 3.5 dreamed of.

New design tenets are not bad in itself. Also I can´t see those terrible imbalances. Also i can´t see too much updates coming. Most of the necessary rules updates are done/will be done on essential release. After this we will be back to normal rate of updates. Definitively no 4.5.

 

[Greatwyrm]

Whole swaths of 4e design tenets have been thrown out the window.

Such as?

The level of errata to non-4ee rules necessary to balance these classes is massive.

Such as?

4ee classes dont play like their 4e cousins with whole new rules and massive redefinitions of game terms/class features.

Such as?

It's really easy to say the sky is falling. It's a lot harder to show somebody where it landed.

 

[Puggins]

Cleric: Warpriest (leader) & Adept (controller)
Fighter: Knight (defender) & Slayer (striker)
Rogue: Thief (striker) & Swashbuckler (controller)
Wizard: Mage (controller) & Pyromancer (striker)

Why use pyromancer when evoker is still available?

I do very much like the concept of the slayer- it does indeed fill a niche currently vacant. Trying to build a character like- say- Jaime Lannister from a Song of Ice and Fire was difficult.

The dex secondary definitely promotes hide use, but any race that doesn't get a +dex bonus (and doesn't go the weapon training route) will want to be using scale, so it works, in my mind.

 

[fuzzlewump]

Slayer is meant to be striker, knight is defender. Mearls says role is assigned after the class concept is fully thought out rather than something the concept is built around in essentials. He says we can expect more of the dual role in the essentials sub classes but not as a rule, just as the story and concept permit.

Very cool.

( that was my question at the gencon d&d q and a. Maybe some blogger will have a better record of everything later. )

And they have listened about cool magical items. Mordenkainens magical emporium ( book) will have all new items with great flavor that fit into a common, uncommon, and rare design. The items mechanically might still be dry but there was no specifics, but I hope for the best. DM only is in control of where uncommon and rare items go, common items you can make with enchant magic item ritual normally.

 

[ArmoredSaint]

...this is a larger sea-change than 3.5 dreamed of.

In what way is this a sea-change?

It is a change, certainly; but a sea-change? Not so much...

sea change

Sorry; ordinarily I'm not one to nitpick grammar on internet message boards, but that one is a pet peeve of mine that is growing far too common in modern English...

 

[Zaphling]

Ugh, I hadn't thought of that.

That does feel a little broken. My sugar high just became a sugar crash.

Now you can just dump STR, right? You can be a Single Attribute Dependency DEX build.

The best Slayer fighter is a kobold (+2 DEX, +2 CON) who can shift 2 every turn so they can stay in the Berserker's Charge stance and charge every round.

Not very thematic at all. And makes a much worse cover for the Red Box.

Hmmm. Thanks for finding that brokeness, or should I say 'crack' of the issue.