Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Aegeri" data-source="post: 5574440" data-attributes="member: 78116">If they actually supported swordmages, sorcerers and artificers with the Feywild book I would be amazed. But that won't happen. We'll probably get two or so new wizard schools, they'll find some way to hammer in a Cleric in there somewhere and of course we'll get ANOTHER Feypact Warlock/Hexblade (because good god, we don't have enough of those). Another completely on rails essential like AEDU class of some sort, which is probably as well thought out as wet tissue paper is sturdy. Then maybe some kind of bladesinger striker like build of the swordmage, which again builds itself like every essentials striker. That last one is kind of awesome sounding if they do go that direction and do it well though (assuming that we get an essentials Swordmage build in Neverwinter of course).I mean it could be totally awesome and not be exactly what is easily predicted, but sadly I doubt it. At least if the book does have the Winter/Autumn sentinel druid builds that would be quite awesome (minding I know there are some people who hate the sentinel due to their lack of wildshape). But I really have to agree with noodle fish mice, that the fact essentials has decided to pretty much not acknowledge anything that came before (unless it is a parent class of something in essentials of course, eg PHB classes and the druid) means that if it doesn't exist in essentials: You can forget future books supporting it (or so it would appear). This means that books giving support to anything other than a very limited subset of classes published pre-essentials is pretty much going to be the norm. This wouldn't annoy me half as much, if there were any indications that DDI was going to actually come through with supporting pre-essentials classes well instead of books. It would be absolutely 100% delightful if I was wrong on this. Unfortunately, I have the really bad feeling I won't be. Looking at reactions to this book and Elemental Heroes Handbook, I haven't seen much excitement at all about them. So it would appear that Wizards needs to impress with this book and it's really important. I just hope what they do with it works and works really well.Sorcerers actually could really use some paragon paths that give them a huge amount of striker OOMPH to them. Not a controller secondary role, but actually really improving their quality as strikers. They have a few, for example the Storm Sorcerer PP is excellent but not enough. A couple of really good general and open Sorcerer PPs that focus on dealing damage would be more than welcome. There was a good reason a lot of Sorcerers were MC Rogue and abusing Daggermaster pre-errata. This is a separate issue though in fairness!I don't really feel that much myself, because a lot of it is IMO entirely wasted and repetitive descriptions of individual powers. The actual class itself is really great and I love it: I wouldn't want the player in my Eberron game to replace his sentinel because I enjoy how the character works in play immensely. But some of the mechanics are poorly thought out with combined attack scaling horribly to "almost useless" territory at paragon/epic (I have to make a decision on what to do about this eventually). I would love a book to have a power swap for it, so you could dump combined attack for something like furious howl, letting the sentinel druid make an attack and then the pet to "howl" boosting his allies in a burst or something (improving enabling). Especially if they insist on ensuring the pets damage scales miserably.I like more explanation and detail on classes; I actually really hate the extra space spent per power on extra fluff. I just don't see the point of it whatsoever. I would far rather see more interesting power choices added instead. This is actually one thing I really dislike about the essentials format immensely.</blockquote>

Verification