Hero's of the Forgotten Kingdoms class roles! Martial Controller? Why yes.

[FreeTheSlaves]

Hooray for the Paladin/Cavalier. Great to see them back.

Fingers crossed it's the classic str then cha build. It would be a disappointment if it was a cha primary build.

 

[The Human Target]

Because they can stick a huge "ESSENTIALS" in front of it and avoid any confusion or conflicts in the CB easily I imagine.

You don't see that as incredibly clunking design?

 

[Garthanos]

You don't see that as incredibly clunking design?

I see them considering this a fresh start future references to a hunter ranger will mean the essentials one.

 

[shamsael]

Builds previously had no mechanical effect, they were just a list of recommended choices.

Builds in essentials do have mechanical effects as they significantly alter your available class features.

I don't think there's any real overlap here we will need to worry about in the long run.

 

[drothgery]

Builds previously had no mechanical effect, they were just a list of recommended choices.

Builds in essentials do have mechanical effects as they significantly alter your available class features.

I don't think there's any real overlap here we will need to worry about in the long run.

Some of the builds in the Power series did significantly alter your class features, though not to anywhere near the degree the HotFL builds vs. the PHB1 builds (well, excepting the Wizard/mage).

 

[cavalier973]

There is already a hunter build for the ranger, why would they call the new build that?

And if the Hexblade is just a warlock path, that bums me out.

Not to mention that "warpriest" is a cleric paragon path in PHB1

 

[Aegeri]

You don't see that as incredibly clunking design?

Nah. Not really. I mean again, just slap "ESSENTIALS" on it and literally nobody is going to get confused here.

 

[wesdecker]

Builds previously had no mechanical effect, they were just a list of recommended choices.

Builds in essentials do have mechanical effects as they significantly alter your available class features.

I don't think there's any real overlap here we will need to worry about in the long run.

Hit the nail on the head there. From what's in HFN, that's what Essentials seems to be getting at. I, for one, am excited to see new and unexpected versions on familiar classes. Breaking the "one role per class" mold is something I am glad to see happening.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I rather like breaking the one-role-per-class thing, though it's not an unalloyed, good (it will make the process of creating a 'balanced' party a bit less clear-cut). I suspect the builds that deviate from the usual role will become de-facto classes in their own right. When playing a 4e fighter or knight, you'll be able to say "I'm playing a fighter." When playing a Slayer, you should specify it, since the role is different, and if you don't people might think the defender role is covered. The Ranger already had this issue, anyway (archers being /very/ different from other rangers), so it's not a big deal.

I wonder how they'll get full Controller functionality into a basic-attack-spamming martial class, though...?

I can see how it could be done with a pole-arm based fighter (since it was entirely doable in 3.x). I'm assuming the hunter is an archer, and I'm less certain how that'll work - as a class with attack powers, it'd be a simple matter of a few 'volley' type area powers and 'trick/called shot' condition-inflicting attacks.

 

[Nichwee]

I wonder how they'll get full Controller functionality into a basic-attack-spamming martial class, though...?

I can see how it could be done with a pole-arm based fighter (since it was entirely doable in 3.x). I'm assuming the hunter is an archer, and I'm less certain how that'll work - as a class with attack powers, it'd be a simple matter of a few 'volley' type area powers and 'trick/called shot' condition-inflicting attacks.

To this I present the following 3 points of note/possibilities:

1: There is nothing to say that the Ranger will be BA-spamming. Just because the Fighter and Rogue are doesn't mean the Ranger will be (this may be WotC's way to reintroduce At-Wills, Encounters and Dailies to the martial power source for new Essensials players). My guess tbh as they will be used to Controllers having varied powers I doubt simply the fact that it is a martial controller would confuse them enough to make not having the class use powers would be best.

2: It could just be an At-Will Stance type thing. One stance adds "slowed" to shots, maybe upgrading to "immobalised" at some level, while another adds "dazed". Or something like that. And triggered Encounter Powers (Like Power Strike) could add conditions of more significant types ("stunned" etc).

3: As the Controller Ranger will probably lose Hunter's Quarry it may gain an effect to designate a Quarry that then allows a random/spicific condition to be applied to that target each round if hit.