How many core classes can we expected in 4th ed?

Mercule said:
I agree that it's an excellent idea for games like Hero, GURPS, or even Shadowrun. For D&D, though, I think it'd be very nearly the dumbest thing WotC could do.

I don't see it that way.

When I take a lesson, I'm paying to learn something that I don't already know. When I buy an RPG, I'm paying to get a system that I don't already have. If I were to buy a 4th edition of D&D, I would be happy to give Wizards money for something new. Teach me something different!

-blarg

ps - I checked out Buy The Numbers, and it's interesting. If there hadn't been an error on the first page of the excerpt I might even have bought it.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


What's iconic? Fighter, wizard, and cleric.

What gets finagled with? Thief/rogue/scout, ranger, paladin, druid, bard.

What'll probably be fine-tuned? Barbarian, monk, sorcerer.

What won't be core? Psionics.
 

I expect to see something akin to the generic classes in UA: 3-4 classes that are customizable using feats (which will play a bigger role as ability-definers). Each class will have its abilities loosely laid out (good attack, good skills, healing magic, attack magic) and a list of "feats" the class can take as class abilities. Then, additional feats (1/3 levels? can further customize your abilities) For example, a "warrior" can use his class-based feats to learn new fighitng techniques like cleave or whirlwind atk, but use his "level based" ones to learn things like sneak attack or smite evil.

An advanced/prestige class like system can mimic harder to define classes like monk, bard, or druid.

thus, each class kinda becomes an "express track" to something: combat, magic, skills, etc. You can deviate off the track some (multi-classing, choosing certain feats) but you'll never be as good in anything else as you are in your chosen track.
 

Part of me would like to see a version of d20 that goes the way of ICE's Rolemaster, with Arms, Channeling, Essence, and Mentalism. Within each of those you have pure, semi-, and hybrid classes. I think the class structure of Rolemaster 2 was one of my favorite elements of the game.

Cheers,
Cam
 


Cam Banks said:
I really like the way EverQuest II handles it. A sort of hybrid of d20 Modern and D&D by way of the MMORPG audience. Four base classes (Warrior, Mage, Rogue, Priest) and then a bunch of advanced classes that spring from those. Talents a la True 20, feat chains, stuff like that. Niche protection by advanced classes but simplification made possible through use of just the four base.

I suppose you could also do the Warrior/Expert/Adept route of True 20, and then add the advanced classes, but I'd want that 2-stage element to it.

If the EQII RPG had only been handled better than it was, I'd be all over that.

Cheers,
Cam
Cam,
Couldn't agree more. I'd say we'll end up with a set of "core" classes and then have everything branch off of that.

The idea would be to take a class like "fighter" and then give you options like "squire," "knight," "archer" and so on. Each of them would use the same basic mechanics but have different sets of options for character development. You might be a 7th level fighter, and have split those levels into, say squire (3) and fighter (4). All of you big primary stats, say BAB, Hit Dice, and Saves would be based on being a 7th level fighter, but your class abilities would come from three levels of squire and four of knight. I think this would be a good mix between classes and templates, and give plenty of room to expand with splats.

--Steve
 

23. 24 if you count the "Centuar" race/class as a core class. And that's not counting the 12 types of specialist mages or 14 types of psionic disciplines.
 

I'm thoroughly opposed to any notions of making D&D into some kind of skill/feat-based point-buy system. Take away the classes, or render them largely unimportant, and you're killing D&D and reanimating its corpse as some Generic Overcomplicated Munchkin Point-Buy L33T Fantasy Wargame: D34TH 2 N3WB$ 'N RP3R$. As another poster said, classes aren't sacred cows of D&D, they ARE D&D. You can petition a newer edition of GURPS or HERO or whatnot if you so badly want a classless point-buy fantasy RPG, which favors powergaming.

That raw, seething hatred of point-buy D&D aside....

I figure 4th Edition D&D will either keep the 11 core classes of 3E, or shrink the number to 4, 5, or 6 core classes with more flexible roles (though that's not what I would favor, it's still a definite possibility). I.E. Fighter, Rogue, Priest, Mage, Champion (combination warrior and spellcaster, with spellblade/duskblade options, hexblade options, sohei options, ranger options, paladin options, blackguard options, etc.), and Adept (warrior mystic with decent skills, less combat focus than Champion, with bard options, monk options, ninja options, etc.). If sticking instead with the better and more-newbie-friendly 11 core classes, they're as likely as not to either remove 1-3 (i.e. ranger, paladin, sorcerer, making the former into PrCs and the latter into a specialist wizard/mage option) or add 1-4 (like a duelist replacing the OA samurai, CW swashbuckler, etc. as a nimble, acrobatic, and socially/politically-savvy warrior, along with a blackguard core class, and maybe a marshal core class and/or spellblade/'gish' core class and/or a 'sneak/skulk' or 'expert' core class as a less-assassin-ish derivative of the rogue). If keeping most/all of the core classes, I expect they might alter the sorcerer to resemble the warlock and favored soul in some regards and be made into a spontaneous caster with special bloodline/gift/transmogrification traits and a choice of receiving their spells from either divine sources or arcane sources. I also expect they might make the fighter a more appropriate option for a knight, mercenary, or heavy-armor/cavalry-style of samurai.

Going with a more-classes-is-better approach, but with most of the newer/updated classes being presented in supplements rather than the core rulebooks, is most likely since it will provide a steady stream of profit to Wizards of the Coast. And ditch the stupid concept of prestige classes as the premier method of customizing a character concept (since PrCs don't allow a concept to be realized at level 1 or 3 or whatever). Fix the multiclassing system, streamline the skills and combat and magic chapters, balance the durned feats already (I HATE 3.5! power attack especially!), and voila! 4th Edition.

Well, anyway, I guess my best guess though would be that 4E will have 10-12 core classes, with a minor possibility of it being 4-9 or 13-16 classes. My preference would be 14 core classes, I think, with plenty of other ones in splatbooks.
 

May guess would be around 12. However, I wouldn't be surprised to see lesser choices in base classes with more choices. I also wouldn't be suprised to see substitution levels added as core.
 

Remove ads

Top