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

[Driddle]

With the advent of three potentially "core" classes via each of the "Complete" series books, it makes one wonder how many overall will be included in the new edition ... some day.

Personally, my money is on the deconstructionist perspective -- breaking down the classes into a master menu of point-weighted items so that characters can be built to a huge range of specialty classes, per level. The core classes may be included as example or for ease-of-play quick picks, but 4th edition will include even more plug-in elements.

On the other hand, it's always possible that the makers will just dump more classes into the mix. That's the nature of this thread. How many classes in No. 4?

 

[Zaruthustran]

Well, keep in mind that Wizards is a grown-up company now, and the design philosophy will be driven as much by "what design will make us the most money" as by "what design is best".

I can see a classless, "abilities ala carte" system being a good choice for experienced players but it seems that it'd be too complex for new gamers. Making the game more accessible to new gamers has got to be a high priority for Wizards, so if anything I think we'll see the game made more simple and streamlined.

So for me, that means classes. How many classes in the PHB 4? I'm thinking we'll see fewer than the number that were in PHB 3.5. Maybe even just Fighter, Healer (not cleric), Sorcerer, Scout (not rogue). This would be a more streamined PHB, with expansion books covering hybrid classes, new spells, new feats, new equipment, etc. Something that would retail for $19.99.

The other way to go, maybe even at launch, would be a super-thick premium book with tons of options right off the bat. It'd go for $70-$100. The paradigm is sort of like what's happening with video game consoles: one can buy a cheap base system or a loaded premium system.

 

[Vorput]

How many classes in No. 4?

19.

 

[shilsen]

17.

 

[Odhanan]

*looks at lottery ticket*

Damn! *stomp*

 

[Vorput]

17.

Them's fightin' words Shilsen...

 

[Mercule]

I couldn't even venture a guess.

The changes I'd really like to see would be to cull Monk and Paladin (making the latter a PrC), combine Ranger and Barbarian, revise Sorcerer to be a roll-your-own Warmage/Beguiler/Dread Necromancer, and either include Swashbuckler or make Fighter workable with that concept.

Also tops on my list would be to use skill groups, ala Iron Heroes, rather than class/cross-class skills. That's a frickin' brilliant design.

 

[2WS-Steve]

I think the core classes will be the same selection as in 3.x -- new core classes will be held back for splats and so on.

I hope they do trim down and revamp the skill selection. Right, now, having to think level by level for skills really slows down making NPCs, and halving the number of skills would work fine.

 

[Corinth]

Four: Cleric, Fighter, Rogue, Sorcerer. (This will be matched by the races: Dwarf, Elf, Halfling, Man.)

 

[Zaruthustran]

I hope they do trim down and revamp the skill selection. Right, now, having to think level by level for skills really slows down making NPCs, and halving the number of skills would work fine.

Amen to that. Three skills for "social engineering"? Two skills for "stealth"? Two skills for "Perception"?

No one would ever pump Hide without also adding Move Silently. Doesn't make sense. So if everyone takes them together, why not combine?

All three social skills are almost completely interchangable. "Look behind you" could be Diplomacy, Bluff, or Intimidate, depending on inflection. Three skills for the same result. Influencing attitudes should be one skill, with the combat effects of Bluff and Intimidate (feinting, making targets Shaken) being combat options accessible to anyone (much like Disarm, etc.).

Combining swim, jump, and climb into "Athletics" makes just as much sense. No one takes swim. No one. But for the 1 out of 50 adventures where it comes into play, it's cool to have characters who can swim. So why not make a generic athletics skill?

Iron Heroes has it right.

-z