Hunter is a pretty great class

[Neonchameleon]

Riddle me this --- is there any real advantage to the crossbow build?

If you have Superior Crossbows from MV1, yes - an extra +1 to hit. If not, push 3 and immobilise is incredible control anyway.

The Rapid Shot feature worked fine for me --- only problem was that my DM did critical failures on a natural 1, so lots of attack rolls = three broken bow strings over the course of 4 fights.

Urgh! Suggest your DM uses the Reckless Fumble rules from Dark Sun instead - a Nat 1 allows a chance to reroll and if you miss the reroll it's a critical failure.

 

[Herschel]

You see, there are two things I absolutely love about the Essentials classes...

(1) A continuum of complexity, and
(2) A relative vagueness of roles.

The Slayer is unmistakably a Striker, and the Hunter is unmistakably a Controller, but they're somewhat decent in other ways, too. They contribute admirably to a party in their own ways, I've found.

Also, I'd say the Berserker is anything but an e-Style class. It could have been released in Primal Power 2 or whatever without a hitch.

-O

In my view they basically made every E-class a light striker with rather mediocre abilities to perform their primary role.

The Hunter sucks as a controller if you face multiple targets, kind of like the Seeker.

The Slayer says "here, be a striker with none of the drawbacks".

The Berserker is bass-ackwards. I want to punch an enemy in the nose, hard, then say "Deal with me, touch my friends and I'll knock your punk azz down."

The Vampire is a weak Controller, Defender and Striker with some self-healing.

The Bladesinger is a decent e-Striker if built properly but a lousy controller.

The Cavalier just blows.

The Knight is okay, but I'm not a fan of Defender Auras.

 

[Neonchameleon]

In my view they basically made every E-class a light striker with rather mediocre abilities to perform their primary role.

The Hunter sucks as a controller if you face multiple targets, kind of like the Seeker.

The Hunter also has strengths the Seeker doesn't. And is simple to play. Basically IMO the Hunter is what the Seeker was trying to be.

The Slayer says "here, be a striker with none of the drawbacks".

The Slayer says "Want to repetatively hit things? Here's a class for you!" And ... some people do. Not me and I think you. but why not give the people who want something really simple to play their fun?

The Berserker is bass-ackwards. I want to punch an enemy in the nose, hard, then say "Deal with me, touch my friends and I'll knock your punk azz down."

We've got several classes the way you want. What's wrong with also having a class that says "don't get me angry! You wouldn't like me when I'm angry."?

The Vampire is a weak Controller, Defender and Striker with some self-healing.

The Vampire is a Hammer Horror Vampire that could do with a Paragon Tier buff. It's a narrow archetype but a nice fun one.

The Cavalier just blows.

Compared to the str-Paladin? How? You at least don't need to triple-stat the poor guy.

The Knight is okay, but I'm not a fan of Defender Auras.

The Knight is a nice simple defender. He's not for you or me. But if I want a defender NPC or to give a defender to someone who doesn't like tactical combat he's great.

 

[Herschel]

The Knight serves a purpose, as does the Slayer, I'm not arguing that, but they're also the two best-designed E-classes. I don't mind the Slayer just bashing stuff but his durability/defenses are pretty darned good right out of the box compared to other strikers.

I'm also really bored with the whole "Hulk angry, me good guy until I angry" schtick. It's okay when someone plays a character that has outbursts but I'm just sick of the whole Hulk schtick. Personal bias, yes, but I hate it.

I have a soft spot for the Seeker, especially the throwing version. One thing that really irks me is there really isn't a class that's strong and strongly built for thrown weapons, although a big part of that is the thrown weapons themselves. The Hunter did get some of the stuff the Seeker should have gotten. But it's still a weak controller with better damage out-of-the-box.

I like what the E-classes set out to do, and I think the Knight, Enchanter and Slayer do what they set out to do, I don't like that existing classes got introduced and ignored and the e-Classes just took their stuff and/or got better goodies of their own.

 

[mneme]

Er. How does the Slayer do anything the Avenger didn't do first? Having good defenses isn't a defender thing, it's a melee thing.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Er. How does the Slayer do anything the Avenger didn't do first? Having good defenses isn't a defender thing, it's a melee thing.

The slayer is simple in play. And from memory has more hp and surges than an avenger (although the Barbarian's there).

The Knight serves a purpose, as does the Slayer, I'm not arguing that, but they're also the two best-designed E-classes. I don't mind the Slayer just bashing stuff but his durability/defenses are pretty darned good right out of the box compared to other strikers.

Pretty good. But not OTT - I'd consider Warlocks more survivable, barbarians have as many hp, and avengers and monks are probably harder to hit.

I like what the E-classes set out to do, and I think the Knight, Enchanter and Slayer do what they set out to do, I don't like that existing classes got introduced and ignored and the e-Classes just took their stuff and/or got better goodies of their own.

I count two ignored classes - the Runepriest and the Seeker. And of those only the Seeker is a loss (and half rolled into the Hunter anyway). Also my favourite e-class is the Thief.

 

[Herschel]

I forgot about the Thief, it's a good one too.

Warlocks are a weird breed. Con-based Warlocks have good HP/surges. Cha-based Warlocks have a number of escape tricks but aren't very durable. They have a tendency to swing towards controller, in part because they're mediocre (pure numbers-wise) Strikers.

Barbarians have HP but their (non-Fort) defenses are lower, sometimes much lower. I love the Thaneborn but you either have to sacrifice your riders for mediocre AC or feat in to heavy armor.

Avengers can get very good defenses, but you have to tweak them.

I don't mind the concept of simpler-to-play characters, but I think they went a little too far in a couple of cases. Limit the Slayer to Chain, for example. He can still feat up if he wants.