I have Heroes of Shadows

[CelticMutt]

The Blackguard's design and development mentioned four starting vices, two cut from the book. Does the Blackguard's section tell us what the other vices might be?

According to the Cavalier write-up it's Greed and either Tyranny or Terror. The Cavalier stated (p 117) that the opposing Vices were Fury, Tyranny, Greed, and Terror. So one of Terror or Tyranny got made into Dominate. I know it would make more sense for Tyranny to get renamed since they're closer in nature, but I swear I read somewhere that it was Terror that got renamed or replaced.

 

[WalterKovacs]

Hey,

Any chance of some more info on the cleric powers that you mentioned would be good for Laser Clerics? (mine is getting excited at the thought of new big blasts and bursts!)

In general, most of the powers are implement based, with a couple weapon based powers in there. So, for implement based laser clerics, most of the powers are at least viable options without needing to pick up a weapon (and thus needing another expertise feat and magic item to keep up with attack numbers).

I'll give you some info on blasts and bursts:

At 9, there is a close blast 3, enemies only, damage (half on miss) and creates an encounter long zone that causes enemies to grant c/a while they are in it. At 19, close blast 5, all creatures, damage (half on miss), and creates an encounter long zone where the first enemy that dies in the zone rises as a dominated minion. At 25, close blast 5, enemies only, damage (half on miss), creates sustainable zone that weakens enemies and gives allies thp.

At 3, close burst 3, enemies only, IR triggers off any creature in burst dropping, damage on hit, effect gives you and allies thp and bonuses to attack roll until EoNT. At 13, close burst 3, one enemy, no attack roll, enemy grants c/a until EoNT, first attack against it deal 3d8 extra damage on a hit or miss. At 17, close burst 5, enemies only, IR triggers off any creature in burst dropping, damage on hit, effect gives you and each ally thp and bonuses to attack rolls until EoNT. At 27, close burst 5, single target, no attack roll, target grants c/a until EoNT, first attack deals 4d8 extra damage hit or miss.

Also any new healing powers for Clerics?

Other than the thp stuff mentioned already, at 2 they get a daily utility to let a dying ally spend two surges, which also gives them a bonus to attack rolls and damage, but they grant c/a, until either at full hp or end of encounter. At 6, they get a daily utility zone which gives you and allies bonus to damage rolls, and everyone in the zone regains hp when an enemy dies in the zone. At 10, daily utility alows you and any allies in burst 5 o lose a surge and get thp equal to surge value, plus bous to speed, Athletics and Acrobatics for the ecounter. At 22 there is a daily utility called Death Shield, you lose a surge and the next time target ally would drop to 0 hp or below before the next extended rest, it instead drops to 1hp. [Vampires and other regenerators like Death Shield]

 

[Aegeri]

Are there any strength powers for the cleric out of curiosity? I am going to guess no, but it's worth asking anyway.

 

[WalterKovacs]

According to the Cavalier write-up it's Greed and either Tyranny or Terror. The Cavalier stated (p 117) that the opposing Vices were Fury, Tyranny, Greed, and Terror. So one of Terror or Tyranny got made into Dominate. I know it would make more sense for Tyranny to get renamed since they're closer in nature, but I swear I read somewhere that it was Terror that got renamed or replaced.

Tyranny gets name dropped as part of the Domination fluff (basically the jyst is: evil Domination is Tyranny). I can see Terror and Greed working actually.

The idea is to have something that can be used for good or evil. Dominating monsters and the like can help to impose control on the world and make it safer. Taken to far, you crush all free will and it becomes tyranny. Fury, focused on the right targets, can lead to good ends. If it's not controlled, it will lash out at everything.

So, to that end, Terror would be using fear against enemies, but not terrorizing everyone (unless you do want to go down the road to evil). So fear based powers, disheartening enemies, etc. Similar to Domination, but you aren't controlling them, just disheartening them and discouraging them from doing things, etc.

Greed would probably focus on protection, and taking things from the enemy. Being shrewd can be a good thing, being wasteful is sort of bad too. So a "little" greed can be good, too much and it's evil.

 

[WalterKovacs]

Are there any strength powers for the cleric out of curiosity? I am going to guess no, but it's worth asking anyway.

No ... but there are attack powers which don't rely on wisdom. There are daily melee power that auto hit (Inflict Wounds, Drain Life, Ravage). The first two do deal dice+wis mod damage, but don't require Wis to hit. The last one deals your bloodied value in damage, so is entirely Wis independent. For encounter powers, at 1, 13 and 27, you not only don't need wisdom, you don't need an implement. It auto hits, and doesn't use wisdom for its damage (it's the ones listed in my post three up from this one that gives combat advantage and extra damage to the next attack). At 7 and 23 there are auto-hit powers that don't need an implement, but the damage is partly determined by wisdom modifier. All these are melee or close attacks, so a strength based melee cleric wouldn't have to worry about provoking O/As when using any of these attacks.

So, while none of the powers use Strength, there are a number of powers that don't require maximized (or any) Wisdom, and some don't need an implement either. [Not even taking into account the utilities, feats, etc]

 

[Aegeri]

So the bloodied value = damage power is called ravage? Odd, I would have called it Harm myself.

 

[gyor]

According to the Cavalier write-up it's Greed and either Tyranny or Terror. The Cavalier stated (p 117) that the opposing Vices were Fury, Tyranny, Greed, and Terror. So one of Terror or Tyranny got made into Dominate. I know it would make more sense for Tyranny to get renamed since they're closer in nature, but I swear I read somewhere that it was Terror that got renamed or replaced.

Where did you hear that? I don't doubt you just curious.

Tyranny and domination have way too much in common, although tyranny is more political and domination is more flexible and has a sexual subtext and personal subtext. Still Tyranny is a type of domination.

Terror is more seperate from the others then tyranny. Terror is fears and nightmares, I 'd say unaligned, evil, choatic evil. Greed is profit and luxury with a subtext of being a mercanary and I see it being more morally flexible like fury.

What kind of vice/dark emotion would you like to see. Addiction could be cool. Vice striker feature where you get a +8 to damage, but if you attack a different foe after using it you take a minus four to damage from withdrawl.
Blasphemy would be awesome. +3 extra damage, +8 against immortals. Madness with a slight far realms tinge with a far realmsian vice striker feature, lashing out with tetacles for +4 damage. Voyerism would get a bonus to the attack roll instead of damage. For the seven vices Lust and Sloth. Those ideas I'm saving for now, because I want to try and make a dragon article about it. Knights of Chivalry article would address Cavaliers of Romance and Blackguards of Lust (but without being crass). Sloth I am thinking of as part of an article as well.

 

[kaomera]

I am kind of disappointed that binders only get 1 summoning power at 9th though & 1 at higher level. The 2 shadow feats dealing with summoning is not worth it to them - only for wizards who already get enough stuff. I have actually really started to hate the glutton on wizards.

That does sound disappointing, hopefully it will be addresses in Dragon some time soon. However it's kind of seeming to me like they may have tried to include too much stuff in the book. Fewer things could have had more options each... I guess it's a symptom of the economy, though. I don't know if WotC could have afforded to put more out (either two books or a larger one), and I don't know how many of their customers would have laid out the extra cash... I am really pretty disappointed in WotC for "re-"printing the assassin, given that the space could have bee used for other stuff. Source or not the class does not say "shadow" to me, and as far as I can tell we had a 90%+ complete version of it already.

 

[CelticMutt]

Where did you hear that? I don't doubt you just curious.

That's the problem, I don't remember. I swear it was a Design and Development or similar type interview, or maybe a post by one of the writers, but I can't find it. Hell, maybe it was a fever dream.

But yeah, Domination = Tyranny does make more sense.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Oh, I know that I've always regretted the day when I was forced to buy into 4e and have all those choices in powers when I levelled up. I hated being able to distingish my character from the next! If only they would revert their rather robust rules and choices to the days when our characters were determined by the randomness of 4d6k3 attributes!

What made 4e great was how we could actually build a character that was balanced and fun to play. Not to be given a character sheet and say "Here! Make up a name to put at the top !" I guarantee you that the player that wants to tackle having 2 surges wants more choices than what feat to get every 2.1 levels

I am currently trying to teach an old ADnD player how that game works... and choices at level 1 are overwhelming.

I really wished there would even be less choice at level 1 and more choices later. So the vampire seems to be on the right track. I also don´t like the few choices later on that much.
For me, a perfect class would give:

- some fixed skills at level 1
- some fixed at wills at level 1
- a fixed encounter
- a fixed daily, if needed.
- a feat to chose
- one or 2 skills to chose

Later you get some choices, in utility, daily and maybe even encounter powers, extra at wills or some skill bonuses.

So the cavallier is actually on a good way.

Looking back to phb 1... which choice did a fighter have?

2-handed or 1-handed. You could have easily tied the at wills to th choice:

cleave for everyone, and tide of iron or reaping strike. (who took sure strike anyway?)
Taking away some choices, especially at level 1 is a good design decision.

Matt James talked about layers recently. In a way it is too late for 4e. But the new race design and the soon available themes allow the substitution of utilities and encounter powrs. So in the new metagame, less choices for classes does not necessarily mean a total straight jacket. And limited choices are necessary to have this function smoothly.

So a

Gladiator
Shade
Vampire

already has enough choices