More Classes Essentialized or more support for current classes?

[RangerWickett]

I'm sort of interested in seeing a real 4.5 edition, that uses the same basic design, but throws away all the chaff that's accumulated in the first iteration of splat books. Right now stuff is a little weird with all the niche (and often atrociously useless) feats that came out early in the game clogging the character builder, and some of the builds are just unnecessarily fiddly.

At the very least, I'd like a toggle in the character builder saying, "Hide Options From Before 2010." And a "Hide Insufficiently Playtested Dragon Magazine Content" wouldn't hurt either.

 

[MrMyth]

How on Earth is that counter-evidence? If anything, that's proof that they don't want to support the original Fighter anymore and want to shift to Essentials-only. Why else take something that already existed and port it to the Essentials format?

I see two main reasons for it:
1) Giving new players, brought in by Essentials, access to these PHB classes in a format that feels natural to them;
2) While also providing the PHB classes updated with all existing errata, for those existing players who have asked for exactly that.

Yes, they are presented in the Essentials format. But from what we've seen, the actual content is exactly the same. The Weaponmaster is the original fighter, just with a different presentation. I see basically no way they could release future material that would only support the Weaponmaster and not the PHB Fighter.

 

[Dausuul]

While WoTC haven't outright said that they will cease support for pre-esentials material, and indeed, we have some support for some odd ball classes like the Runepriest this month, what would people like to see?

I like the builds in the various Essentials books. I can easily see myself playing a Hexblade for example.

However, I don't think that the older classes, had the much support to begin with such as the Seeker or Artificer. Heck, even the Swordmage, which does have some support, could use a LOT more in my opinion.

On the other hand, I suspect that the Neverwinter Nights boxed set is going to essentialize the Sword Mage with the Bladesinger in that product.

Anyway, what would the people currently playing the game like to see? Given that Dragon is probably the only source of material we're going to see for older material and the limited resources it appears to be struggling under (Robert S can only write so much a month for example!), what would you like to see WoTC focus on?

I'm in the Essentials camp. We have way too many dang classes, many of them trivial variations on existing themes. Invoker should be an alternative cleric build. Avenger should be a paladin build. Sorceror should be a wizard build, and so on and so forth.

This would cut down on redundancy and make new material more useful. Right now, if a new invoker power is released, the party cleric can't do a thing with it. If invokers and clerics were two alternative builds of the same class, they could share powers instead of constantly reinventing the wheel, just as spellcasting classes in earlier editions shared spells.

That said, there are a few classes that should not be folded into the current Essentials ones. The psion and the monk, for example, really don't fit within any Essentials class paradigm. For these, either continue support as-is or make Essentials versions. (Not that I personally care what becomes of the psion and the monk--I hate 'em both--but there are those who like them.)

 

[Zaran]

The last dragon mag article I have seen for a cClass that I remember was for the beastmaster ranger and it had like 6 powers all for the first few levels of heroic. Having an upcoming article for the runepriest isn't the same as having a section in a power book for the class. You can't point to dragon and say that the info we get is adequate enough to support non essentials play because it just hasn't Bren there.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

The Weaponmaster Fighter IS the PH1 fighter. It's not "essentialized" it's just reformatted.

 

[The Human Target]

I'm in the Essentials camp. We have way too many dang classes, many of them trivial variations on existing themes. Invoker should be an alternative cleric build. Avenger should be a paladin build. Sorceror should be a wizard build, and so on and so forth.

This would cut down on redundancy and make new material more useful. Right now, if a new invoker power is released, the party cleric can't do a thing with it. If invokers and clerics were two alternative builds of the same class, they could share powers instead of constantly reinventing the wheel, just as spellcasting classes in earlier editions shared spells.

That said, there are a few classes that should not be folded into the current Essentials ones. The psion and the monk, for example, really don't fit within any Essentials class paradigm. For these, either continue support as-is or make Essentials versions. (Not that I personally care what becomes of the psion and the monk--I hate 'em both--but there are those who like them.)

This doesn't make much sense to me.

Avengers are hugely different than Paladins, Invokers a pretty different than Clerics.

Making them branches off another class instead of actual classes themselves won't do much to reduce clutter or make the game simpler. There will still be feats that support both sides of the class, still special items that do, paragon paths, etc.


To me, Essentials are the thing adding tons of unneeded new classes to the game- 2 new fighters, a new wizard, a new rogue, etc.

And in many cases, those new classes step alllllll over the previous classes.

How is that not class bloat?

 

[Felon]

So, they decided to publish a Martial Power II, but no follow-ups for any of the other power sources.

This means that someone seeking the most toys to play with should NOT play a spellcaster.

Is that irony? I can never tell.

 

[babinro]

I see no reason why they could not continue to support both styles. Personally, I've yet to see anything in essentials worth purchasing...and so I eagerly look forward to Arcane/Primal/Divine/Psionic power 2 books.

That being said, I'd want to see more support for current classes....get them all to a relatively even level of support.

Then, if possible, when releasing new classes in the future...go all out on options. Don't print a book with 6 classes and few options. Make it only 2 or 3 classes but give it extensive support so it starts out on par with the rest. Necromancer for example could be introduced in one book with 2 or so core style options, and 1-2 essential versions.

 

[Dice4Hire]

I see no reason why they could not continue to support both styles. Personally, I've yet to see anything in essentials worth purchasing...and so I eagerly look forward to Arcane/Primal/Divine/Psionic power 2 books.

That being said, I'd want to see more support for current classes....get them all to a relatively even level of support.

Then, if possible, when releasing new classes in the future...go all out on options. Don't print a book with 6 classes and few options. Make it only 2 or 3 classes but give it extensive support so it starts out on par with the rest. Necromancer for example could be introduced in one book with 2 or so core style options, and 1-2 essential versions.

A lot of good ideas here, and I hope WOTC is listening. I know we are right now in the essentials season, so cannot expect much 4E support*. But the next year looks like more essentials stuff, though I hope I am wrong. I want 4E support, not essentials support.

*Why, yes, you are right. I don't consider essentials 4E.

 

[Dausuul]

Avengers are hugely different than Paladins, Invokers a pretty different than Clerics.

I see very little difference. As far as I can tell, an avenger is a paladin with more smiting and less shielding. Oh, and they don't wear armor. The overall concept--a holy warrior who lays down the Smack of Heaven in melee--is the same. Avenger is to paladin as slayer-fighter is to knight-fighter.

Likewise, the invoker appears to be a laser cleric with more laser and much less healing.

There will still be feats that support both sides of the class, still special items that do, paragon paths, etc.

Probably, but they will be the exception rather than the rule.

To me, Essentials are the thing adding tons of unneeded new classes to the game- 2 new fighters, a new wizard, a new rogue, etc.

And in many cases, those new classes step alllllll over the previous classes.

How is that not class bloat?

Essentials is meant to provide fully functional replacements for the previous classes, so of course it steps on 'em. That's the whole idea; Essentials is 4.5E. Don't tell Wizards I said so, they hate it when people say that, but it's bloody obvious that's what it is.