New base classes for D&D coming--what could they be?

[Ranger REG]

Re: Re: Re: New base classes for D&D coming--what could they be?

Because then you wouldn't have to pay another $29.95 to have them. Silly.

Ah, I get it.

<< foreign accent >> You gotta love American capitalism.

 

[Psion]

Sigh.

 

[Starman]

Originally posted by Zaruthustran
I think that there needs to be a core class that can cast arcane magic, and be definition a core class should have zero pre-reqs. In my opinion, the core class for arcane magic-user should be sorceror, and wizard (a class that acquires access to powerful magic through careful practice and study) should be a prestige class for non-Chaotic arcane casters.

Except in the core rules there is a difference between how sorcerers know their spells and how wizards know theirs. For sorcerers it is totally innate. It comes naturally to them. Wizards spend time pouring over tomes learning new spells. That is why if you multi between them you cannot use your spells per day for one class to cast spells you know as the other class. Are you saying this should be changed?

Starman

 

[Vocenoctum]

Unrelated note: Wizard should be a prestige class because in all the fantasy literature I've read, before you become a book-loving Wizard first you've got to have "the Gift". Or "The Spark". Or "The Shine". Or whatever term is used to describe natural magic talent. Therefore, before you can learn to codify magic (ie, practice book-learnin' Wizardy) you've got to first have innate magical ability (ie, sorcery). That's why I think Wizard should be a prestige class.

Well, they do display talent before being picked up. But, that's when they're 10 or 11 years old (for a human) so by the time they're a viable PC, they've been found and received training.
A paladin is not a knight, they're a holy warrior, they're as likely to be chosen at 10 or 11 also and go on from there.


For a new base class, perhaps Soldier (a little different from Fighter or Warrior perhaps. Different skill set, abilities geared more towards thenew system.)

Archer also has potential, again with a different skill set and powers for the system.

Obviously it'll be classes geared towards combat. Perhaps the classes will be reprinted in the Warrior book too.

 

[kenjib]

You could, but then Fighters could cast magic at 1st level. Which is an even bigger departure from 3rd Edition.

I think that there needs to be a core class that can cast arcane magic, and be definition a core class should have zero pre-reqs. In my opinion, the core class for arcane magic-user should be sorceror, and wizard (a class that acquires access to powerful magic through careful practice and study) should be a prestige class for non-Chaotic arcane casters.

As for the new Core classes in 3E... man, I dunno.

I don't like innate/blooded casters all that much, myself. I prefer the concept of casters that require either devotion and faith or scholarly pursuits into ancient hermetic lore. By leaving both sorcerers and wizards as core classes, we can both be satisfied, whereas by making wizards a prestige class, my ideas don't work anymore. It's a nice houserule though. I think it would work well with what you're going for.

I agree that the classes will definitely be related specifically to the new skirmishing rules and not of use for general D&D games. Field commander and soldier classes that gain bonuses specifically related to the new miniature rules (but not applicable to the standard core rules) are perfect examples of what I'm thinking. That said, field commander would make more sense as a PRC, so I'm thinking soldier is the best candidate...

 

[Tiefling]

I've always hated the idea that mages were somehow "special". Magic should be something that anyone who knows the words/gestures can do. As much as I dislike the fire-and-forget system in D&D, that's one positive thing about it (especially with the 3E multiclassing rules).

Seems kind of odd to me that you would say what magic SHOULD be. Magic should be whatever the DM and players want it to be. Why do you think that your way is how it should be?

Edit: While I quoted Mercule I ask the same thing of Zaruthustran.

 

[magnas_veritas]

You could, but then Fighters could cast magic at 1st level. Which is an even bigger departure from 3rd Edition.

Well, no, he's a Fighter who can take levels in Wizard. He just hasn't bothered/hasn't received training.

Just because he has the precursor feat wouldn't necessarily mean he'd get the spell list and slots with which to cast them.

Brad

 

[Tyler Do'Urden]

My guess:

They're bringing back the class that they should have brought back when they first released 3e, rather than the Barbarian:

The Cavalier

 

[drnuncheon]

My guess:

They're bringing back the class that they should have brought back when they first released 3e, rather than the Barbarian:

The Cavalier

God, I hope not.

What does this class need that a Fighter can't cover?

J

 

[kingpaul]

The Cook

Not just any cook, but an Iron Chef type cook. That would be cool.

Wouldn't that be a PrC for an Expert-type person?