New Miniature book base classes [scoop?]

[heirodule]

My summary (designer facts in BOLD)

4 new classes
2 "simple" spellcasters:
A "pyromancer" blaster mage (guess, based on mini preview)
A battlefield control "mage" or "druid" (my guess)
2 tacticaly complex characters
A commander/captain (very probable)
A skirmisher/sneak (my guess)

on the wOTC boards, Zarathustran GUESSED

1. Class name: Swashbuckler. Role: The Smooth Fighter. Source: Three Musketeers, at the Dread Pirate Roberts, at Zorro. Rationale: These guys were masters of wit and blade. They're iconic fantasy characters, and they're not in D&D.
There aren't any Fighter classes with social skills. That's a void that should be filled. Right now, if you want to play a quick-witted, quick-moving guy who can hold his own in a fight you either have to pick Fighter and "waste" your heavy armor and shield feats, Ranger and get a bunch of wildernes baggage, Barbarian and get a bunch of perhaps unwanted abilities, or Paladin and get religious baggage--and none of those classes have Bluff! I picture this class as a light-armoured fighter with +1/lvl BAB, good Fort and Ref saves, d8 HP, 4 skill points, and access to a few social skills like Bluff, Intimidate, Perform, Sense Motive, and Diplomacy. This will better serve all those characters that are currently rogue/rangers or fighter/rogues. Think "urban ranger", except without tracking, spells, and the shoehorned fighting styles.

2. Class name: Commander. Role: The Leader. Source: Russel Crowe's Gladiator, or Mel Gibson's Braveheart, or Bruce Campbell's Ash, or anybody's Robin Hood*. Rationale: These guys were fearless leaders, they could take a lot of punishment, they increased the fighting abilities of their companions, they could kick butt--but they weren't lawful good, and they didn't sing. And they're not in D&D. There needs to be a party-support character that can lend a direct hand in the fight. I picture this class as a heavy-armoured combatant with +1/lvl BAB, good Fort and Will saves, d10 HP, 2 skill points, and access to Diplomacy, Spot, Profession: Soldier, Intimidate, and Sense Motive. For special abilities it'll have Inspire Courage (speech and orders, not music) and the Paladin's Fear immunity/bonus to saves for companions, but no spells. This will help serve those high-charisma martial-minded characters that don't want to be godly champions or musicians. Think "paladin" or "bard", without the Ethos or the beats.

3. Class name: Mystic. Role: the Witch. Source: Morgan le Fay, fairy tales. Rationale: Right now there's no spontaneous divine caster. Sure, Druids and Clerics can swap for healing on the fly, but this class can swap any divine spell for any other divine spell. Lightly armoured, with lots of skill points. Think "Sorcerer", but divine.

WOTC Designer Mike Donais replied:

Question 1:
Your other post guessing what they were was pretty close in a few cases actually. They are designed to fill certain niches for certain styles of players. They are in some cases simpler so that they can be made into miniatures. One of the advantages of the simpler spellcasters is if a friend who hasn't played D&D before says he wants to play a spellcaster you can use these ones. In addition to the two 'simpler spellcasters' there are 2 moderately complex classes with interesting tactical choices to make for the more advanced player. All 4 classes were designed and developed to fill specific niches.

 

[heirodule]

Although now that i think of it, a spontaneous divine summoner would make more sense

1. It fits with "a couple of the ideas" Zarathustran posted

2. Its different

3. It would sell more miniatures

In the third incarnation of D&D miniatures, all the classes will be monster summoners. Ring any bells?

 

[Emiricol]

What are these, core classes they are making based off the miniatures line?

 

[Green Knight]

Yep. Core Classes just like the Fighter, Rogue, Paladin, and Barbarian. They'll also have Prestige Classes in the miniature book, too.

So while the paint job on the miniatures killed my interest in the miniature line, I'm still VERY much interested in that miniatures book (And hey, who says you need to use WOTC miniatures? I plan on basing all of my Reaper miniatures and using them).

 

[Zaruthustran]

What are these, core classes they are making based off the miniatures line?

Yes. The hardcover D&D Miniatures Handbook will have expanded rules for the D&D Miniatures game, as well as four new base classes for the D&D RPG game.

When I saw the D&D Miniatures press release (specifically, that bit about new base classes) I just about went nuts. New *base* classes? Wow!

If you have Search, you can see more than a few speculation threads started by me. Oddly, they never seemed to catch on. I guess other folks are more concerned about how Power Attack works, rather than what happens when you add 4 entire new base classes to join the bards, barbarians, druids, fighters, paladins, rangers, rogues, sorcerers, and wizards.

Me, I'm fascinated. What fantasy archetypes are not yet served by the existing classes? What game customer is not yet served? What game mechanic is not yet explored? It just piques my interest.

-z

 

[Krug]

Interesting...
I wonder if most DMs would permit these classes into their campaigns though...

 

[d4]

i don't like the idea of a "Commander" base class. sounds more like a prestige class to me.

a newbie 1st-level character with zero experience can hardly be described as a Commander, a leader of troops in battle... what war-weary soldier is going to follow him?

there's a reason why Second Lieutenants get no respect...

Sergeant to troops: Men, we are saved! here is Bart, our new Commander! ready to lead us to victory!

troops: huzzah!

Sergeant to Commander: so tell me, Commander, how many glorious campaigns have you won?

Bart the Commander: well, none, really.

Sergeant (looking crestfallen): i see... but how many engagements have you valiantly fought in?

Bart the Commander: well, none, really.

Sergeant: you've never even been in a fight?

Bart the Commander: dude, i'm a 1st-level character. give me a break!

Sergeant: ok, then why don't you stand up front there...

 

[rounser]

As an established skirmish system, D&D renders Chainmail redundant, so now they're turning D&D into Chainmail? Why do I sense that the cart is being put before the horse again....it's not the first time they've let rules "needs" compromise flavour, as the 3.5E prestige dual classes prove. I wonder if all classes will be similarly "simplified" for 4E if the miniatures take off and WotC Brand Management changes their vision of what D&D needs to be - in order to support that.

Then again, maybe it'll be good for the game; who knows...

 

[Technik4]

Actually from what I gleaned on the dying days of Chainmail on the chainmail boards was that the new minis game will be very similar to chainmail and that the miniature handbook would have a backwards conversion guide for all the minis from chainmail. Of course wizard's "backwards compatability" skills have been thrown into a bad light of late, but it is interesting.

Technik

 

[coyote6]

Classically, D&D has four basic archetypes -- the fighter, the rogue, the arcane magic user, and the divine spellcaster. Of those four, the most complex to play are the spellcasters.

The miniatures game has four classes, two of which are "simple" and spellcasters. I'd guess that one's a simplified arcane caster, and the other's a simplified cleric. D&D 3.5e simplified spells by doing away with variables in many cases (HD affected by sleep, areas of effect for line & cone effects, etc.). So some sort of spontaneous castering seems likely, or at least something that doesn't require separate "spells known" and "spells prepared". Possibly much smaller spell lists, too.

So, the other two "moderately complex" classes are probably rogue and fighter variations. A swashbuckler class might be possible -- it's an obvious niche. OTOH, it strikes me as not fitting in with a miniatures skirmish game too well -- how do units in such a game buckle their swashes or get their panache on? OTTH, I suppose it doesn't have to make sense to be in the book.

Another possibility would be some kind of scout class -- something sneaky, but more skirmish-oriented than a traps-and-locks rogue. Maybe like a ranger, without spells ('cause that would be More Complication).

Some sort of knightly class would be another possibility; it could have abilities like Z's Commander, especially at higher levels. But even at lower levels, you could justify some abilities -- it's not a lousy second lieutenant, fresh from OCS with no clue about the real world; it's a knight that's served as squire to experienced warriors and thus knows which end of the blade goes into the enemy (and is probably noble born anyways).

As for why discussion hasn't taken off -- well, a simple answer is that there's just not a lot of interest in the game, despite adding D&D crunch to try to drive sales. If it is lack of interest, that likely doesn't bode well for the game, I imagine. Myself, I'm only very vaguely interested; I'll look at it if I see it, but it certainly isn't on any kind of must-buy list, and is definitely price-sensitive.