New "which 8 classes are in PHB" speculation thread

The Sorcerer was just a modified wizard with different resource management. I don't think there needs to be more than one arcane casting class in the PHB, especially one so similar to the Wizard. With at will, per encounter and per day abilities for every class, the Sorcerer is simply obsolete.

I would like to see Clerics, Druids, Fighters, Rangers, Rogues, and Wizards stay.

Paladins should be a prestige class. Bards should be completely rebuilt from the ground up, either as a new and more interesting base class (rather than a bastardized hybrid) or a prestige class. Barbarians should simply be a part of the character's culture and background, with perhaps a fighter ability chain dedicated to berserk fighting. Monks should be saved for the oriental book, imo.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Falling Icicle said:
The Sorcerer was just a modified wizard with different resource management. I don't think there needs to be more than one arcane casting class in the PHB, especially one so similar to the Wizard. With at will, per encounter and per day abilities for every class, the Sorcerer is simply obsolete.
Except it appears due to retroactive history the reason for the sorcerer being in existence has changed.

I heard when 3rd edition came out that the reason the sorcerer was in the game was that during playtest they changed the wizard so that it didn't prepare spells any more in order to see if they could get rid of the vancian spellcasting system. However, half the playtesters loved it and the other half hated it. Since they couldn't get a consensus they decided to rename the new wizard and put it in the game as well.

In a recent discussion with the designers one of them said that the reason that sorcerer was originally put in was to make sure that there was more than one class who could use the pages and pages of arcane spells as they felt it was a waste to have all those spells for just one class. He then said that wizard and sorcerer were still two seperate classes for the same reason.
 

Falling Icicle said:
The Sorcerer was just a modified wizard with different resource management. I don't think there needs to be more than one arcane casting class in the PHB, especially one so similar to the Wizard. With at will, per encounter and per day abilities for every class, the Sorcerer is simply obsolete.

I have feeling the sorcerer will be more like the warlock class, and that the wizard will be entirely different.

But I too would like just one arcane class. I say bring back the good old Magic-User!
 
Last edited:



Great predictions.

Only one problem. Here is the confirmed list of classes by role:

Fighter, Paladin = Defender.
Cleric, Druid = Leader.
Rogue, Ranger = Striker.
Wizard = Controller.

Roles: C / Video - Roles
Defender: stand on the front lines and hold back the monsters, protect the party.

Leader / Healer:

Controller: there are many ways to control the battlefied, one of them is to drop a fireball over there.

Striker: focus in on a target and deal as much damage as possible while moving around the battlefield.

From the iconic classes. Fighter, Cleric, Wizard, Rogue. Multiple classes that can fill this role equally well. Example given: Druid is just as good of a healer as the Cleric. Combat roles more than anything.

The text is all quoted from the video.

This doesn't mean they'll be in the PHB1, this is just a straight quote from the video pertaining to roles and classes.
 

My guesses:

Fighter (Martial Defender)
Paladin (Divine Defender)

Rogue (Martial Striker)
Ranger (Divine? Striker)

Wizard (Arcane Controller)

Warlord (Martial Leader)
Cleric (Divine Leader)

and then either
Sorcerer (Arcane Striker)

or
Druid (Divine Controller)
 

delericho said:
Do we know all the PHBs have the same 8 classes? Maybe they're collectible?

Just kidding. :)
:D That's brilliant!!! :D

The new infos didn't affect my initial guess at all:
Defenders: Fighter, Paladin
Strikers: Rogue, Ranger
Leaders: Cleric, Warlord
Controllers: Sorcerer, Wizard
 

I've got the think that Leader is a healer role. When they introduced to concept of character roles one of the primary examples is the "who is going to play the cleric" problem. They specifically mentioned druid should be able to heal as well as a cleric, so I've got to think druid is the second Leader. If Warlord is the second Leader, and Druids are controllers, then there isn't a true healer role at all (unless Warlords can heal by some mechanism, and frequently enough that they can be the primary healer for the group). Then you could end up with a party composed of 1 of each role, and no healer, which would defeat the whole reason for having roles in the first place.

At this point we have "confirmed" 8 core classes in the PHB, and we have more than 8 "confirmed" classes. My guess is they have about 15 total classes right now (the high end of the initial max characters quote), which they are whittling down to 8. There are probably some that are pretty much guaranteed, some that are on the bubble, and some that are on their last breath. I would guess that Warlord is on the bubble. We know about it only from a screenshot which they didn't appear to release on purpose. If they weren't talking about him then either they weren't sure he was going to make the cut, or they wanted him to be a surprise. Furthermore, the guess as to his role is "support", something that doesn't fit into any of the roles as we know them (unless controller could be considered a supporting role). You could rip out some of those tactical/leader/support type abilities and turn them into feats. Then you could just as easily have a wizard leader as a martial one.
 

alaric said:
I've got the think that Leader is a healer role.

I don't see why. Healing could be something completely unrelated to the role. Maybe the power source has something to do with it (so rangers, paladins, druids and clerics will all be able to heal if they're divine classes).
 

Remove ads

Top