Roles, Power Sources; unbalanced?

[Moon_Goddess]

What do we think we know about classes?

Leader:
Cleric (Divine), Warlord (Martial)
Striker
Ranger (Martial), Rogue (Martial)
Defender
Fighter (Martial), Paladin (Divine)
Controller
Wizard (Arcane), Warlock (Arcane)


While I would greatly prefer if every class could be made to fill every role with talents and feats, I understand the need for defined roles.

But for flavor reasons and flexablity I wish we could get one of each role per source or at least not have all of the classes from one power source being the same role. There's hardely even a point in having multiple classes in that case.

Of course I could be wrong about all this information. We don't really know about the classes just guessing. But regardless I think one of each role per power source would be a good idea.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Eh. I'd much rather have the classes designed in a way that fits their flavor and is mechanically sound, than to enforce a false equality in a system that's intended to be more descriptive than proscriptive.

 

[Rechan]

Among other things, if we had a class for every Role for every Power Source, we'd have a PHB with 12 classes. Which means more rules just for those classes in the PHB. I think WotC wanted to save more space just for those classes, and playtest those rules as hard as possible, rather than spread their resources even wider.

It also presents room to fill things out later in future books. For instance, the Swordmage. I forget which designer is working on it, but the Swordmage is the arcane Defender. The Bard will likely be the Arcane leader. I also think that some are harder to do, like a martial controller. The only options would be a machine-gun like archer or an alchemist or something. A divine controller that isn't the druid* would also be difficult.

*I think I'd like to just see Power Source: Nature and present four classes that encompass the Druid's flavor, rather than dump the wildshape/companion stuff down the tubes.

 

[Snapdragyn]

A divine controller that isn't the druid* would also be difficult.

I disagree. An evangelist who stuns or mesmerizes with the power of their spoken faith, a shaman who causes paralyzing pain by pushing foes' spirits partially out of their bodies, or a (cabalist?) who summons outsider minions of their deity... there, 3 ideas in < 5 minutes from a non-designer. I'm sure they could come up with tons of stuff.

 

[Rechan]

I disagree. An evangelist who stuns or mesmerizes with the power of their spoken faith, a shaman who causes paralyzing pain by pushing foes' spirits partially out of their bodies, or a (cabalist?) who summons outsider minions of their deity... there, 3 ideas in < 5 minutes from a non-designer. I'm sure they could come up with tons of stuff.

Well the issue then is the controller meant to do? Is the purpose of the controller to just KILL large swaths of people? To shape the battlefield (Walls, Entangles)? Or just to EFFECT large amounts of people? I would like to think that a Controller can do all of those things. The examples you gave were very very niche and limited to one or two possibilities; how does the Evangelist, whose powers sound like Will saves, shape the field/block this direction.

I have the feeling that summoning would be handled much differently. I know that I would be irked if some guy walked onto the field and just dumped like ten summoned enemies right on the field in one area.

 

[Snapdragyn]

Well the issue then is the controller meant to do? Is the purpose of the controller to just KILL large swaths of people? To shape the battlefield (Walls, Entangles)? Or just to EFFECT large amounts of people? I would like to think that a Controller can do all of those things. The examples you gave were very very niche and limited to one or two possibilities; how does the Evangelist, whose powers sound like Will saves, shape the field/block this direction.

Gouts of hellfire to kill large swaths, & walls of brimstone to block the way - or eventually just pits into hell. 'Get thee to the plane where you belong, foul beast, the plane of EE-TER-NUHL DAM-NAY-SHUN!' (Say it with a major Southern accent for extra effect.)

 

[Scholar & Brutalman]

Multiple people have pointed out that the 4e Warlock could be a divine class.

The 3.5 Warlock gets its power from fiendish or fey sources, though the fey sources seemed pretty scant after the initial fluff in Complete Arcane. To me this is more divine than arcane, since the power comes from devotion or obedience to extraplanar forces. Though the 3.5 Warlock was officially arcane (it had an arcane failure chance in medium or heavier armour) there is no reason for the 4e version to be the same.

 

[Nyeshet]

I tend to see the Warlock as "Striker (arcane)," actually.

Personally, I'm not sure where I would place the Ranger. Favored Enemy, if it still exists as such, suggests Striker, as does the Scout's alt-SA ability - presuming the Ranger gets it (or can get it, via a tree). On the other hand, with the right array of divine spells the Ranger could be a good Controller (entangle comes to mind, for example).

Also, I find it a bit unlikely that they will have the same source for any of the roles, although I admit it is possible. The point of having two classes per role - presuming the follow such a strategy - would, I would think - be to showcase the differences that differing power sources could bring to the role, thus re-enforcing the importance of the concept of multiple available power sources. So I would expect Cleric and Warlord - as Leaders - to have descriptive text that purposefully compares and contrasts some of their abilities, pointing out how this class gains from using this power source or equivalents despite power source.

 

[breschau]

What do we think we know about classes?

Leader:
Cleric (Divine), Warlord (Martial)
Striker
Ranger (Martial), Rogue (Martial)
Defender
Fighter (Martial), Paladin (Divine)
Controller
Wizard (Arcane), Warlock (Arcane)

We actually don't know if the Warlock will remain Arcane, and have no information on the Ranger's power source either. He's more likely divine if he's in PH1.

 

[Exen Trik]

What I'd really like to see (but I highly doubt it would happen) is role and class being separate. From 1st to 30th, you have that Role, and it effects abilities that scale as you advance regardless of class. Some combinations are more obvious or have better synergy than others, but you could be go any combination and still be effective.

For example, the fighter who is normally fills the defender role could instead be the following:
Leader: Gives attack/defense benefits to nearby allies, like a passive 'aid another'
Striker: Extra damage bonus when flanking, charging, or other tactical actions
Controller: Has AoO abilites that prevent enemy actions or movement and has bonuses to grapple/disarm/bull rush type attacks

I think it would go a long way to giving a variety of styles to a character, outside of talent trees and without resorting to multiclassing. I'd like to play a Striker style fighter without taking levels in rogue or ranger. And if I did multiclass in those classes or with others, I would still be a Striker character.


...Of course, I don't really know what the roles even mean in terms of the rules, so technically I don't know what I'm talking about.