The 4th edition class list so far

[Felon]

IIRC, they said they were not happy with the idea of having 1/3 of the PHB for just one class (wizard). If 1/4 is used by another class (cleric), it will be somewhat unbalanced..

The paladin's feeling a little dejected that he doesn't merit consideration as a divine spellcaster.

 

[Gloombunny]

First, talent trees aren't confirmed. In fact it was stated that there wouldn't be "talent trees" but there might be something in that direction.

If you have a better term we can use to refer to whatever class-customization options there will be, feel free to suggest it!

 

[Deverash]

First, talent trees aren't confirmed. In fact it was stated that there wouldn't be "talent trees" but there might be something in that direction.

Do you know the source for that?

 

[Glyfair]

Do you know the source for that?

No, I don't. I've been going through a lot of 4E info, and can't even remember whether it was on the WotC forums or here,

 

[Scholar & Brutalman]

No, I don't. I've been going through a lot of 4E info, and can't even remember whether it was on the WotC forums or here,

Chris Perkins said this in his Gamespy interview:

GameSpy: We've been reading a lot about talent trees in 4th Edition, similar to those in Blizzard Entertainment's Diablo and World of Warcraft games. Will 4th Edition characters progress similarly to those in an MMORPG and was this sort of play dynamic the inspiration for the new 4th Edition rules?

Christopher Perkins: Talent trees aren't unique to MMORPGs. Wizards has produced other games that use talent trees, such as the d20 Modern Roleplaying Game and the Star Wars Roleplaying Game Saga Edition. The theory of game design, regardless of platform, is constantly evolving. We've taken our gaming experiences over the past decade, as well as player feedback on the games and supplements we've produced in that time period, to build a system for character creation and advancement in 4th Edition that draws inspiration from numerous sources, but isn't exactly like anything that's been done before.

GameSpy: What do you think talents bring to the game that was lacking in previous editions?

Christopher Perkins: The system by which characters are created and advanced in 4th Edition will be revealed in the coming months, both on D&D Insider and in the Wizards Presents: Races and Classes preview book releasing in December. Until then, it would be premature to discuss the details.

So he dodged the question about talent trees. On the other hand, when asked about feats, Bruce Cordell didn't dodge anything:

Q: What about feats?
A: "Feats remain; people like feats... Some 3.5 classes really suffered for not having enough feats."

Which leads me to suspect that feats are pretty much the same, but talent trees are somehow different.

 

[Glyfair]

Chris Perkins said this in his Gamespy interview:

That sounds about right.

BTW, I'm going to upgrade Warlord to "Very Probable" based on the recent comments about the Warlord.

 

[Green Knight]

Which leads me to suspect that feats are pretty much the same, but talent trees are somehow different.

My guess is that Feats will be more like Saga. I.E. You'll get a Feat at 1st level, 3rd level, and every three levels thereafter as normal, and you'll also get a Feat for every even level in the class you're advancing in.

As for Talents, if they don't work as they do in D20 Modern or Star Wars Saga, then I can't imagine how they will work. Of course, "but isn't exactly like anything that's been done before" could mean many different things. For instance, it could mean that Talents will work exactly as they do in those systems, EXCEPT that you'll also be able to take Racial Talents in lieu of Class Talents which, as far as I know, those systems don't have. So that'd qualify as not being exactly like anything done before. Well, who knows. Either way, I'm looking forward to seeing plenty of variety and customization within character classes.

As for classes, if we're restricted to only eight, then I'd say the following:

Cleric
Fighter
Paladin
Ranger
Rogue
Warlock
Warlord
Wizard

Although I find it hard to believe that there'll only be 8 eight classes. 12 seems more likely to me (All the classes as in the current PHB, except for the Bard, and adding the Warlock and Warlord). And considering that the page count for the PHB has been increased, it may be that that comment about there only being 8 classes in the PHB is out of date. That may've been true then, but with the PHB getting fatter, it may not be true now. Hopefully that's the case, as I'd really like to see more classes then that. At the very least I'd like to see the Druid, which to me is a must-have, considering the new direction for Elves (Although the Druid could possibly be turned into a Talent Tree for the Cleric. I'd have to think about that one).

Barbarians and Monks aren't necessary, though. I agree with a previous poster who said that the Barbarian would work fine as a Talent Tree for the Fighter (Or possibly the Ranger). Same for the Monk. And while it'd be fun to see the lamentations of Bard players, I wouldn't mind seeing Bards in the first PHB. They'd be a nice contrast to the other Leader classes, the Warlord and the Cleric (The former likely relying on a Martial power source while the latter relies on a Divine power source. The Bard could be the Arcane Leader).

 

[Aloïsius]

The paladin's feeling a little dejected that he doesn't merit consideration as a divine spellcaster.

Well, I doubt paladins will have 30 (or 25...) level of spells... I'm not even sure they will have spells.

 

[Rechan]

Barbarians and Monks aren't necessary, though. I agree with a previous poster who said that the Barbarian would work fine as a Talent Tree for the Fighter (Or possibly the Ranger). Same for the Monk.

I personally would prefer if the Fighter had an unarmed fighting option, thus making one capable of creating a Brawler, Pugilist, a Hercules, or (hopefully) mixing Barb and Monk to create an unarmed type who tackles and cracks skulls and is otherwise savage.

However, I do think that there is a point to make the monk its own class. There's a lot of variety there, and the Option to create the Mystical Quasi-magical ascetic should be presented - in a later book.

Although, it would be intriguing if the Rogue or Ranger got an Unarmed variant, allowing you to play the unarmed striker. With the right flavor, you could be a Sam Fisher commando (I sneak up to him and snap his neck) or a ninja.

 

[Jhaelen]

IIRC, they said they were not happy with the idea of having 1/3 of the PHB for just one class (wizard). If 1/4 is used by another class (cleric), it will be somewhat unbalanced.

This is why I hope there will be more than those 8 classes. I want druids to be in the PHB, at least.

I am pretty sure, there will be only 8 classes but they still won't dedicate 1/3 of the PHB to a single class. They can easily achieve this by cutting down on the number of different spells, which I hope and expect to see.