Warlock confirmed in PH1...

[pawsplay]

Cute symmetries are out, though.

 

[NaturalZero]

Since necromancy and summoning were not mentioned among the wizard traditions it will be interesting to see if wizards get access to these types of spells at all. Perhaps they are more in line with the warlock's flavor and thus we will see them as something he has access to as control-type options.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

Since necromancy and summoning were not mentioned among the wizard traditions it will be interesting to see if wizards get access to these types of spells at all. Perhaps they are more in line with the warlock's flavor and thus we will see them as something he has access to as control-type options.

It was mentioned a 4e wizard could do everything a 3e wizard could do, from one of the designers. I could certainly see that implying that wizards still have summoning and necromancy spells.

 

[D.Shaffer]

An interesting question (Well interesting for me anyways) since summoning was mentioned...what party role IS a summoner anyways? Depending on how, where, and what they summon, they could feasibly do all 4 roles.

 

[Baby Samurai]

So maybe:

-Cleric (divine/leader)
-Fighter (martial/defender)
-Paladin (divine/defender)
-Ranger (divine/striker)
-Rogue (martial/striker)
-Warlock (divine/controller)
-Warlord (martial/leader)
-Wizard (arcane/controller)

…?

 

[Aage]

Has Warlord been confirmed btw? Or is it still just speculation that it will be in phb1? Because if it isn't, I think this would be a cute combination of classes/roles/sources:

Warlock (Divine, Controller)
Cleric (Divine, Leader)
Paladin (Divine, Defender)

Bard (Arcane, Leader)
Wizard (Arcane, Controller)

Ranger (Martial, Striker)
Rogue (Martial, Striker)
Fighter (Martial, Defender)


3 Martial, 3 Divine, 2 Arcane. 2 for each role.

 

[Zander]

I wouldn't mind the presence of the Warlocks if they were portrayed as the Warlocks of legend...dark wizards who make demonic pacts. (The name warlock is derived from the Old English word wǣrloga which mean oath breaker.) However, it seems like the warlock will be like the warlock in the Complete Arcane - essentially a pony whose one trick is to shoot lasers (errr..."arcance blasts").

FWIW I completely agree. Since 1E, I've felt that there should be a core class of arcane caster that derives its power from demonic pacts.

I wouldn't mind a 4E class that resembled the 3.5 warlock in flavour but I wouldn't call it "warlock" and wouldn't include it in the PHB I. "Eldritch master", perhaps.

 

[Zander]

A few posters have mentioned the druid as a possible PHB I class. I'm guessing/hoping that druids will be in the PHB II where they'll be joined by a more folkloric, i.e. nature-friendly, gnome race.

 

[NaturalZero]

An interesting question (Well interesting for me anyways) since summoning was mentioned...what party role IS a summoner anyways? Depending on how, where, and what they summon, they could feasibly do all 4 roles.

Id say summoning firmly lies within the realm of the controller. I mean, what better way to control the battlefield than to surround your foes with celestial dire weasels?

 

[Zamkaizer]

Cute symmetries are out, though.

But...I like cute symmetries! Hell, I even get annoyed when they're not there.

I think they lend the proceedings a sense of comprehensiveness.