What classes will be in the martial power book?

[Lonely Tylenol]

On the other hand, if we are talking about individuals who can master esoteric forms of alchemy, steampunk clockwork gadgetry, and other forms of mad science which surpass the normal technology of the world, then I say it would have to be a new power source.

Yes please. I have a serious need for a solid, dedicated steampunk/clockwork tech supplement for D&D.

 

[Elphilm]

Old gypsy women have occult powers. The Green Knight has occult powers. It makes psionics a bit creepy and more preternatural than arcane magic, with its codified rituals and well-known spell names.

I like that. One could rename psionics as a whole - perhaps "occult powers" would not feel as out of place in a fantasy setting as some people tend to think "psionics" do.

It will not happen officially, since the designers have already referred to psionics as the Psi power source in multiple places. Nevertheless, it's a tasty idea.

 

[Belorin]

If 4E can keep the number of power sources to say 7 or 8:
martial
arcane
divine
shadow
psionic
primal
artifice

Then use the power source books to open up new feats, powers, and abilities to allow customization of classes introduced in the new PHBs, as well as new paragon paths and epic destinies. These could be tied in to the new setting for that year, for example Eberron could introduce psionics and the artifice power sources, while Forgotten Realms would be shadow and primal.

Bel

 

[Sadrik]

The Martial power source is defined as being based on human skill and ability,

Source?

The difference between physical excellence and mental excellence is a thin line. I can see it developed mechanically in two ways. As a martial talent tree that is only available to a gadget class. Or create a whole new power source and put that gadget tree into it. Both accomplish the same thing. It is just a naming convention issue. If there is rogue lockpicking and trap finding/making/disabling abilities already in the martial power source, then, imho I think the gadget character should be martial.

 

[TwinBahamut]

Source?

It is just my interpretation of this article.

The difference between physical excellence and mental excellence is a thin line. I can see it developed mechanically in two ways. As a martial talent tree that is only available to a gadget class. Or create a whole new power source and put that gadget tree into it. Both accomplish the same thing. It is just a naming convention issue. If there is rogue lockpicking and trap finding/making/disabling abilities already in the martial power source, then, imho I think the gadget character should be martial.

I am not sure I follow you here... Anyways, I see it this way: Martial characters do the exact kinds of things that any mundane person in a setting can do, except they ramp up the limits to superhuman levels. If any ordinary person can shoot a gun, then a Martial character can shoot a gun will superhuman accuracy and rate of fire. If any ordinary person can run a mile, then a Martial character can run a mile faster. If any ordinary person can pick a lock, then a Martial character can pick a more complex lock with a trap on it.

Maybe I have been reading the webcomic Girl Genius too much, but I believe that a trope of any kind of pulp "mad science" or beyond normal technology story involves the idea that alchemy and clockwork and the like is beyond the reach of normal people, including normal scientists. Dr. Frankenstein used science to create his monster, but the science he used completely surpasses the realm of understandable "normal" science (he learned the secrets of life and death from sitting in a graveyard too long, after all). A better example, if a videogame one, is Dr. Light from the Megaman series, who creates the robot X, an android who is technologically unmatched for hundreds of years after Dr. Light's death. The classic superhero/supervillian character of the gadgeteer who is both the only person who knows how to make a device and the only person who has such a device (such as Mr. freeze with his ice gun) is another example. As such, I would put the abilities of a "technology" or "gadget" power source as completely separate from the Martial power source, much like the Arcane power source is, simply to hold to genre tropes.

 

[Valdrax]

I think they may go in a different direction, putting in more options for different builds of the base classes already presented, maybe a couple of new classes and definitely new paragon paths and epic destinies.
Maybe different weapon styles for various weapons, unarmed combat, etc.
And I agree about the martial controller, unless they allow some kind of grenadier type class.

I second this post.

Inference: since you're discussing the bard, and you're under the NDA, the bard isn't in the playtest material you've seen. This is no surprise, but some people have been hoping it's been added to the PHB.

Now all I have to do is subtly question you about the 60 or 70 other classes from 3.5, and I can determine what classes are in the PHB! Brilliant!

Please quit trying to bait people into violating their NDA. It's just not nice.

If a Martial Controller is impossible, but Psionics, Divine, and Shadow-based Controllers are possible, then what exactly are these kinds of Controllers? If there can't be a Martial Controller because there is no way for a Martial character to emulate certain kinds of effects, then every Controller has to emulate those kinds of effects, and thus has to end up looking very similar. It is the same problem as last time around, where the Psion was just a repackaged Wizard under a new name.

Oh, sure there will be a lot of overlap for magical controllers. Most will be able to do direct damage; most will be able to muck with the terrain; most will be able to directly affect the minds and bodies of enemies; most will be able to rearrange enemies on the battlefield.

What will matter will be the emphasis of the classes. We've already seen a little of this where Wizard enchantment powers are getting nerfed to give the Psion some room to be unique.

An Arcane Controller focuses primarily on evocation effects.
A Psionic Controller focuses primarily on enchantment effects.
A Shadow Controller focuses primarily on illusions, enervation, and control of visibility.
A Primal Controller focuses on terrain manipulation and transmutations.

A Divine Controller gets hard thanks to Shadow and (the presumptive) Primal already eating up good niches for it. A summoner, a master of fear and awe, etc. all run into the same problem as the Martial Controller -- a gimmicky niche with little room for carving out uniqueness.

The lack of a non-magical controller does not mean the system or the role is broken. It just means there are certain fights which may be a little more challenging (primarily ones with swarms of mooks), but doubling up on other roles and focusing a little on the options where classes get to "minor" in another role will do just fine. I doubt that a PC group with 2 Defenders, 2 Strikers, and a Leader will be incapable of handling challenges without a Controller.

 

[the Jester]

Power sources should be few and have a true broad niche that is not covered by another power source, imo. So spirit, can be part of the shadow power source- for instance. Creating a whole new source to fit a particular niche is a bad idea.

Well, I agree in principle; I think fewer sources with broad niches is a better approach to take than many, narrow power sources.

But specifically about spirit vis-a-vis shadow, I disagree. I think you can make a bunch of very different spirit based classes, that are quite different from shadow based classes. I would say that they are as closely related as arcane and divine are. Some of the disagreement might come from the definitions we're each using for "spirit"- I am not necessarily talking about undead.

Off the top of my head, I can see:

Spirit Controller- witch (lots of battlefield control, use masses of spirits to tie enemies down, damage them, distort the environment, etc.)
Spirit Striker- binder (gain specific powers from different "vestige" spirits)
Spirit Leader- shaman (spirit based, like in the Players Option: Spells & Magic 2.8E book)
Spirit Defender- houngan (voodoo dude; lets the spirits "ride" him and take him into battle)

***

As to what power sources I think we'll see in the next few years:

Arcane
Divine
Martial
Psionic
Ki (possibly combined with psionic, otherwise much better defined and differentiated)
Primal
Shadow

I'd be interested in a few others, should they ever try them on:

Chaos
Elemental (only if well-differentiated from arcane, primal, etc)

 

[Klaus]

Anyways, I see it this way: Martial characters do the exact kinds of things that any mundane person in a setting can do, except they ramp up the limits to superhuman levels.

Chris Sims wrote (talking about the warlord's power source):

[ The warlord has ] the martial power source, which isn't completely nonmagical, but certainly less magical than other power sources.

So the key for a martial controller is to think of how a character, without needing outside equipment (like grenades), could affect several opponents at range, using his supernatural ability to kick arse.

 

[TwoSix]

Really? I feel completely the opposite. The swashbuckler is the lightly armored guy who's fast on his feet and his darting and whirling through combat, his rapier dealing wounds and death wherever he passes. He's all about avoiding damage, not absorbing it.

That, to me, is the epitome of "striker."

Personally, I like the idea of a swashbuckler as a martial controller. Dashing through a group of minions, stabbing wildly to his left and right as he emerges unscathed, and 4 goblins drop behind him makes a good fireball equivalent. Swinging over the enemy on a chandelier, throwing insults about their mother, and making them all chase the swashbuckler up the stairs is just as effective a battlefield control as wall of fire.

 

[D.Shaffer]

The problem with most postulated 'Martial Controllers' I see is that they're not REALLY Controllers...they're Strikers or Defenders with a few Control like abilities. The monk who leaps into a bunch of guys and stuns them all with a flurry of blows? A melee Striker as he's primarily dealing damage to them, the stun is a side effect. The Chain user who knocks down a bunch of guys at once while sticking close to the party? Defender; a controllerish defender, but he only effects people at melee range (Granted, it's a large melee range) who get close to the party. They're not controlling the field, they're attacking the people right next to them. The controller does area of effect damage/control AT RANGE.

Keep in mind that no class is completely 'pure' when it comes to their role. The Warlock is a striker, but it also has some area of effect battlefield shaping abilities. The fighter is a defender, but it has abilities that give a variety of status conditions on those that close in on him (Knocking them prone or disarming them, for instance). The cleric is a leader, but he has a bunch of direct damage abilities.

If you design a martial controller, control has to be its PRIMARY function. Most of the classes proposed dont really do that, or they do so in a way that doesnt really 'make sense'. For me? I think it IS possible to make a Martial Controller, but it'd be closer to an 'anti-warlord'. Someone who uses their skill to intimidate and cow anyone who can see him. Maybe not as directly effective as a magical controller but he'd effect more people at once. The main problem would be making him distinctive enough from the Warlord without impinging on other possible future classes. As an example, as these seem more like fear effects, a Shadow Controller might work better for these types of mechanics.