Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="kaomera" data-source="post: 5517912" data-attributes="member: 38357">I may not be the best person to ask, as I think there's probably a lot of players who can get a lot of fun out of these classes without this drastic an overhaul, but for me:Artificer: Would probably require an overhaul of the way that magic items work in 4e. If not that then an overhaul of the concept of the artificer. In any case I think the concept needs some refining, and I'm not really that much of a fan of the way many of the powers end up working. 4e decided that doing pretty much anything without also attacking was boring, and that leads to powers that are overly complicated / fiddly even before you have to track multiple bonuses from different powers / feats / etc. and how they stack. Something much more straightforward, that doesn't punish the other players because you're playing an artificer, would be nice, IMO.Seeker: Let's start with a new name. The concept of a primal, weapon-using controller is kinda neat, but let's actually give the class something unique. Oh, and if you actually wanted to do something with the class, overshadowing it with a better (ok, IMO) version in your next product seems kind of counter-productive...Runepriest: Actually the concept I was most interested in out of the PHB3 classes, but to make it work you'd have to:     * Make it not a cleric: It would be nice to start by ditching healing word. I know that's not likely, but aside from healing infusion I really hate how leaders get saddled with healing. Ideally you'd find some other way to address the issue, but more likely we're stuck with rune of mending. In that case you'd have to at least do something more interesting with it. Overall, though, the class just needs something significant that really sets it apart.     * Fix rune states: Rune states need to be more significant IMO, but at the same time you need to avoid the problem of leaders forcing the other PCs to play their game. Ideally going into or changing a rune state should be a big deal, the current always-on version is just fiddly. I would hope that this would have the added effect that the rest of the group would be more interested / excited by what you where doing, making tracking issues less significant.     * Stop being so fiddly!: Runic artistry, I am looking at you! Also, rune states! Too much to keep track of, especially for the rest of the party and the DM. OK, I get that this is actually really, really awesome for some players, who want a more complex character. But then that player needs to be able to keep track of the effects in a reasonable manner. It's unfortunate that adding a "requirement: must not make the game unfun for everyone else" to some classes, etc. isn't really a viable option...</blockquote>

Verification