What PHB3 Classes stand out to you?

[babinro]

I would make this into a poll if I had any idea on how that's done.

What PHB3 classes stand out to you? Which don't seem that great? This is of course based on initial impressions as its way too early to have put any real playtime in.


Personally, I'm excited to try the following:

Battlemind: Mechanically, this comes off as a fun class with all the at will defender options that can trigger continually. I love that it leans towards a controller in much of its powers. This feels like a defender that will really add a lot to the game.

Monk: It seems like they've nailed the style and flavor of a monk through the Full Discipline system. The class has such a unique take on it that I can't wait to see it in action. Hopefully it plays as fun as it looks.

Runepriest: I get the impression this class isn't one that many people like. To me, this seems like a lot of fun. So much flexibility within each power to meet a large variety of situations. It also has some really fun Paragon Paths to further enhance your jack of all trades potential.


Psion: I like how this class truly feels like a controller to me. Something I've not seen since the Wizard in PHB1 in my opinion. There's a great amount of variety in the at-wills throughout the levels that could make various unique Psion builds. The Daily Powers, however, come off as uninteresting. This may well be a result of the at-wills covering a lot of ground. Their daily's often feel like at-wills with some extra damage.

As for the Ardent and the Seeker. Neither of them cry out as really fun on paper to me. The Ardent just seems boring compared to the options giving by its leader counterpart the Runepriest. The Seeker comes off as generic. It is like they ran out of really creative builds and went back to something old. The rest of the book is so separated from the PHB1 and 2 in terms of what new gameplay elements are brought in to make the classes unique, that the seeker looses its flair. It feels like just another class rather than having its own identity.

 

[kaomera]

Only the Runepriest really stands out for me so far. The Monk looks like it might be ok, and I plan on taking a closer look at the Seeker (at first glance I'm not sure it's really up my alley). I'm not really that enthused about the psionic classes flavor-wise, and I don't think I like the augmentable at-wills mechanically.

 

[Felon]

The seeker sounded brilliant in concept, but the execution feels humdrum. This is generally a problem with controllers. Defenders can feel exciting to play due to their sheer toughness, strikers for their damage output, and leaders for the healing, while a controller's signature seems to be their lack of all those things--especially toughness. If it's not AoE-oriented controller, that's especially true.

The runepriest just seems a like a cleric build to me. Clerics have strength-based weapon attacks. Runepriests use strength-based weapon attacks.

Battlemind and ardent come across like the kind of needless symmetry that I thought 4e wasn't about. Plus, the names feel totally reversed. When I think "battlemind", I think of a tactician, a strategizer--IOW, a leader. And when I think "ardent", I think of words like "defiant", "resolved", "implacable"--IOW, a defender. Feels almost like a typo.

Monks feel cool, but I can't help but think that we already had a Dex/Wis striker class that has awesome of mobility options. What else've they got? I'll have to sit down and really read at some point.

As for the psion, what I'd really like to see for them is a way to use ki foci so they can be "hands free". I got some good monk minis striking poses that would work great if they were used for a TK psion that slaps people around from across the room.

The parts of the PHB3 that really stand out to me aren't the classes, but rather everything else. Skill utilities in particular are a nice way to add features to a class that would otherwise be denied. Endurance grants some tughness, heal grants some healing, intimidate adds some control, diplomacy adds some leadership, and so forth. Neat idea, and neat execution.

 

[babinro]

The parts of the PHB3 that really stand out to me aren't the classes, but rather everything else. Skill utilities in particular are a nice way to add features to a class that would otherwise be denied. Endurance grants some tughness, heal grants some healing, intimidate adds some control, diplomacy adds some leadership, and so forth. Neat idea, and neat execution.

I agree, the non-class portions of the book are very well done. I'm fine with having 2 less classes than the other PHB's in favor of the skill utilities and the hybrid rules. In the long run, they'll have a greater impact on the game.

 

[Trolls]

For me, all the psionic classes stand out, while the other two don't really evoke a strong reaction.

Ardent: For me the ardent ticks both the fluff and crunch boxes. A good foundation idea (affecting others with an outflow of emotion), the control associated with the leader's healing is a neat rider, and many of the individual powers look like great fun to play with at the table. Some of the at-wills are a bit boring, but I can't wait to try dailies like wormhole plunge.

Battlemind: I have a love hate relationship with this class at the moment with regards to the mechanics. The features are a bit lacklustre, with a limited ability to actually defend, but some of the individual powers look like great fun. Lightning Rush in particular caught my attention; I like the idea of pursuit rather than stickiness as a defender tactic.

Psion: I'm generally more in favour of control via the battlefield with zones, walls, forced movement and so on, just out of personal taste, but the psion has been swaying me. I haven't read this class in as much detail as the others yet, though.

Monk: I played a monk during the playtest, and I love it to bits then. Now, with the mechanical clean up and extra build, it's my favourite striker by a fair margin. The only worrying thing about the class is that it can be difficult to set up some of the more showy daily powers. But when you spot the right moment, it's well worth the wait!

Runepriest: I don't really know what to say about the class. I can't really see any fault in it, but at the same time I can't get excited about it. I think I just have to put it down to personal taste.

Seeker: The seeker for me is mostly 'meh', with a few gems in there. The Inevitable Shot feature looks like great fun, but I think I'd just multiclass for that rather than going all out with the seeker.

 

[Kinneus]

I want to make a Monk so I can kick people in the NADs.

I have to say I just really don't like the way the Ardent, Battlemind and Psion are set up. Getting only 3 At-Wills and no Encounter powers just doesn't seem as fun to me. I just feel like it would get tedious to play. Which is too bad, because I kind of like the flavor of the Ardent. Battlemind does smack of "needless symmetry," though, but then again, I thought that about the Warden, too.

I'm gradually warming up to the Seeker. When I was a kid, before I really got into D&D, I was always curious about the Ranger. I liked the idea of an elven guy with a bow in the woods who could do magic. As I grew up, my tastes trended toward different things, but reading through the Seeker class recaptured some of the old magic. Their class features seem pretty strong, too. Shift as a minor action? +1 to attack with all thrown weapons? Sign me up. I might just have to give these guys a go... which is surprising, as I'm not usually into Controllers or Primal heroes. Go figure.

Runepriest looks nifty mechanically, but flavor-wise, it just seems like a Str Cleric, extra-dwarfy style. I mean, a whole pantload of Cleric powers already go on about runes and glyphs and junk. Do we really need this?

Skill Powers are cool, though, as are Hybrids. All in all a good book, even if none of the classes scream awesome at me like, say, the PHB 2 Sorcerer, Avenger, Shaman or Druid did.

The new races are nice, too. I almost give a crap about Githzerai despite myself, while the Shardmind and the Minotaur are genuinely cool. The Wilden just makes me shrug. Not too powerful mechanically, and it's racial encounter power-swapping thing is a rather superfluous complication.

PHB 2 was a home run. This was a very cautious bunt onto first base. Both are good, but there's really no comparison.

 

[Obryn]

Monk, Runepriest, Seeker, and Psion all work for me. I get their concepts, I can picture them in action, and I can think of fantasy archetypes that they resemble. Of these, Monk and Runepriest are my favorites so far.

I just don't get the flavor or concept of the Ardent or Battlemind. To me, it feels like the designers just kind of phoned those in because they needed more psionic classes. The best I get with either of them is "Psionic Warlord" and "Psionic Fighter" and frankly, if I am just comparing them to existing classes, it shows I'm not really grokking them.

I've seen the Battlemind compared to a Jedi. Which... well, okay, but I still don't totally see it. I've also heard some good, evocative ideas for the Ardent (say, a cruel psychic leader of a slave army), but I don't see any of it in the default setting yet.

They just don't do anything for me. I don't have any idea how I would sell them to one of my players.

-O

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

I really, really like how they did the monk. That may actually make me go back on my vow to never play a non-ranged class again. It is somewhat similar to an avenger, but they do have significant flavor and playstyle differences. (I am *cheerfully* changing my avenger's multiclass to monk from rogue, though)

I kind of like the psion. It looks like a fun controller, but I'm a bit leery on the "hey, you only have three at-wills, one encounter power, and 4 dailies EVER" thing. I'd think you'd get bored as heck after a while. Also, the at-wills not scaling at 21st level+ really kind of sucks.

I'm conflicted about the runepriest. It feels honestly like it shouldn't be divine, but in the same power source as the truenamer. It's much, much more of a buffer-type leader than the cleric is. I'd thought about switching my minotaur cleric to one, but I don't think it'd be more helpful than the cleric.

Ardent, Seeker, and Battlemind, I really haven't looked at them. I suspect that if I were going to do a full-on healer the Ardent would be easiest for me to roleplay. "You hit me? (bleep) (bleep) no, (bleeeeep) him up, guys!"

Brad

 

[Garthanos]

Battlemind does smack of "needless symmetry," though, but then again, I thought that about the Warden, too.

Back in the day... we took a druid and emphasized his fighter like qualities gave him wooden armor and .... had a sword made of teak... they were defenders of nature priestesses... and umm well they were called the green knights... the were also monster hunters (where monsters were defined as crimes against nature). The Warden was a Ka-Ching for me!...

Many of the classes are "builds" of old classes to me....as are paragon paths (whose flavor sometimes over whelms the base class).

 

[Mengu]

First impressions...

Ardent - It's okay for the most part, but not interesting enough for me.

Battlemind - Still trying to figure out how their defender stuff will be useful at the table. I kind of like their durability. But it's not calling out to me.

Monk - I like their shtick, and would enjoy playing one.

Psyawn - not interested.

Runepriest - I'm all about this guy. My favorite class of the lot. Awesome flexibility, excellent powers. Too bad the feats are dismal, but fortunately there are 2000+ other feats.

Seeker - who, what where? I still can't find the inspiration for this one. Kind of wish this was a striker class with a secondary controller role. Inevitable Shot (and ways to recharge it) make it feel like a striker anyway.