The new Heroes of Shadow thread

772 posts / 0 new
Last post
This is the new Heroes of Shadow thread.  The old one got a little . . . cluttered, and was closed.  It was a long thread, and the product has gone through a lot of changes since it was announced, so it's about time for a new thread anyway.




Here's the current Product Page

Previews
December and Beyond: info on the Blackguard subclass and the Necromancy and Nethermancy schools for the Mage.

January and Beyond: more info on the product as a whole, and a preview of the Shade.

February and Beyond: a bit of concept art and a fluff description of the Vampire. No mechanics are previewed this time.

March and Beyond: some item previews, and the Shadowthief Pragon Path for arcane classes.

Shadow Magic: Shadow power source fluff and the table of contents

Shadow Classes: a summary of the class material in Heroes of Shadow, and a detailed look at the Vampire in the heroic tier

Shadow Races: a summary of the races in Heroes of Shadow, and a detailed look at the Vryloka

Paragon Paths: a summary of books paragon paths, and a preview of the Nocturnal

Shadows of Destiny: a summary of the epic destinies, and a preview of the Guardian of the Void

Design & Development - Necromancy & Nethermancy: design thoughts on the new mage schools


Heroes of Shadow is now a hardcover book scheduled for release April 19th.
It will feature:

New Races, including Vryloka (humans cursed with vampirism), Shades (humans with souls tainted by shadow), and Revenants (spirits of the deceased reborn in undead flesh to pursue a specific goal, first appeared in Dragon Magazine).

New Material for Existing Classes, including Necromancy and Nethermancy schools for the Mage subclass of the Wizard (including some powers that the PHB Wizard can use), a Blackguard subclass for the Paladin, a Death Domain for the Warpriest subclass of the Cleric (including some powers that the PHB Cleric can use), the Executioner subclass of the Assassin (the formerly final-version, formerly Heroes of the Forgotten Kingdoms associated DDI article for the Executioner has been retroactively labeled a 'playtest preview' for Heroes of Shadow), a new Binder subclass with Gloom and Star pact options for the Warlock (the Binder is a controller rather then a striker, but still has some powers that the PHB Warlock can take), and a Gloom pact option for the Hexblade subclass of the Warlock.

One New Class, the Vampire, which "enables you to play a creature of the night in all its dark glory".  This class represents monstrous vampires as PCs, not just a general term for a class focused on life draining as some had earlier speculated.

New Paragon Paths, see the preview article above

New Epic Destinies
, see the preview article above

New Feats and Items

As the Original Poster for the old thread, I thank you for the start of the new one. My question has been answered, and it is thusly...

Q: Will there be any new classes in this product?

A: (As interupted by me) We had not planned on it, going with Kit Builds introduced in the Essentials books. As we looked at various comments and reviews of our previews it has been decided to expand the book into hardcover and included one class, a Vampire. The Vampire race will be renamed.



Really, I have to see this to really know how it gels. It may be a good class, or it could be one stretched thin and not have much going for it. One class in a book introducing a power source, though, is a bit under developed. Having only two classes total (Vampire and Assassin) for the Shadow Power source is disappointing.

Thoughts?
Terms you should know...
Show
Kit Build - A class build that is self sustaining and has mechanical differences than the normal scale. Started in Essentials. Most are call their own terms, though the Base Class should be said in front of their own terms (Like Assassin/Executioner) Power Points - A mechanic that was wedged into the PHB3 classes (with the exception of the Monk) from the previous editions. This time, they are used to augment At Wills to be Encounters, thus eliminating the need to choose powers past 4th level. Mage Builds - Kit builds that are schools of magic for the Wizard. A call back to the previous editions powering up of the wizard. (Wizard/Necromancer, for example) Unlike the previous kit builds, Wizards simply lose their Scribe Rituals feature and most likely still can choose powers from any build, unlike the Kit Builds. Parcel System - A treasure distribution method that keeps adventurers poor while forcing/advising the DM to get wish lists from players. The version 2.0 rolls for treasure instead of making a list, and is incomplete because of the lack of clarity about magic item rarity.
ha ha
56902498 wrote:
They will Essentialize the Essentials classes, otherwise known as Essentials2. The new sub-sub-classes will be: * Magician. A subsubclass of Mage, the magician has two implements, wand and hat, one familiar (rabbit) and series of basic tricks. * Crook. A subsubclass of Thief, the Crook can only use a shiv, which allows him to use his only power... Shank. * Angry Vicar, a subsubclass of warpriest, the angry vicar has two attacks -- Shame and Lecture. * Hitter. A subsubclass of Slayer, the Hitter hits things. * Gatherer. A subsubclass of Hunter, it doesn't actually do anything, but pick up the stuff other players might leave behind. Future Essentials2 classes include the Security Guard (Sentinel2), the Hexknife (Hexblade2), the Webelos (Scout2), the Gallant (Cavalier2) and the Goofus (Knight2). These will all be detailed in the box set called Heroes of the Futile Marketing. (Though what they should really release tomorrow is the Essentialized version of the Witchalok!)
I'm holding my thoughts for a bit (intentionally tried to keep the initial post "just the facts", straight from WotC, with minimal commentary and interpretation.  You know my own opinion, and I'll repost it here at length later on.
I do find it a little sad that the reverant is being put in to a book. They might change it around, and call it the essentials version, and not at all like the DDi version. But it's pretty much the same idea, isn't it?

I think if you are going to make such bold statements as DDi only content, it should say that, or at least say it's DDi only content for X amount of time.

I think this book looks interesting, though I'm not sure I would allow these options in my current campaign, since it seems these classes would clash with what I'm doing with my campaign.
Apparently the new Hexblade Pact is the "Gloom Pact" and it gives the hexblade Shadow Walk.
Apparently the new Hexblade Pact is the "Gloom Pact" and it gives the hexblade Shadow Walk.



Could I get a source, so I can link it in the OP?
Apparently the new Hexblade Pact is the "Gloom Pact" and it gives the hexblade Shadow Walk.



Could I get a source, so I can link it in the OP?




One place calls it "Binder Pact" - while another place calls it "Gloom Pact"

twitter.com/#!/Alphastream/status/306134...

twitter.com/#!/Alphastream/status/306141...

community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...
Interesting.  From those links, it sounds like the Gloom pact is either a new build for the PHB warlock, or a new subclass entirely, and not a hexblade.  The January & Beyond article listed warlock content twice.  We may be getting two new warlock builds - one hexblade and one other.

I'll mention it in the OP, but I'd prefer to have something more concrete then some vague twitter posts to link to.
Don't we have enough Warlock pacts already???

Dark, Infernal, Fey, Star, Vestige.... IIRC there is also 1 or 2 Dragon Mag pacts although their names escape me.

Instead of broadening the Warlocks options (Hexblade notwithstanding), can't we just deepen them by creating new powers for the pre-existing pacts?  

Repository: Homebrew & Original Content

 

There are days when I wish my old account did not screw up with the transition to gleemax. Having been a member since 2008 doesnt carry near the same prestige as having been a member since 2003, not that it matters lol.

Apparently not, as when they decided to add new fey hexblade options, they opted to make a second, separate hexblade fey pact, rather then add power choices or other options to the existing hexblade fey pact.

That said, while I'm generally with you on needing more options for existing pacts rather then more pacts, I would still like to see hexblade versions of the existing dark and vestige pact.

The gloom pact may or may not be a hexblade pact, and if it is then it might be their equivalent of the dark or vestige pact (or both).

There's just not enough info out there right now for me to have much of an opinion.
I think the pact sounds awesome and is what the Dark Pact should have been. The thing I disliked most about the Hexblade was the lack of Shadow Walk.

I also glad they are giving an alternative to Eldritch Blast - I just don't like pure damage powers with no riders. I would rather have the dmg die reduced and have a rider. So glad to see no Eldritch Blast on the Binder Pact. It is also cool the power that replaces it is a Close Blast.

Heroes of Shadows sounds great so far - I just wish we would get better previews for it.

I like the Dark Pact pact boon but their At-will power is just sad...
As a note, apparently the Gloomwrought box set will come with a book of player options, so those who were looking for an updated reprint of the Shadar-Kai still have some hope.
Has there been any mention of a Shadow bloodline?

They had something close to it in Dragon but it was more like a Multi-class feature. I would like to see a Shadow bloodline like they had for the Elan.
I have mentioned this in the other thread, but the Shadar-Kai is already available. It is in the Dragon Annual, most likely the only Annual that will be produced. Doubtful that it will be in any other source at this point.
Terms you should know...
Show
Kit Build - A class build that is self sustaining and has mechanical differences than the normal scale. Started in Essentials. Most are call their own terms, though the Base Class should be said in front of their own terms (Like Assassin/Executioner) Power Points - A mechanic that was wedged into the PHB3 classes (with the exception of the Monk) from the previous editions. This time, they are used to augment At Wills to be Encounters, thus eliminating the need to choose powers past 4th level. Mage Builds - Kit builds that are schools of magic for the Wizard. A call back to the previous editions powering up of the wizard. (Wizard/Necromancer, for example) Unlike the previous kit builds, Wizards simply lose their Scribe Rituals feature and most likely still can choose powers from any build, unlike the Kit Builds. Parcel System - A treasure distribution method that keeps adventurers poor while forcing/advising the DM to get wish lists from players. The version 2.0 rolls for treasure instead of making a list, and is incomplete because of the lack of clarity about magic item rarity.
ha ha
56902498 wrote:
They will Essentialize the Essentials classes, otherwise known as Essentials2. The new sub-sub-classes will be: * Magician. A subsubclass of Mage, the magician has two implements, wand and hat, one familiar (rabbit) and series of basic tricks. * Crook. A subsubclass of Thief, the Crook can only use a shiv, which allows him to use his only power... Shank. * Angry Vicar, a subsubclass of warpriest, the angry vicar has two attacks -- Shame and Lecture. * Hitter. A subsubclass of Slayer, the Hitter hits things. * Gatherer. A subsubclass of Hunter, it doesn't actually do anything, but pick up the stuff other players might leave behind. Future Essentials2 classes include the Security Guard (Sentinel2), the Hexknife (Hexblade2), the Webelos (Scout2), the Gallant (Cavalier2) and the Goofus (Knight2). These will all be detailed in the box set called Heroes of the Futile Marketing. (Though what they should really release tomorrow is the Essentialized version of the Witchalok!)
@ThaX: No more or less doubtful then anything else.  Humans, Elves, Eladrin, Dragonborn, Halflins, Drow, Half Orcs, Half Elves, Tieflings, and Dwarves had all been previously published before Heroes of the Fallen Lands and Heroes of the Forgotten Kingdoms were released, and all of those races were reprinted with updates.  Ditto minotaurs - first released in Dragon then re-released with updates in PHBII.

Shadar-Kai remain by cannon the most populous PC race of the Shadowfell.  An updated reprint in Heroes of Shadow would not have been inappropriate, nor would it be inappropriate in Gloomwrought.

That's a far cry from saying it should happen, or that it's going to happen.  I'm just saying that those of us who want it to happen still have some hope.

@AskaniPsion: no mention that I've heard of an Elan-esque bloodline as of yet, much as I would be interested to see one as well.
Kudos to Wizards for learning from criticism. I do hope that the class is AEDU-style and about using shadow to utilize life-draining powers, and not being a real vampire. I also hope that we get a self-contained AEDU Necromancer class in a future product (Shadow Power?).
Anything is possible at this point.  WotC really don't seem to know what they want to do with the product line right now.  If you want to see anything specific, be it an independant AEDU necromancer or a shadow-themed Elan-esque bloodline, or even something more general, like racial utility powers for other races, I heartily recommend you let WotC know by doing any or all of the following:

1) email customer service
2) mail a physical letter to WotC
3) submit an article to Dragon


As for wizards learning from criticism, it's hard to say.  As for the Vampire Class in particular, there are any number of ways it might have made it into HoS:

It might have been there from the beginning, and WotC just decided not to talk about it until January for whatever reason.

Heroes of Shadow recently went from a softcover to a hardcover, without sufficient time to really design enough filler to fit the extra page space.  At the same time, we're hearing that the Ravenloft setting, which was said to include options for PC 'Vampires, Werewolves, and Ghosts', has been shelved.  We could just have material originally developed for a cancelled product being ported over to another product that needed filler.

Or WotC might actually have heard the negative reaction to a HoS book without any new shadow classes and rushed to add one.


Who knows what the truth is?  That's why I tried to keep speculation out of my initial post.  We just don't know what's going on behind the scenes over there.

In any event, I'm hoping the Vampire is cool, effective, shadowy, and presents meaningful choices.  I don't care if it's "essentials style" or not, so long as it's more mage, less slayer, when it comes to meaningful choices of powers.

A fun, effective, shadowy vampire, along witha fun, effective, shadowy assassin, would go a long way towards winning me over to this book.

A HoS book without any fun, effective options shadow characters that aren't also arcane, divine, or martial would certainly leave me dissapointed, to put it mildly.  As this is still quite possible, I'm feeling very ambivalent at the moment.
Don't we have enough Warlock pacts already???

Dark, Infernal, Fey, Star, Vestige.... IIRC there is also 1 or 2 Dragon Mag pacts although their names escape me.

Instead of broadening the Warlocks options (Hexblade notwithstanding), can't we just deepen them by creating new powers for the pre-existing pacts?  



short answer... No


I still want the following:

Demon Pact
"Dark Powers of the Shadowfell" Pact  -  I imagine this is what the Gloom Pact will be
Dragon Pact


plus more than that, but that's all I can think of off the top of my head at the moment
Primordial Pact works nicely too, with a strong elemental theme.

Going to take a moment and make a prediction: Heroes of the Shadowfell has been altered to include builds for classic 4e classes.  This will be an attempt by WotC to prove they had intended to support Classic 4e all along (this is simply "spin" though, as the material was only added at the last minute) but will be interpreted by the community as proof that Essentials has failed.
Seems unlikely.  Necromancy and Nethermancy are clearly mage schools, while the blackguard is clearly an e-style subclass unlikely to bring any useful material to the paladin.  I mean, it could be, but I wouldn't get my hopes up.

Not that support for classic 4e classes is what I hoped for myself, but a suite of new classes for shadow characters the way PHBII did for primal or PHBIII did for psionic is a thoroughly squashed dream at this point. 
Yeah, I really don't see any reason to introduce a new power source without new classes. Ki was killed because of this, the Monk being the only class that was viable.

I see the move to Hardcover as a way to contain more material that was given for inclusion in this product as well as a move for more standard fare in the book like the Vampire (god, worse than the Assassin name) class and more classical builds like those in the power books along with the Kit Builds (most likely call classes, like the Wizard:Necromancer)

I don't believe that any of the material was slapped together at the last moment, though being pulled from elsewhere may be a possibility.
Terms you should know...
Show
Kit Build - A class build that is self sustaining and has mechanical differences than the normal scale. Started in Essentials. Most are call their own terms, though the Base Class should be said in front of their own terms (Like Assassin/Executioner) Power Points - A mechanic that was wedged into the PHB3 classes (with the exception of the Monk) from the previous editions. This time, they are used to augment At Wills to be Encounters, thus eliminating the need to choose powers past 4th level. Mage Builds - Kit builds that are schools of magic for the Wizard. A call back to the previous editions powering up of the wizard. (Wizard/Necromancer, for example) Unlike the previous kit builds, Wizards simply lose their Scribe Rituals feature and most likely still can choose powers from any build, unlike the Kit Builds. Parcel System - A treasure distribution method that keeps adventurers poor while forcing/advising the DM to get wish lists from players. The version 2.0 rolls for treasure instead of making a list, and is incomplete because of the lack of clarity about magic item rarity.
ha ha
56902498 wrote:
They will Essentialize the Essentials classes, otherwise known as Essentials2. The new sub-sub-classes will be: * Magician. A subsubclass of Mage, the magician has two implements, wand and hat, one familiar (rabbit) and series of basic tricks. * Crook. A subsubclass of Thief, the Crook can only use a shiv, which allows him to use his only power... Shank. * Angry Vicar, a subsubclass of warpriest, the angry vicar has two attacks -- Shame and Lecture. * Hitter. A subsubclass of Slayer, the Hitter hits things. * Gatherer. A subsubclass of Hunter, it doesn't actually do anything, but pick up the stuff other players might leave behind. Future Essentials2 classes include the Security Guard (Sentinel2), the Hexknife (Hexblade2), the Webelos (Scout2), the Gallant (Cavalier2) and the Goofus (Knight2). These will all be detailed in the box set called Heroes of the Futile Marketing. (Though what they should really release tomorrow is the Essentialized version of the Witchalok!)
Some have surmised that the Gloom Pact for the Warlock may be a Pact for the pre-Essentials Warlock...

It is my fervent hope that they include a non-melee Warlock sub-class in the book, rather than try to fit new ideas into the old mold... Along the same lines, the I hope that the Vampire will be a Class in the sense that it describes your background fluff and that your class features will come from your choice of Sub-Class / Type  (i.e. the new class format.)


If they want to continue putting out DDI articles for the old stuff so be it... but I'd rather they not mix old and new in the books.
"(i.e. the new class build format)"

Fixed that for you.

My belief is that Wizards realized that the Essentials Kit Builds are not an exclusive design paragon for future products, though I suspect that was the plan at the beginning. If this product was to only have Kit Builds (As was suspected at the beginning) then it would collect dust on the retail shelves.

Right now, it is still disappointing that it has the mixed power sourced builds but the new class (Vampire!) and other things does give this book a chance for sales, at least in my eyes.
Terms you should know...
Show
Kit Build - A class build that is self sustaining and has mechanical differences than the normal scale. Started in Essentials. Most are call their own terms, though the Base Class should be said in front of their own terms (Like Assassin/Executioner) Power Points - A mechanic that was wedged into the PHB3 classes (with the exception of the Monk) from the previous editions. This time, they are used to augment At Wills to be Encounters, thus eliminating the need to choose powers past 4th level. Mage Builds - Kit builds that are schools of magic for the Wizard. A call back to the previous editions powering up of the wizard. (Wizard/Necromancer, for example) Unlike the previous kit builds, Wizards simply lose their Scribe Rituals feature and most likely still can choose powers from any build, unlike the Kit Builds. Parcel System - A treasure distribution method that keeps adventurers poor while forcing/advising the DM to get wish lists from players. The version 2.0 rolls for treasure instead of making a list, and is incomplete because of the lack of clarity about magic item rarity.
ha ha
56902498 wrote:
They will Essentialize the Essentials classes, otherwise known as Essentials2. The new sub-sub-classes will be: * Magician. A subsubclass of Mage, the magician has two implements, wand and hat, one familiar (rabbit) and series of basic tricks. * Crook. A subsubclass of Thief, the Crook can only use a shiv, which allows him to use his only power... Shank. * Angry Vicar, a subsubclass of warpriest, the angry vicar has two attacks -- Shame and Lecture. * Hitter. A subsubclass of Slayer, the Hitter hits things. * Gatherer. A subsubclass of Hunter, it doesn't actually do anything, but pick up the stuff other players might leave behind. Future Essentials2 classes include the Security Guard (Sentinel2), the Hexknife (Hexblade2), the Webelos (Scout2), the Gallant (Cavalier2) and the Goofus (Knight2). These will all be detailed in the box set called Heroes of the Futile Marketing. (Though what they should really release tomorrow is the Essentialized version of the Witchalok!)
"(i.e. the new class build format)"

Fixed that for you.

My belief is that Wizards realized that the Essentials Kit Builds are not an exclusive design paragon for future products, though I suspect that was the plan at the beginning. If this product was to only have Kit Builds (As was suspected at the beginning) then it would collect dust on the retail shelves.

Right now, it is still disappointing that it has the mixed power sourced builds but the new class (Vampire!) and other things does give this book a chance for sales, at least in my eyes.



No need to fix anything... I said I meant.

For clarification, here is the breakdown of the new class format:


Class  -  Your class dictates basic background information about your character, especially story fluff. I.E. Fighters are military trained specialists with weapons and armor, Wizards are the foremost specialists with magic who gain they're power through long research and stufy, and Clerics are priestly types who gain Divine magic/power by way of being the subject of secret investiture rituals. (Just a few examples.)

Type / Sub-Class  -  Your Type (the word WotC uses) or Sub-Class (the word most forum posters use) dicates your class features, powers, hit points, skills, more specialized story fluff, etc.

Build  -  specializations within your Sub-Class... not much to say here, it's pretty self-explanatory.  Examples include the Knight's weapon/shield specializations (Longsword & Shield, Warhammer & Shield, or Quarterstaff), the Mage's Schools of Magic (Illusion, Pyromancy, Evocation, Charm, Necromancy, Nethermancy), and the Warpriest's Domains (Sun, Earth, Death, Storm).

I feel that this is a far superior model when compared to the pre-Essentials class format.

I am interested in what the Warlock (Binder) is implied to mean.  If it is a all new sub-class for the Warlock, I wonder what it will entail.  Will it be similar to the Hexblade, but maybe not melee-focused?  Perhaps it will be a leader version of the Warlock (since we haven't had two sub-classes that have been of the same role yet, it is possible, could also be a controller).  I suppose another option could be that they named the pre-Essentials Warlock the Warlock (Binder) much in the same way that they named the pre-Essentials Fighter the Fighter (Weaponmaster).  If it is just a new name for the old Warlock, I would be quite happy.  Heck, if they had the Gloom Pact for both oWarlocks and Hexblades, that would be pretty frickin' sweet.

CORE MORE, NOT CORE BORE!
I'm really looking forward to this book but just about the only thing they could do to really annoy and make me decide not to buy it would be to make the Gloom Pact Essentials/Hexblade exclusive.  I would be stunned if they have become so blinkered that they don't want to mix in anything for the older builds.  Wizards sneak in with shadow magic because they can still use nethermancy and necromancy style powers.  My shadow mage (Warlock/Ossassin hybrid) will feel really screwed if I can't get any warlock attack shadow powers.
"(i.e. the new class build format)"

Fixed that for you.

My belief is that Wizards realized that the Essentials Kit Builds are not an exclusive design paragon for future products, though I suspect that was the plan at the beginning. If this product was to only have Kit Builds (As was suspected at the beginning) then it would collect dust on the retail shelves.

Right now, it is still disappointing that it has the mixed power sourced builds but the new class (Vampire!) and other things does give this book a chance for sales, at least in my eyes.



No need to fix anything... I said I meant.

For clarification, here is the breakdown of the new class format:


Class  -  Your class dictates basic background information about your character, especially story fluff. I.E. Fighters are military trained specialists with weapons and armor, Wizards are the foremost specialists with magic who gain they're power through long research and stufy, and Clerics are priestly types who gain Divine magic/power by way of being the subject of secret investiture rituals. (Just a few examples.)

Type / Sub-Class  -  Your Type (the word WotC uses) or Sub-Class (the word most forum posters use) dicates your class features, powers, hit points, skills, more specialized story fluff, etc.

Build  -  specializations within your Sub-Class... not much to say here, it's pretty self-explanatory.  Examples include the Knight's weapon/shield specializations (Longsword & Shield, Warhammer & Shield, or Quarterstaff), the Mage's Schools of Magic (Illusion, Pyromancy, Evocation, Charm, Necromancy, Nethermancy), and the Warpriest's Domains (Sun, Earth, Death, Storm).

I feel that this is a far superior model when compared to the pre-Essentials class format.



Why is that?

"I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody." --Bill Cosby (1937- ) Vanador: OK. You ripped a gateway to Hell, killed half the town, and raised the dead as feral zombies. We're going to kill you. But it can go two ways. We want you to run as fast as you possibly can toward the south of the town to draw the Zombies to you, and right before they catch you, I'll put an arrow through your head to end it instantly. If you don't agree to do this, we'll tie you this building and let the Zombies rip you apart slowly. Dimitry: God I love being Neutral. 4th edition is dead, long live 4th edition. Salla: opinionated, but commonly right.
fun quotes
58419928 wrote:
You have to do the work first, and show you can do the work, before someone is going to pay you for it.
69216168 wrote:
If you can't understand how someone yelling at another person would make them fight harder and longer, then you need to look at the forums a bit closer.
quote author=56832398 post=519321747]Considering DnD is a game wouldn't all styles be gamist?[/quote]
I'm really looking forward to this book but just about the only thing they could do to really annoy and make me decide not to buy it would be to make the Gloom Pact Essentials/Hexblade exclusive.  I would be stunned if they have become so blinkered that they don't want to mix in anything for the older builds.  Wizards sneak in with shadow magic because they can still use nethermancy and necromancy style powers.  My shadow mage (Warlock/Ossassin hybrid) will feel really screwed if I can't get any warlock attack shadow powers.



Looks like the Binder is a Pre-Ess Warlock

community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...


I am guessing they made some alterations to the original class. Looks like Prime Shot was altered.

Maybe Curse damage is now a set amount like the Hexblade is.

Looks like the Binder is a Pre-Ess Warlock

community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...


I am guessing they made some alterations to the original class. Looks like Prime Shot was altered.

Maybe Curse damage is now a set amount like the Hexblade is.




You're misreading that post: the speculation there is that it is not a Pre-E style "build" but a separate Essentials-style "Sub-Class" of the warlock; just like the Slayer and Knight are both Essentials Sub-Classes of the Fighter, Binders and Hexblades are both Essentials Sub-Classes of the Warlock.
Hopefully it will get confirmed in this weeks new "In The Works".

Oddly no one has mentioned any other class features that were on the character sheet except different "Prime Shot" & Shadow Walk. I also don't know why no one has any photos of it. Was the Binder character sheet on paper or on the Virutal Table?
It looks promising, although is there any way that it could be made incompatible with two-fold pact - they replaced sneak attack with backstab for the thief to avoid any synergy.  I'm not sure that I'd trade up the temp hp from my infernal pact for the boon of the gloom pact even if it is possible (I'm a hybrid) and I like my Edritch Strike.  A multi-target at will could suggest a controller warlock?  If so would the controller riders be attached to the powers or contained in the powers themselves.

Sheesh, it really shouldn't be necessary to have a subclass of warlock to make the class work.  This would only lead to narrow feats usable only by this subclass.  I'm less worried but it's still possible that I won't be able to use the book for my character at all.  Let's hope they haven't snatched failure from the jaws of success.
The gloomlock/binder is starting to look more and more like a new e-style subclass for the warlock, not a hexblade but neither an AEDU lock, as, from rumors, it has neither the prelock's curse nor the hexlock's blade.  Which likely means it won't be compatible with two-fold pact, or much of anything else designed for the original lock, or the hexlock for that matter.


I still want the following:

Demon Pact
"Dark Powers of the Shadowfell" Pact  -  I imagine this is what the Gloom Pact will be
Dragon Pact


plus more than that, but that's all I can think of off the top of my head at the moment



Why a Demon Pact?  We have Infernal Pact.  You want someone who made a pact with fiends?  There you go.
2nd one - Ummmm...Dark Pact, nuff said.
Dragon Pact - Not really sure what you're really looking for here, as dragons aren't exactly the kinds of creatures to have power they can "bestow" upon other creatures.
The gloomlock/binder is starting to look more and more like a new e-style subclass for the warlock, not a hexblade but neither an AEDU lock, as, from rumors, it has neither the prelock's curse nor the hexlock's blade.  Which likely means it won't be compatible with two-fold pact, or much of anything else designed for the original lock, or the hexlock for that matter.



Where are you getting the information that it won't be AEDU?
CORE MORE, NOT CORE BORE!
they replaced sneak attack with backstab for the thief to avoid any synergy.


No, they didn't. Backstab is the thief's 'generic encounter attack power'. He has exactly the same Sneak Attack class feature as the regular rogue.

"My flying carpet is full of elves."

Ooh - sorry, my bad.  If the binder pact has a pact boon but no curse then it should still qualify for two-fold pact.  The only way to avoid that would be to title the class feature as somethng else other than 'Eldritch Pact' which would be a bit of a kick in the teeth for the non-Essentials builds as it would be a sign that they were moving away from compatability with any future pacts.  I'd be surprised if they went that far though (although they do keep surprising me and not often in a good way).  Wizards can take powers designed for mages because they are still wizard powers and hexblades can still choose certain warlock powers.  Maybe this wont be so bad.

Hmm - the hexblade has a pact boon but where does it say that they have to choose a pact as a class feature?  Eldtritch Pact is not listed as a class feature for them on the compendium.  Multiclass warlocks also fall foul of this as they are instructed to choose a pact but do not gain the class feature.  The pact boons are not stated as having the requirement that you choose the particular pact; each one is listed as separate class power/feature.  So it looks extremely likely that the new warlock class build will list the gloom pact as a separate class feature rather than a sub-category of Eldritch Pact.

I've enjoyed playing 4E and I haven't found the Essentials stuff to be totally offensive but they are rapidly starting to lose my respect as they flog Essentials to the exclusion of the older builds.  I waited over a year for the article on staff-wielding and it was largely useless to non-Essentials builds - no expertise multiclass like with bolas and whip, no feats for tempest or rangers to make it a meaty choice for players into that theme etc. 

I suspect I will rapidly be houseruling the gloom pact as an Eldritch Pact that if it proves not to be the case. 

Why a Demon Pact?  We have Infernal Pact.  You want someone who made a pact with fiends?  There you go.
2nd one - Ummmm...Dark Pact, nuff said.
Dragon Pact - Not really sure what you're really looking for here, as dragons aren't exactly the kinds of creatures to have power they can "bestow" upon other creatures.



I've said it before, but I'll say it again... in D&D demons and devils are rather different critters and the fluff and mechanics for an Abyssal Pact Warlock could be quite different from that of the Infernal Pact Warlock.

As for the Dragon Pact...  There are multiple instances in 2nd & 3rd edition of people having power bestowed upon them by draconic patrons.  I'm quite tired though and all I can think of off the top of my head are the pact-style magic-users of the "Council of Wyrms" setting.


As for the Binder... I kind of hope that it is a Controller Warlock, but someone else has mentioned them possibly being a Leader, and I think that that could be pretty cool as well.
Where are you getting the information that it won't be AEDU?



Sorry, my mistake, I mean it's looking like it won't be a 'PHB' warlock build, it probably will be AEDU, at least insofar as having at will, encounter, daily, and utility powers.  That said, as a warlock it likely won't get to choose its at will powers, and if it turns out to be a e-style subclass it will likely get the same encounter power multiple times rather then a choice of powers as it levels, and may not get any choice in some of its daily and utility powers, either.
For clarification, here is the breakdown of the new class format:

Class  -  Your class dictates basic background information about your character, especially story fluff. I.E. Fighters are military trained specialists with weapons and armor, Wizards are the foremost specialists with magic who gain they're power through long research and stufy, and Clerics are priestly types who gain Divine magic/power by way of being the subject of secret investiture rituals. (Just a few examples.)

Type / Sub-Class  -  Your Type (the word WotC uses) or Sub-Class (the word most forum posters use) dicates your class features, powers, hit points, skills, more specialized story fluff, etc.

Build  -  specializations within your Sub-Class... not much to say here, it's pretty self-explanatory.  Examples include the Knight's weapon/shield specializations (Longsword & Shield, Warhammer & Shield, or Quarterstaff), the Mage's Schools of Magic (Illusion, Pyromancy, Evocation, Charm, Necromancy, Nethermancy), and the Warpriest's Domains (Sun, Earth, Death, Storm).

I feel that this is a far superior model when compared to the pre-Essentials class format.



Interesting take on the e-design.

So along these lines, they reorganized the oCleric 'class' into the eWarpriest 'type', thus leaving more design space for other kinds of Cleric types. For example, in addition to the Warpriest gish (warrior-mage) type, there can be a separate 'Thaumaturge' mage type, along the lines of the original light-armor Laser Cleric.

And so on for the 'classes'.

I want to be able to build a character that uses options from both types, for example the Warpriest and the hypothetical Thaumaturge. Presumably I will be able to by means of some kind of 'hybrid' mechanic. If so, I can appreciate this design structure.
For clarification, here is the breakdown of the new class format:

Class  -  Your class dictates basic background information about your character, especially story fluff. I.E. Fighters are military trained specialists with weapons and armor, Wizards are the foremost specialists with magic who gain they're power through long research and stufy, and Clerics are priestly types who gain Divine magic/power by way of being the subject of secret investiture rituals. (Just a few examples.)

Type / Sub-Class  -  Your Type (the word WotC uses) or Sub-Class (the word most forum posters use) dicates your class features, powers, hit points, skills, more specialized story fluff, etc.

Build  -  specializations within your Sub-Class... not much to say here, it's pretty self-explanatory.  Examples include the Knight's weapon/shield specializations (Longsword & Shield, Warhammer & Shield, or Quarterstaff), the Mage's Schools of Magic (Illusion, Pyromancy, Evocation, Charm, Necromancy, Nethermancy), and the Warpriest's Domains (Sun, Earth, Death, Storm).

I feel that this is a far superior model when compared to the pre-Essentials class format.



Interesting take on the e-design.

So along these lines, they reorganized the oCleric 'class' into the eWarpriest 'type', thus leaving more design space for other kinds of Cleric types. For example, in addition to the Warpriest gish (warrior-mage) type, there can be a separate 'Thaumaturge' mage type, along the lines of the original light-armor Laser Cleric.

And so on for the 'classes'.

I want to be able to build a character that uses options from both types, for example the Warpriest and the hypothetical Thaumaturge. Presumably I will be able to by means of some kind of 'hybrid' mechanic. If so, I can appreciate this design structure.



It also means that classes like the Avenger (whose story fluff basically describes as Clerics who are meant to hunt people down rather than be a leader of men) can now be re-done as a "sub-class of Cleric.

Here's the breakdown, as I see it, of pre-Essentials classes that could be revised and reorganized:

Warlord = Fighter / Martial / Leader  (and hopefully with a better name)
Avenger = Cleric/ Divine / Striker
Invoker = Wizard / Divine / Controller
Psion = Wizard / Psionic / Controller
Seeker = Ranger / Martial & Primal / Controller  (has already been revised into the Hunter)
Swordmage = options for the Fighter and Wizard classes and/or a Fighter/Wizard sub-class
Battlemind/Ardent = options for the Fighter classes involving a mechanic in which power points are used to augment basic attacks
Warden = Druid / Primal / Defender... plus some multi-class stule options for the Knight
Artificer = Wizard / Arcane / 1 Leader type and 1 Controller type
Bard = Wizard / Arcane / 1 Leader type and 1 Controller type
Runepriest = Wizard / Divine / Leader
Shaman = Druid / Primal / Leader  (has already been revised into the Sentinel)  [I do think that they messed with the fluff more than was really neccessary.]
Barbarian (Rageblood) = Druid / Primal / Striker
Barbarian (Thaneborn) = Druid / Primal / Leader
Monk = martial artist style fighter with some Psionic options  or  psionic melee wizard
Sorcerer = kept as its own class but now with seperate Bloodlines (similar to the Hexblade's Pacts)

Here's the breakdown, as I see it, of pre-Essentials classes that could be revised and reorganized:

Warlord = Fighter / Martial / Leader  (and hopefully with a better name) I am torn. I think it makes sense, but I think it would cause compatibility problems if implemented.
Avenger = Cleric/ Divine / Striker
Invoker = Wizard / Divine / Controller No. Just no. The invoker should be a cleric/divine/controller.
Psion = Wizard / Psionic / Controller No, just no. The point of these new classifications is to create builds that fit better with the game's legacy of organization. The psion has always been a different class than the wizard. I think it should stay that way.
Seeker = Ranger / Martial & Primal / Controller  (has already been revised into the Hunter)
Swordmage = options for the Fighter and Wizard classes and/or a Fighter/Wizard sub-class
Battlemind/Ardent = options for the Fighter classes involving a mechanic in which power points are used to augment basic attacks They make more sense as builds of the psion.
Warden = Druid / Primal / Defender... plus some multi-class stule options for the Knight
Artificer = Wizard / Arcane / 1 Leader type and 1 Controller type
Bard = Wizard / Arcane / 1 Leader type and 1 Controller type No, just no, for the exact same reason as I said no to the psion idea.
Runepriest = Wizard / Divine / Leader It makes more sense as a type of cleric.
Shaman = Druid / Primal / Leader  (has already been revised into the Sentinel)  [I do think that they messed with the fluff more than was really neccessary.]
Barbarian (Rageblood) = Druid / Primal / Striker I don't like it. The barbarian has historically been its own class, and been more martial than primal. I would prefer a new class, called barbarian, which is in some ways a strength based version of something like the scout. In other words, a martial/primal style character with martial at-will and encounter attacks and primal rages.
Barbarian (Thaneborn) = Druid / Primal / Leader Same as above.
Monk = martial artist style fighter with some Psionic options  or  psionic melee wizard The monk has historically been its own class, and so I would like to keep it this way.
Sorcerer = kept as its own class but now with seperate Bloodlines (similar to the Hexblade's Pacts)



Overall I agree with your concept. But, I really don't like some of your classifications. I put my notes on your thoughts above.