Weaponsmaster? Templar?

14 posts / 0 new
Last post
Remember when Fighters used to be Fighters and Clerics used to be Clerics?  Is there a REASON why they're renaming the base classes?  The essentials builds are annoying to me to begin with, but now it's slowly becoming more and more difficult to find my base classes anymore because they're renaming them in a format that matches the essentials without any way to identify which is which.

Would someone just PLEASE tell me their reasoning behind this?
Custom Races
Kt'Lahn (Last Update: Oct 22, 2010)
Noble tiger people who will do almost anything to maintain honor.

Custom Classes
Soulforged (Last Update: Jul 23, 2010)
Incarnum Defender

PEACH if you would.

I am Red/White
I am Red/White
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.


Direction and decisions via dartboard matrix and a Battleship/Twister variant that I hear was pretty big in the Ukraine back in the 90s, and the drawing of a random corporate directive from the Hat of Daft Meddling.

Draw from the hat
Directive from the Hat of Daft Meddling : "Mr Potato Head Relevant To The Mountain Dew Generation. Also Ninjas"
Spin the Spinner, fling dart at chart.
Left foot, blue, Darts lands on B-14 cross reference result on matrix indicates "Take a pull from the communal bottle of Old Granddads & Needlessly Rework a Class, and Draw Another Directive From the Hat". Second pull from hat reads: "My Grandkid Saw Apocalypto And Thought It Was Pretty Cool So Make Something Out Of That. -Additonal: Find Out What An Apocolypto is"

Result: a "Re-imagining" of the Theif class, called the Tubermancer, who specializes in disguises and the addition of a new race: a race of sentient vampiric root vegetables. And they're Aztec Ninjas.

This is set to roll out in June, so If you're planning on rolling up a regular PH1 4E Theif using the character builder after that just remember, it'll be listed as "Tubermancer" and all references to Rogue Or Theif will be purged like Stalin's yearbook photos
Get the troika folks back, retool TOEE using the current ruleset, Turn Based Combat, of course. Release in December then follow up with expansions covering Against The Giants, The Scourge of the Slave Lords. maybe DLC for the one shot's like Ghost Tower of Inverness, White Plume Mountain, etc. Using the same engine, could throw the Dragonlance folks a bone or two with faithful adaptations of the first 3 mods of that series. Then when it looks about like the engine's run it's course release an adventure editor/builder expansion sort of like the old Forgotten Realms Unlimited Adventures.
Remember when Fighters used to be Fighters and Clerics used to be Clerics?  Is there a REASON why they're renaming the base classes?  The essentials builds are annoying to me to begin with, but now it's slowly becoming more and more difficult to find my base classes anymore because they're renaming them in a format that matches the essentials without any way to identify which is which.

Would someone just PLEASE tell me their reasoning behind this?

Simple: "Fighter" is now a superclass of which Weaponmaster, Slayer, Knight etc. are sub-classes. Thus they can make Feats and Powers available to Fighters (all current and future fighter sub-classes) or to just Slayers or whatever.
ΦΦΦΦΦ
@tomakaze:  Deliciously random and hilarious.  You, sir, win 10 internets.

@Mr_Rose:  Superclass?  I...I guess that actually makes some kind of sense.  Don't get me wrong - still quite annoying to me, but it still makes sense.  My opinion:  They should find a way to mark the Essentials builds as 'Essentials' or add a little image or SOMETHING for those that are just buying new subscriptions or people like me that couldn't afford their subscription and now can only to find that important things like that changed so dramatically.  Not everyone likes to have to go through section upon section of stuff just to figure out where everything went - some people are just plain lazy.
Custom Races
Kt'Lahn (Last Update: Oct 22, 2010)
Noble tiger people who will do almost anything to maintain honor.

Custom Classes
Soulforged (Last Update: Jul 23, 2010)
Incarnum Defender

PEACH if you would.

I am Red/White
I am Red/White
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.

Honestly what they should do is either label them "Fighter (Weaponmaster)", "Fighter (Slayer)" and "Fighter (Knight)" in the builder (which would have the added benefit of keeping them together in the alphabetical listing) or perhaps the option of "Fighter" which then gives the choice on the first build screen between "Weaponmaster", "Slayer" and "Knight".
What DrNick said, +1.

IMAGE(http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/8.jpg)

Truely, DrNick, your marklar is very wise.

I concur with your assessment.  The only issue I see with the latter suggestion it is that not all the Essentials builds are (we'll stick with Fighter for the example) Defenders - if I remember correctly, the Slayer build is a Striker.  If the class you choose gave you a submenu to select from, they'd have to stop sorting by Role which I wouldn't really mind except some people would more than likely complain.  :/

Either way, I approve of the first suggestion whole heartedly and think it should be implemented.
Custom Races
Kt'Lahn (Last Update: Oct 22, 2010)
Noble tiger people who will do almost anything to maintain honor.

Custom Classes
Soulforged (Last Update: Jul 23, 2010)
Incarnum Defender

PEACH if you would.

I am Red/White
I am Red/White
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.

DrNick has the right of it.  The fact that on the character sheet a fighter's class is "weaponmaster" is lame, but I would (barely) tolerate Fighter (Weaponmaster). 

Fighters and clerics have been around for decades, if your going to squeeze the names out, at least come up with better replacements.

I love D&D more than I could ever love a human child.

Totally agree with the opinions here and to be honest, I'm unfortunately surprised that the vampire class represented in Heroes of Shadow doesn't sparkle in sunlight...
I'm unfortunately surprised that the vampire class represented in Heroes of Shadow doesn't sparkle in sunlight...



Wait what?
I'm unfortunately surprised that the vampire class represented in Heroes of Shadow doesn't sparkle in sunlight...



Of course they do - right before they flare up and burn to a crisp
I'm unfortunately surprised that the vampire class represented in Heroes of Shadow doesn't sparkle in sunlight...



Wait what?



It's a take on "Kids these days..."

The latest travesty to hit the Vampire mythology is the Twilight series of books and movies, wherein, vampires sparkle in sunlight, rather than being weakened or destroyed.

Of course, who knows what his real opinion is. He said that he agreed with the opinions in the thread, but never clarified which ones. Some of the people posting are okay with the change, some would rather that the order be reversed in the CB (i.e.; Fighter (Weaponmaster), Fighter (Knight) and Fighter (Slayer)), and some have said that they should can the subclass names for classes with an Essentials version and let Fighters be Fighters and Clerics be Clerics. (I'm one who holds the middle opinion).

I suppose it could also be a variation of "It's different, now. It sucks!"

I suppose it could also be a variation of "It's different, now. It sucks!"

Sounded to me more like an "It's confusing, now. It sucks!" to me.

Which I agree with. 
-m4ki; one down, one to go

"Retro is not new. Retro-fit is not new." --Seeker95, on why I won't be playing DDN

|| DDN Metrics (0-10) | enthusiasm: 1 | confidence in design: -3 | desire to play: 0 | Sticking with 4e?: Yep. | Better Options: IKRPG Mk II ||
The Five Things D&D Next Absolutely Must Not Do:
1. Imbalanced gameplay. Any and all characters must be able to contribute equally both in combat and out of combat at all levels of play. If the Fighters are linear and the Wizards quadratic, I walk. 2. Hardcore simulationist approach. D&D is a game about heroic fantasy. I'm weak and useless enough in real life; I play RPGs for a change of pace. If the only reason a rule exists is because "that's how it's supposed to be", I walk. I don't want a game that "simulates" real life, I want a game that simulates heroic fantasy. 3. Worshipping at false idols (AKA Sacred Cows). If the only reason a rule exists is "it's always been that way", I walk. Now to be clear, I have no problem with some things not changing; my issue is with retaining bad idea simply for the sake of nostalgia. 4. DM vs. players. If the game encourages "gotcha!" moments or treats the DM and players as enemies, adversaries, or problems to be overcome, I walk. 5. Rules for the sake of rules. The only thing I want rules for is the things I can't do sitting around a table with my friends. If the rules try to step on my ability to roleplay the character I want to roleplay, I walk. Furthermore, the rules serve to facilitate gameplay, not to simulate the world. NOTE: Items in red have been violated.
Chris Perkins' DM Survival Tips:
1. When in doubt, wing it. 2. Keep the story moving. Go with the flow. 3. Sometimes things make the best characters. 4. Always give players lots of things to do. 5. Wherever possible, say ‘yes.’ 6. Cheating is largely unnecessary. 7. Don't be afraid to give the characters a fun new toy. 8. Don't get in the way of a good players exchange. 9. Avoid talking too much. 10. Save some details for later. 11. Be transparent. 12. Don't show all your cards. Words to live by.
Quotes From People Smarter Than Me:
"Essentials zigged, when I wanted to continue zagging..." -Foxface on Essentials "Servicing a diverse fan base with an RPG ruleset - far from being the mandate for 'open design space' and a cavalier attitude towards balance - requires creating a system that /works/, with minimal fuss, for a wide variety of play styles, not just from one group to the next, but at the same table." -Tony_Vargas on design "Mearls' and Cook's stated intent to produce an edition that fans of all previous editions (and Pathfinder) will like more than their current favourite edition is laudable. But it is also, IMO, completely unrealistic. It's like people who pray for world peace: I might share their overall aims, but I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for them to succeed. When they talk in vague terms about what they'd like to do in this new edition, I mostly find myself thinking 'hey, that sounds cool, assuming they can pull it off', but almost every time they've said something specific about actual mechanics, I've found myself wincing and shaking my head in disbelief and/or disgust, either straight away or after thinking about the obvious implications for half a minute." -Duskweaver on D&D Next
I am ok with it.

Sign In to post comments