|
6 years ago ::
Aug 20, 2007 - 1:27PM
#31
|
|
|
It sounds to me like the four roles(Tank,Striker,Healer,Controller), are in fact four core classes. And each role will have a multiply talent tree for what are presently called classes.
Tank= Fighter, Paladin
Striker= Rogue,Ranger, Barbarian
Controller= Wizard,Sorcerer
Healer= Cleric, Druid
I think the talent trees would have to be expanded compared to the SW saga talents. The other choice would be each class has a talent tree for each role. Which makes less sense IMO.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Aug 20, 2007 - 1:29PM
#32
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2007
|
If the druid has been subsumed by the cleric than perhaps the cleric will ofer certain talent trees. If you go in one direction chosen at first level, you worship nature dieties and follow the path of the druid. Or you could choose to be specifically a "Priest" and follow the clerical path or others. That would be interesting.
My idea for that was to select your domains at 1st level (two, maybe three). Your domain choices would be limited to the domains possessed by your deity. If you're following a "cause" or "alignment" as it were, those default "causes" should have their own domain lists.
The choice of your domains would determine what talent trees you could select. Like I mentioned above, Plant and Animal (and perhaps one elemental domain) would qualify you for Druidic talent trees, which would take care of things like Wild Shape.
Or the Good domain would open you to pick talent trees that allow channeling positive energy, turn undead, etc. Sun domain, perhaps in conjunction with Good, would open up more advanced powers against undead. Evil domain makes you channel negative energy and allows you to boost or control undead. And so forth.
That will even make sure that not every Priest can deal so well with undead, for example. They could have other abilities like controlling elementals, or even just a little roguish trickery in place of all that.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Aug 20, 2007 - 1:31PM
#33
|
Date Joined:
Apr 17, 2005
|
Probably the class that killed the marshal and took his stuff. Possibly the bard as well.
Hmmm
Before we begin play, another player is giving Rich grief about one of Rich’s character’s abilities that grants the rest of us a blanket +2 to saves; it just ain’t sexy. Rich says something like, “I don’t know, I doubt I’ll use it that much, but who knows, maybe everyone in the party will get entangled.”
Sure enough, not 10 minutes later this fire-crazed flame priest has entangled half the party with fire snakes! Rich throws up his +2 to saves and, voila, at least two of us get free immediately. I guess that power isn’t so corner case after all.
It's possible this might be an ability from the Warlord.
It would be nice if the Bard's "Bardic Knowledge" or "Spellcasting" was kept, but I definitely like the option of having a character who have natural buffs without resorting to Spells or Singing.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Aug 20, 2007 - 1:34PM
#34
|
Date Joined:
Aug 13, 2006
|
THis role stuff is very alike City of Heroes :P
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Aug 20, 2007 - 1:35PM
#35
|
Date Joined:
Aug 16, 2007
|
That is also a good option Darth Cyric. I like that one as well.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Aug 20, 2007 - 1:38PM
#36
|
Date Joined:
Nov 22, 2002
|
Yeah, I've been thinking the same thing.
It's making me a bit wary. City of Heroes already feels too restrictive to me, and that game is designed to be nothing but combat. Are they designing Fourth Edition D&D along similar lines?
Y'know what worries me is that I haven't heard any talk of roleplaying at all. And that's really the most important part of choosing a class (or pretty much anything else in D&D).
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Aug 20, 2007 - 1:49PM
#37
|
Date Joined:
Aug 10, 2009
|
Y'know what worries me is that I haven't heard any talk of roleplaying at all. And that's really the most important part of choosing a class (or pretty much anything else in D&D).
This is where I'll diverge. Your class doesn't necessarily have to have anything to do with your character's personality. Classes are ways to get abilities, your character's personality can influence those, but ultimately they're just set dressing.
Reflavoring class abilities to make, say Sneak Attack, a Divinely inspired confidence to strike true at the enemies of your faith is easy enough. Is Smite Evil channeling power directly from your deity or from your own sense of righteous indignation?
Make a concept, then worry about how to make that concept.
JEPHL
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Aug 20, 2007 - 1:59PM
#38
|
Date Joined:
Apr 17, 2005
|
Y'know what worries me is that I haven't heard any talk of roleplaying at all. And that's really the most important part of choosing a class (or pretty much anything else in D&D).
Umm... since when has D&D rules not been combat focused?
Seriously. Try running a game focused on social stuff. You know, "You are all diplomats" or "You are all spies" and watch the game be just rolling Bluff vs Sense Motive, Gather Info and Diplomacy. :P
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Aug 20, 2007 - 2:02PM
#39
|
|
|
So, did the Monk kill the Swordsage and take his stuff?
More likely the otherway around. IMHO.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Aug 20, 2007 - 2:07PM
#40
|
|
|
Speaking of 'Ranger kills Scout...'
I wonder if we will see an end to the dual-wielding Ranger option. If Ranger is getting Skirmish, it puts the focus firmly on ranged combat. Applying it to melee would horn in on the Rogues action, so I don't see that happening. And, although I have played TWFing Rangers in the past, it never made sense to me why they had the option in the first place.
|
|
|
