|
3 months ago ::
Mar 08, 2013 - 4:40AM
#31
|
|
|
Okay, here's what I see for a 5E avenger: Take a paladin and....
- Swap out Heavy Armor for a bonus in light armor.
- Swap out Smite Evil for an effect that gives Advantage on attacks on the single enemy (Oath)
- Five levels of divine spellcasting, like the Duskblade had in 3.5. Spell list similar to the assassin's. Hammer of Good/Law/Chaos, Invisability, Darkness, Daylight, Lance of Faith, etc.
- Swap out the paladin's holy steed for the limited ability to pass through solid walls.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 08, 2013 - 5:08AM
#32
|
Date Joined:
Jun 21, 2012
|
It's a weird situation where classes are sometimes defined by theme, sometimes by mechanic. The avenger mechanics i'm reading in 4e are intriguing. We should create a place for the fun mechanics, even if they're not part of the backbone of a class somewhere. I could totally see a unique fighting style represented that many classes could take advantage of. As an aside, I've sort of begun to separate thematic from mechanical options by saying class = theme and feats = mechanic... but I realise that it doesn't really work that way. It might be nice if it did.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 08, 2013 - 5:17AM
#33
|
Date Joined:
Mar 28, 2008
|
"How do you think they will replicate the Avenger in 5E?"
I don't.
since it is Badwrong4efun I agree with you
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 08, 2013 - 5:23AM
#34
|
|
|
How do you think they will replicate the Avenger in 5th Edition?
I'm sorry, but I really hope that they don't bring the Avenger into 5th Edition.
The Avenger is the class that ruined 4E for me. Its ability to easily achieve a better armour class than Defender-type classes that made use of heavy armour (later errata fixing that notwithstanding) was a deal-breaker.
If we have to put up with something like that being back in the game, then I'd prefer that they just roll a few of its features into an already-existing class.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 08, 2013 - 5:31AM
#35
|
|
|
So taking anything from 4E and reducing it to something less is offensive.
What you want is not possible.
This is a new edition, and it works differently from any previous one.
It appears you want the Warlord to be mechanically the same as in 4e, all options and systems included, but of course it will be quite different, even if they make it into a base class. The nature of the core rules in 5e alone make that level of fidelity impossible.
You may feel that classes from earlier editions are being more "respected" but that is just an impression because class structure in 5e looks somewhat more like 1e to 3e class structure than 4e.
But if you dissect the other classes you'll see that they too are getting "less" than in their 1e to 3e versions, but on the other hand they might be getting a few new ideas, and some rules with which 5e operates are just too different to make a straight up comparison with an earlier version of the class.
Developers did say they would try to visit all classes of D&D from previous editions, but that doesn't mean they'll all be exactly the same in mechanics and/or concept.
It just means they'll try to throw in all those styles of play from previous editions in the new one.
Whether that style of play is translated into a separate class, or a variant of another class, or even diluted into other character options like skills and feats is another matter.
But as long as the game allows you to play with that playstyle and concept you like, I don't see why it really matters if you achieve that by calling it a class of something else.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 08, 2013 - 5:56AM
#36
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2006
|
Maybe the next avenger is a remake of 3.5. ed Crusader, a fighter with some divine spells and "ki maneuvers" (like techniques from "Tome of Battle: Book of nine Swords), with a style more offensive and agresive that paladin.
"Say me what you're showing off for, and I'll say you what you lack!" (Spanish saying)
Book 13 Anaclet 23
Confucius said: "The Superior Man is in harmony but does not follow the crowd. The inferior man follows the crowd, but is not in harmony"
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 08, 2013 - 6:02AM
#37
|
Date Joined:
Aug 18, 2007
|
My two favorite classes in 4e were Avenger and Warlord. I thought the PHB I classes were lame except for the Warlord, and the Avenger was a great paladin.
I think Warlord should be its own class, but I am not opposed to the concept being accomplished through other means.
The Avenger I think would be best as a specialized Paladin. I always saw the avenger as a roguish paladin.
I have had a character that was multiclassed rogue and paladin in 3rd edition, so it might be a mix of those two classes.
CAMRA preserves and protects real ale from the homogenization of modern beer production.
D&D Grognards are the CAMRA of D&D!
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 08, 2013 - 6:04AM
#38
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
Lawful Nasty Paladin with offensive/strikerish maneuver and blessings and boons selected .. plus Armor of Faith.
Done ...
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 08, 2013 - 6:17AM
#39
|
|
|
1st point: When I read the name avenger I am imagining the increible Hulk beating up Loki.
I suggest other name, the crusader. I know it was a class from Tome of Battle: book of nine swords but the concept, the archetype is better for a divine fighter with a style more offensive that paladin.
2 nd point: I imagine the 4th ed avenger like a mixture of Solomon Kane (classic character), Demon Hunter from Diablo III, Inquisitor from Pathfinder rpg, the witch-hunter from warhammer fantasy the with-hunter the prestige class from Oriental Adventures and the sith from Demon Hunter sourcebook from (old) Wold of Darkness rpg.
pictures
Show
Solomon Kane, picture from homonymous film.
Demon Hunter from Diablo III.
Trevor Belmont, vampire killer from Castlevania videogame saga.
Witch hunter, from warhammer online.
Hans and Gretel, witch hunters.
I have showed these pictures to explain better the way I imagine the D&D avenger, like a mixture of crusader+inquisitor+witch hunter+vampire hunter.
I had thought about a alternative name, the secutor (from Latin, =follower and pursuer, it was a type of gladiator), because it´s a little word game, similar to Spanish words "seguidor" (=follower), "perseguidor" (=pursuer) and ejecutor (=executioner).
How did you get all that and forget Kent Allard aka Lamont Cranston aka The Shadow (The Phantom works to) perhaps the pulps greatest inspiration for the archtype.
Some D&D minutae, the Avenger was Chaos' answer to Law's Paladin back in BECMI and the inspiration for the Anti-Paladin in Best of Dragon Vol. 2 (sorry, don't know the Dragon Issue).
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 08, 2013 - 6:26AM
#40
|
Date Joined:
Aug 25, 2007
|
well lets start looking outside mecanics, what is a avenger?.
A avenger is a agent of a god who actively seeks out treats and enemies of his god and his folowers and eliminates them.
compared to the paladin.
A paladin is a agent of a god who has taken on the duty to protect the folowes of his god from treats both physical and treats to their fate.
so in the concept a avenger is more proactive then the paladin not waiting form evil to expose itselve but activly hunting it.
|
|
|
