Okay so Dave managed to prove me wrong when I said it felt like a lot of people were getting tired of April Fool’s on the internet. The most people voted that some of the pranks are fun, but some are getting tired, while almost as many people said that they love how creative some people are getting with the holiday. I suppose the rest of us will just have to be happy that it’s only a one day / once-a-year event, but really after I thought about it I feel the actual purpose of the holiday involves pissing some people off, so good that everything is still in the ‘spirit’!
We’re getting through the mid part of April now, and the release date of D&D 4th Edition is getting so close we can almost taste it! I only recently remembered that back in January I had asked everyone which classes they’d most like to see stick around for the new Edition. Happily, the Bard and Monk came out on top of that poll, however we are going to be left waiting for further supplements in order to play any of those classes. Thankfully we aren’t exactly stuck with any bad choices, which gracefully leads me to our next question:
[poll id=”74″]
Short descriptions of each class after the jump.
Cleric: Now placed in the role of “Leader”, the cleric specializes in divine magic such as healing and turning undead, is proficient in the use of select martial weapons, and serves to buff the other party members. Feeling: Helpy Helper
Fighter: The fighter has be placed into the “Defender” role, is proficient with almost all armor and weapons, and specializes in inhibiting enemy movement and generally being the main target for baddies to attack. Feeling: Most Durable
Paladin: Joining the Fighter in the role of “Defender”, the Paladin is less with the smashy and more with the holy, but still quite a bit with the smashy. What the Fighter does with Martial abilities the Paladin does with faith, and probably leans a bit towards the Leader roll so might be consider one of the first dual-role classes. Feeling: Helpy Smashy
Ranger: The Ranger just in general kicks ass in the “Striker” role, dealing out large quantities of damage to a single target. Generally they specialize in use of the bow. Feeling: Brings the Pain
Rogue: The Rogue is the yin to the Ranger’s Yang, also acting as a “Striker” but more with the subtlety and trickery. They don’t fly like ninjas do, but they stab just the same (sometimes). Feeling: Hidden Pain
Warlock: Yet another in the “Striker” role, the Warlock accomplishes this in yet another way through the use of Magic. Very different from the Wizard, Warlocks use curses, hexes, and spells which involve lots of spiders, darkness, blood, etc. Dabbles a bit into the “Controller” role, so is similar to the Paladin in the dual-role area. Feeling: Ew, OW!
Warlord: Here’s the guy who loves to be a “Leader”, the warlord specializes in a wide range of martial abilities, weapons, and armor. His abilities often provide benefit to party members or help to unite the party’s actions in concert as an efficient team. Feeling: Feather Me Yon Oaf?
Wizard: Here is our lone “Controller” class, but can anyone really complain about the return of the Wizard to an essential class in the game? The Wizard uses magics (and lots of ’em) to deal out damage and effects on a large scale to multiple enemies. Feeling: Like Gandalf if he never met Bilbo
I think Warlord is my favorite (from flavor) because it offers a class and role that has been absent in previous D&D iterations. My play group always struggled to realistically have the “warrior-king” character supported by the rules…
Ditto on the Warlord for me. From everything that I’ve read and played in 4th Edition it looks like the Warlord is going to be super fun to play as and with!
I was concerned that the new base classes (warlock / warlord) would get more votes than others just because they’re new to the PHB, but I think the fact that there are character sheets out there already for most of the others will help people get a feel for how they might play better.
I got my ass kicked when I played one, but Ranger was my favorite to play at D&D XP. “Split the Tree” just rocks hard, and I’m glad to finally see the archer type supported fully by base rules.
I won’t vote here… I’m probably not going to play 4e…
I’m going to DM it… (scared you didn’t I?)
and in that sense… I’m looking forward to making Encounters using the monster’s roles and the sliding rule-like apporach to stat blocks.
That being said, if I have to play a classed NPC my bet would go for the Warlord with a bunch of minions to buff.
This vote is kinda quack since 4th edition hasn’t been officially released yet…
It’s definitely coming out, and these are the classes that are in the PHB (98% safe bet, at least) Don’t worry though, we won’t hold you to your speculative votes! 😀
Ooh. The ranger does sound rather good these days. I still have a bad taste left in my mouth from the 3.0 Ranger that was only half washed out with 3.5.
I’m highly anticipating the Warlord class, which seems to me to finally give a name to most of the characters I’ve played…combat-focused leader-types, that is…
I voted for the wizard because I feel it’s the class that is getting the most useful overhaul. The the step away from ‘vancian’ magic is huge for all the spellcasters but biggest for the wiz. In earlier editions he’d fire off the few memorized spells that pertained to the encounter and then spent the rest of the fight staying out of trouble (or having to have the other PCs come rescue him). The Sorcerer was only a hair better by not having to memorize his spells. Now, though, having an at will magic missle means that the wizard will a viable participant in every fight, as well as not having to worry about taking up spell slots to memorize something that may never come into play.
Over all though (as I continue to ramble) I think the changes to all the classes are going to be a major improvement. I played a Ranger at ICON in one of the groups that Mike Mearls ran, and it was awesome. I totally agree with Darvin about the 3.0 ranger disaster. At the surface it sounded cool, but when trying to play them it was just sad.
Lastly, I will miss the Monk and the Druid, but with the way they are changing things, I think it will be worth the wait for these classes. Bill Slavescik said that we will be very happy with the Sorcerer when that comes out, but frankly, with the changes to the wizard the role of the 3.x sorc has already been filled. In my opinion anyway.
Oh.. and I liked the feelings of the class descriptions (smashy, helpy, etc.) good job.
Thanks Rauthik! In the Races and Classes book they had a short preview of the pre-schematic for the Sorcerer which was based around the concept that he becomes one with his magic, or that it flows through him and leaves a bit of the magic behind in the caster. IE – when he casts fireball he might catch on fire that does damage to attackers, or when casting a cold spell he might be surrounded by ice that slows down attackers. I thought it was a really fun concept for D&D and I hope it comes through intact with the final version.
I’m beginning to think more and more that the Wizard will start to shine again once 4th Edition is released.
Darvin: The 4.0 Ranger is definitely a ton of fun to play, and as Dave said, even just the one power “Split the Tree” made it a blast.
This might sound strange, but I get the feeling that most people here think the sorcerer in 3.x was better than the wizard. In my group we generally felt the exact opposite – the wizard was way better than the sorcerer. Perhaps we are the exception.
Sultan: The Wizards quicker access to higher level spells and variety was crucial because most of our games involved only one SUPER HARD combat an adventure. Multiple combats happened, but most of the time the spell casters kept a few ace’s up their sleeve for the overpowered fight that threatened the weekly TPK. So, the sorcerers ability to cast a jillion fireballs was less important than having that special sauce for the ‘boss.’
My impression after playing with a bunch of different groups in 3.5 is:
-Wizards are more powerful if you know what to do with them.
-Sorcerers are more fun and SEEM more powerful on the surface.
3.5 Wizards indeed can be powerful even at lower levels. You have a free “Scribe Scroll” Feat that allows you to theoretically cast as many spells as a Sorcerer per day, albeit at the cost of time/money. And the Wizard can pick up so many spells that with the right preparation, he can be ready for any situation.
The 3.5 Sorcerer was still good as primary blaster of the party and allowed a party Wizard (In a group with both) the chance to specialize more.
It’s the classic Superman/Batman debate.
In a fight that neither expects, Superman (Sorcerer) will usually defeat Batman (Wizard).
But given time to prepare and plan, Batman (Wizard) is more flexible, and will devise a way to take down Superman (Sorcerer).
But it’s so much easier to be Superman and not have to worry about preparation and planning and trap-laying, sometimes.
@ Main Event: I had considered this as one of the main reasons why wizards seemed better in our group. But wizards also seemed better out of combat because they had the flexibility to learn (and memorize) utility spells that sorcerers often didn’t have the luxury to take.
@ The Game: I agree with this sentiment that wizards are better if used properly but sorcerers are more ‘fun’ in that they don’t require planning / min-maxing to be good. Players that like to plan and min-max enjoy wizards while those that just want to blast stuff like sorcerers. That is my impression anyway.
WEEEEE! SORCERERS!
The warlord definately interests me. THough it may be a while till I play an actual 4th edition game (my group and I all decided to stick with 3.5 for now) the warlord sounds interesting, and similar to how I play most of my fighters
I voted for the Warlord as well. As an GM for Iron Heroes, the Hunter is one of the most interesting classes, and had to be Mearls first attempt at what he had in mind for the Warlord.
With the new 4e combat, with all the options for special moves and abilities, battlefield placement of allies and enemies will be critical, and the Warlord is going to be a class that is going to help other characters look even cooler by setting up all sorts of big moves for his companions.
slightly off topic, but I noticed this on Maxminis:
http://www.maxminis.com/Forums/tabid/104/forumid/81/postid/785675/view/topic/Default.aspx
it’s a 20 point protest letter against 4th edition and worth reading. Now, before people freak out, just read it. It’s funny and while I’m all for 4e I did agree with a point here and there. But then, maybe that was just a little nostalgia sneaking in (as I realized this week that I am officially old now. It wasn’t the bday, it’s the fact that I listen to talk radio news/politics on my way to work in the morning… and actually kind of miss it on the weekends… not good).