![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
viktor_haagLike most folks running a fourth edition game, today I leapt on a copy of the PHB2. After a quick look at the classes contained in it, I have a few thoughts.
Some things occur to me:
• The current PC mix is weak on Controllers and Defenders and heavy on Strikers (twice as many Striker options as Controller or Defender options). I find it interesting that both of the holes in the table got used to pile on extra Strikers. Why is this? Because WotC is of the opinion that more players believe that blessed is the Big Damage?
• Why do we need Rangers and Rogues cast as Martial Strikers? I think it might have been more interesting to cast one of these classes as a Martial Controller, and the Ranger with the two-weapon emphasis, and the thematic possibilities of multiple knife flinging, multiple arrow shooting (and poking, viz Orlando), lassoing, makes a compelling case. To me, it makes thematic sense to think of Rogues as the sneaky bastards that serve up hurt to single targets (or at least one target at a time), and the Ranger as the sneaky bastard that you dump into the middle of a crowd of mooks to lay about like a scythe in the grain.
• Why do we need Sorcerers and Warlocks? To me, this seems like an even bigger waste than the Ranger/Rogue overlap. At a glance, it seems completely sensible that the Sorcerer's "Draconic and Wild" power sources should just have been added as additional Pacts for the Warlock, and then pages devoted to an Arcane Defender (Binder? Hexer? Thaumaturge? Rune-master?)
• Avengers seem obviously to be Monks, and I'm a bit dodgy on calling them "Avengers", since it seems to me to firmly limit their thematic breadth. Could we not have called them Adepts instead (shades of Earthdawn)?
• Surely at some point, some group of four players is thinking to play a "Power Source Party", where all the PCs are aligned along a single source of power. You can do that with Divine and Primal sources now, and have all the roles covered, and to some extent there are naturally thought of possibilities here: a group of high-steppe, nomadic Primal-oriented raiders; a ship full of templar stalwarts on their way to prosecute a holy war. But Martial and Arcane sources get left a bit dry on this count: surely a mercenary company could muster up a Sapper or two to act as a Martial Controller? And you can bet that Magery Guild is not going to leave the guarding of their gate to some Paladin, Fighter, or (fates forefend) Warden: they're going to want an Arcane fellow to soak up the damage.
• I like the alignment of classes along lines of "sources of power". It seems to me there's one more obvious power source possible here, and possibly two more not-so-obvious: Psionic, Scientific, and Political. Given the tone of the default background and WotC's leaning on the traditional "adventuring means combat" approach, I suspect that we'll see the first of these power sources appear soon, while the other two may get provided by a clever third-party or not at all.
| Arcane | Divine | Martial | Primal | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Controller | Wizard | Invoker | none | Druid |
| Defender | none | Paladin | Fighter | Warden |
| Leader | Bard | Cleric | Warlord | Shaman |
| Striker | Sorcerer Warlock | Avenger | Ranger Rogue | Barbarian |
Some things occur to me:
• The current PC mix is weak on Controllers and Defenders and heavy on Strikers (twice as many Striker options as Controller or Defender options). I find it interesting that both of the holes in the table got used to pile on extra Strikers. Why is this? Because WotC is of the opinion that more players believe that blessed is the Big Damage?
• Why do we need Rangers and Rogues cast as Martial Strikers? I think it might have been more interesting to cast one of these classes as a Martial Controller, and the Ranger with the two-weapon emphasis, and the thematic possibilities of multiple knife flinging, multiple arrow shooting (and poking, viz Orlando), lassoing, makes a compelling case. To me, it makes thematic sense to think of Rogues as the sneaky bastards that serve up hurt to single targets (or at least one target at a time), and the Ranger as the sneaky bastard that you dump into the middle of a crowd of mooks to lay about like a scythe in the grain.
• Why do we need Sorcerers and Warlocks? To me, this seems like an even bigger waste than the Ranger/Rogue overlap. At a glance, it seems completely sensible that the Sorcerer's "Draconic and Wild" power sources should just have been added as additional Pacts for the Warlock, and then pages devoted to an Arcane Defender (Binder? Hexer? Thaumaturge? Rune-master?)
• Avengers seem obviously to be Monks, and I'm a bit dodgy on calling them "Avengers", since it seems to me to firmly limit their thematic breadth. Could we not have called them Adepts instead (shades of Earthdawn)?
• Surely at some point, some group of four players is thinking to play a "Power Source Party", where all the PCs are aligned along a single source of power. You can do that with Divine and Primal sources now, and have all the roles covered, and to some extent there are naturally thought of possibilities here: a group of high-steppe, nomadic Primal-oriented raiders; a ship full of templar stalwarts on their way to prosecute a holy war. But Martial and Arcane sources get left a bit dry on this count: surely a mercenary company could muster up a Sapper or two to act as a Martial Controller? And you can bet that Magery Guild is not going to leave the guarding of their gate to some Paladin, Fighter, or (fates forefend) Warden: they're going to want an Arcane fellow to soak up the damage.
• I like the alignment of classes along lines of "sources of power". It seems to me there's one more obvious power source possible here, and possibly two more not-so-obvious: Psionic, Scientific, and Political. Given the tone of the default background and WotC's leaning on the traditional "adventuring means combat" approach, I suspect that we'll see the first of these power sources appear soon, while the other two may get provided by a clever third-party or not at all.
