4E class changes

Discuss 4th Edition rules, PoL setting concepts, and the GSL here.
The Book-House: Find 4th Edition products, Find D&D Essentials products.

Moderators: Idabrius, Blacky the Blackball

Post Reply
User avatar
BotWizo
Wizard
Posts: 1180
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 4:36 am
Gender: male
Location: Barbarian Lands - Brun (Iowa - USA)

4E class changes

Post by BotWizo » Fri May 20, 2011 6:00 pm

I am unsure why wizards is changing the names of many of the core classes, and some of the cleric nerfs.
It seems weird you would remove the class wizard and rename it arcanist.
Same goes for the cleric, now when looking through character builder it is more confusing, and my books don't match the builder.

I guess I can see it for templating or formating reasons, but strange when now no-one is playing a wizard they are playing an arcanist build or a mage.
Why would you not want to keep the classic names for the "core/base/original" classes

The cleric nerfs, I can see some of them but not others, the two big strange ones are nerfing cleric turn undead, and changing the keyword on healing word to not include divine strange that you would make some of the base functions of the class somewhat less effective.

Here is a table of the classes that have been name changed:
Arcanist | [Wizard] Templar | [Cleric] Weapon Master | [Fighter] Marshal | [Warlord] Scoundrel | [Rogue]


does anyone else have good rationalizations?
Last edited by BotWizo on Fri May 20, 2011 8:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Game over man... Game over! -- Pvt. Hudson

User avatar
Birchbeer
Stone Giant
Posts: 758
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 3:58 pm
Gender: male
Location: Niagara Frontier
Contact:

Re: 4E class changes

Post by Birchbeer » Fri May 20, 2011 6:33 pm

From what I understand, and I may be wrong, but the class name in the PHB is the master class name. For example the Warlock. There are three flavors Hexblade, Binder and (whatever they call the PHB Warlock). All are based upon a similar theme, just different implementations.

I personally think they should have done this at the get go, it makes sense and there is precedence from previous editions. Adding it in later just complicates things.

User avatar
Birchbeer
Stone Giant
Posts: 758
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 3:58 pm
Gender: male
Location: Niagara Frontier
Contact:

Re: 4E class changes

Post by Birchbeer » Fri May 20, 2011 6:34 pm

Back to your example for wizard... you'd be a Wizard:Arcanist or a Wizard:Mage. Both are wizards, just different ways of expressing it.

User avatar
ghendar
Cranky Grognard
Posts: 660
Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 8:11 pm
Gender: male
Location: Acererak's Rumpus Room

Re: 4E class changes

Post by ghendar » Fri May 20, 2011 6:34 pm

BotWizo wrote:does anyone else have good rationalizations?
They want to move 4e even further away from its roots? Honestly, that's about all I got.
Fifth registered member, bitches!

If the Unapproachable East was so unapproachable, how did anyone get there?

User avatar
BotWizo
Wizard
Posts: 1180
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 4:36 am
Gender: male
Location: Barbarian Lands - Brun (Iowa - USA)

Re: 4E class changes

Post by BotWizo » Fri May 20, 2011 6:38 pm

Birchbeer wrote:Back to your example for wizard... you'd be a Wizard:Arcanist or a Wizard:Mage. Both are wizards, just different ways of expressing it.

That's what I was thinking, but it makes it harder to avoid the essentials classes in the builder.

I don't like the essentials classes, so I don't want to build them.

my only other thought is to make 4e appeal to the older edition crowd that hates 4e, so I am not sure name changes will bring them back.

edit---

There were and still are three builds of the wizard [arcanist], now there are three arcanists builds plus the mage build which is an essentials path.
Game over man... Game over! -- Pvt. Hudson

rabindranath72
White Dragon
Posts: 2615
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 1:10 pm
Gender: male

Re: 4E class changes

Post by rabindranath72 » Fri May 20, 2011 8:48 pm

It seems to be that they want to simply avoid confusion with the new Essentials classes, which have become the de-facto standard. Since builds don't exist anymore, it's only natural that they want to avoid confusion.

User avatar
dulsi
Storm Giant
Posts: 1798
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2008 12:20 am
Gender: prefer not to say
Contact:

Re: 4E class changes

Post by dulsi » Sat May 21, 2011 2:03 am

I'd assume they did it because it was confusing that you could be a wizard or a mage and both qualified for wizard paragon paths/epic destinies. It is clearer to have arcanist and mage both be types of wizards. However, that is really something that should have been before the PHB came out. Doing it now just leads to confusion.
Dennis Payne -- Identical Games
Support Roon's Raccoon Sprintladder on Lego Ideas.
ImageImage

rabindranath72
White Dragon
Posts: 2615
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 1:10 pm
Gender: male

Re: 4E class changes

Post by rabindranath72 » Sat May 21, 2011 8:16 am

dulsi wrote:However, that is really something that should have been before the PHB came out. Doing it now just leads to confusion.
This assumes that they had a clear idea of what they were doing. It's quite evident with the development history of 4e that this has never been the case.

User avatar
BotWizo
Wizard
Posts: 1180
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 4:36 am
Gender: male
Location: Barbarian Lands - Brun (Iowa - USA)

Re: 4E class changes

Post by BotWizo » Sun May 22, 2011 3:46 am

rabindranath72 wrote:
dulsi wrote:However, that is really something that should have been before the PHB came out. Doing it now just leads to confusion.
This assumes that they had a clear idea of what they were doing. It's quite evident with the development history of 4e that this has never been the case.

makes you wonder does mike m now want essentials to be the main choices instead of the previous leadership who wanted the ph build styles?

could be a leadership change thing for 4e.
Game over man... Game over! -- Pvt. Hudson

User avatar
Dragonhelm
Aurak
Posts: 1473
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 3:53 am
Gender: male
Contact:

Re: 4E class changes

Post by Dragonhelm » Sun May 22, 2011 5:39 am

I'm embarrassed to say that I didn't even realize the core wizard had been renamed to the arcanist. I can't even find where this took place, yet I see it in Compendium. Got a source on this one?
Trampas Whiteman
---DragonHelm--->

Image

Moderator for: Dragonlance. My moderator voice is Dark Red.

rabindranath72
White Dragon
Posts: 2615
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 1:10 pm
Gender: male

Re: 4E class changes

Post by rabindranath72 » Sun May 22, 2011 9:27 am

BotWizo wrote:
rabindranath72 wrote:
dulsi wrote:However, that is really something that should have been before the PHB came out. Doing it now just leads to confusion.
This assumes that they had a clear idea of what they were doing. It's quite evident with the development history of 4e that this has never been the case.

makes you wonder does mike m now want essentials to be the main choices instead of the previous leadership who wanted the ph build styles?

could be a leadership change thing for 4e.
I think it's pretty clear that things have changed when Mearls took charge. The fact that they are not going to reprint the old PHBs, and the new "treatment" for old stuff is pretty indicative IMO. He has even publicly admitted that making everything core was a Bad Idea.

User avatar
BotWizo
Wizard
Posts: 1180
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 4:36 am
Gender: male
Location: Barbarian Lands - Brun (Iowa - USA)

Re: 4E class changes

Post by BotWizo » Mon May 23, 2011 1:24 pm

Dragonhelm wrote:I'm embarrassed to say that I didn't even realize the core wizard had been renamed to the arcanist. I can't even find where this took place, yet I see it in Compendium. Got a source on this one?

No I was surprised by the arcanist and the scoundrel renames. I think I heard the marshal rename and blew it off, but the two i did see were the weapon master and now the templar.

It may have been the martial power source class renames were all done in the same article.

anyway, all the renames seem kind of wierd.

Many 4e fans/players and non-fans are predicting a change to the ranger class next, the change will be probably a rename and maybe a nerf is the rumor.
Game over man... Game over! -- Pvt. Hudson

User avatar
Dragonhelm
Aurak
Posts: 1473
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 3:53 am
Gender: male
Contact:

Re: 4E class changes

Post by Dragonhelm » Mon May 23, 2011 8:23 pm

I found out that scoundrel and arcanist are forthcoming, but they've mentioned the names in passing.

I don't mind the idea of these subclasses, but I think their presentation is a bit off. The idea being that subclasses give you different flavors of the base class. Fine, well, and good. But I would like to see them refer to the classes as (example) Rogue (scoundrel) and Rogue (thief), not the other way around.
Trampas Whiteman
---DragonHelm--->

Image

Moderator for: Dragonlance. My moderator voice is Dark Red.

User avatar
BotWizo
Wizard
Posts: 1180
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 4:36 am
Gender: male
Location: Barbarian Lands - Brun (Iowa - USA)

Re: 4E class changes

Post by BotWizo » Mon May 23, 2011 8:39 pm

Dragonhelm wrote:I found out that scoundrel and arcanist are forthcoming, but they've mentioned the names in passing.

I don't mind the idea of these subclasses, but I think their presentation is a bit off. The idea being that subclasses give you different flavors of the base class. Fine, well, and good. But I would like to see them refer to the classes as (example) Rogue (scoundrel) and Rogue (thief), not the other way around.

I am like you if I understood you correctly.

I would rather have the base class as fighter, wizard, rogue, etc.

Rather than weapon specialist, arcanist, scoundrel.

Then refering to the scoundrel as having three rogue builds, along with the thief as an essentials rogue build.
seems like unnecessary complication.

just call the base class rogue, and refer to the essential classes by special name.

ah well no big deal.
Game over man... Game over! -- Pvt. Hudson

Post Reply

Return to “D&D 4th Edition”