# Excerpt: Paragon paths (merged)



## jaelis

*Excerpt: Paragon paths*

Excerpt is up: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4ex/20080423a


----------



## breschau

*Scoop: Paragon Paths...*

Here.


----------



## Amy Kou'ai

Thoughts:

Wow, I'm amazed at how compact Paragon Paths are.  I guess we'll be seeing a lot of them.

Huh, you can do multiclass stuff instead of taking a Paragon Path.  Hopefully this doesn't preclude multiclassing before Level 10.

Looks like each path is associated with a path.  I wonder if the Epic Destinies are less specific.


----------



## breschau

I really like the option of a paragon path _or_ multiclassing options. If you go that route, and do the regular multiclassing, then do it again in lieu of an epic destiny, that's some multiclass love.


----------



## Ulthwithian

Lots of crunch in here.   This makes this bear quite happy. 

The most impressive ability I saw was the Battle Marshal's (name?) ability to use an Action point to regain an encounter ability.


----------



## Rechan

Some things I noticed:



> Spear Push 	Str 15, Dex 13 	Add 1 square to distance pushed with spear or polearm



Spears and polearms push! 



> Ranger class, two-blade fighting style



We also get confirmation of "Off hand" weapon. Hmm.

I wonder what "and are capable of making an opportunity attack" means? When you can take one, or that you haven't all ready made one this round?


----------



## jaelis

The ranger stuff seems particularly cool... confirmation of TWF and some pretty swank powers.

Ranger: Stormwarden

“I have accepted the burden of the stormwardens of the Feywild, and this region is under my protection.”

*Prerequisite*: Ranger class, two-blade fighting style

Your role as a warden and defender of the wild takes on new heights as you learn the ancient ways of the stormwardens of the Feywild. These techniques turn your whirling blades into a storm of destruction that rains down punishing blows on your enemies. With each slash of your weapon, the wind howls in anticipation of the coming storm.

*Stormwarden Path Features*

* Blade Storm* (11th level): As long as you are armed with a melee weapon and are capable of making an opportunity attack, one adjacent enemy (your choice) takes damage equal to your Dexterity modifier at the end of your turn.

*Stormstep Action *(11th level): When you spend an action point to take an extra action, you can teleport 3 squares either before or after you use the extra action.

*Twin-Blade Storm* (16th level): As long as you are armed with a melee weapon and are capable of making an opportunity attack, two adjacent enemies (your choice) take lightning damage equal to your Dexterity modifier at the end of your turn.

*Stormwarden Exploits*

*Clearing the Ground *Stormwarden Attack 11
    You sweep your blades in mighty arcs around you, cutting foes that get too close and thrusting them back.

    Encounter Martial,Weapon
    Standard Action Close burst 1
    Requirement: You must be wielding two melee weapons.
    Target: Each enemy in burst you can see
    Attack: Strength vs. AC

    Hit: 1[W] + Strength modifier damage, and you push the target 1 square.

*Throw Caution to the Wind* Stormwarden Utility 12
    Aw, what the hell. You only live once.

    Encounter Martial, Stance
    Minor Action Personal

    Effect: You take a –2 penalty to all defenses and gain a +2 bonus to attack rolls.

*Cold Steel Hurricane *Stormwarden Attack 20
    You rush into the midst of your enemies and, like a freezing wind, flay them alive.

    Daily Martial, Weapon
    Standard Action Close burst 1
    Requirement: You must be wielding two melee weapons.
    Special: Before you attack, shift a number of squares equal to your Wisdom modifier.
    Target: Each enemy in burst you can see
    Attack: Strength vs. AC (main weapon and off-hand weapon), two attacks per target

    Hit: 1[W] + Strength modifier damage per attack.

    Effect: You regain your second wind if you have already used it during this encounter.


----------



## lbporter

I must say the paragon paths are way more awesome than I thought they were going to be. I had little faith in them as I hate prestige classes and only used them to combine a spell casting class with a non-spell casting class (ie. the mystic theurge or the eldrich knight). that said, I am very encouraged by the line "Alternatively if you wish, you can also select powers from a second class in place of a paragon path." I hope this lets me do that old school fighter-mage that never realy panned out in 3.x. Other than that the battle mage looks to RAWK.

Luke


----------



## Rechan

But I like them. 

Also, Star pact mentions. Doesn't look very Far Realms, as some were suspecting. Star Pacts may be related to Fate, perhaps.


----------



## Shroomy

The paragon paths are somewhat truncated, since they left out the powers for all but the stormwarden, but stomwarden exploits = awesome!


----------



## Lackhand

The Math -- in this context, when characters get stuff -- bugs me. It doesn't seem to follow rhyme or reason, though I'm sure that it does; it just seems really bursty.

These look pretty cool to me. It's easy to see how the number presented grew so precipitously.

I like


----------



## Sojorn

Shroomy said:
			
		

> The paragon paths are somewhat truncated, since they left out the powers for all but the stormwarden, but stomwarden exploits = awesome!



Also confirms TWF for rangers.

Explicitly I mean.


----------



## mach1.9pants

Amy Kou'ai said:
			
		

> Thoughts:
> Huh, you can do multiclass stuff instead of taking a Paragon Path.  Hopefully this doesn't preclude multiclassing before Level 10.



I would be willing to bet that you can m-c from level one.  (even if it is only cross-training initially)


> Looks like each path is associated with a path.  I wonder if the Epic Destinies are less specific.



I don't think that is quite right. I assume you mean each class is associatted with a class. However, IIRC from a podcast?, each path is (EDIT: _MAYBE_) open to a couple of classes. But they are only previewing one path relevant to each class. IMO


----------



## jaelis

Rechan said:
			
		

> I wonder what "and are capable of making an opportunity attack" means? When you can take one, or that you haven't all ready made one this round?



Probably means not stunned or the like.  (Everyone can make one oppy attack per enemy per round now, so you don't use them up.)


----------



## Vaeron

The paladin paragon path is amazing...  saving throw rerolls for all allies, allies immune to charm and fear, using an action point weakens all adjacent enemies.  Crazy!


----------



## Fallen Seraph

Rechan said:
			
		

> But I like them.
> 
> Also, Star pact mentions. Doesn't look very Far Realms, as some were suspecting. Star Pacts may be related to Fate, perhaps.




I noticed that too. Makes me very happy


----------



## GoodKingJayIII

Awesome, awesome article.

It's too late to be anything but excited.  I'll take a closer look tomorrow.


----------



## Spenser

Hmmm. So: 

1. Pop Throw Caution to the Wind.
2. Use Clearing the Ground and push the bad guys back into a new formation. 
3. Use your action point. 
4. Shift right in the middle of the bad guys for maximum effect, and let loose with Cold Steel Hurricane.
5a. Pop Stormstep action to teleport back out of the fray. -OR-
5b. Poke them two more times with Twin-Blade Storm.

Hmmm.


----------



## Amy Kou'ai

mach1.9pants said:
			
		

> I don't think that is quite right. I assume you mean each class is associatted with a class.




Hah!



			
				mach1.9pants said:
			
		

> However, IIRC from a podcast?, each path is (EDIT: _MAYBE_) open to a couple of classes. But they are only previewing one path relevant to each class. IMO




Yeah, I thought that paragon paths weren't so class-specific based on what I'd read earlier, but notice that the Prerequisites say things like "Paladin class" and so on.


----------



## HeinorNY

Prerequisite: Ranger class, *two-blade fighting style*

YAY!


----------



## mach1.9pants

...and I am thinking that action points are going to be a very useful resource! Feats that enhance etc AP usage will be popular IMO.


----------



## Almacov

Very nice chunk of information. =)

I'm really interested in seeing what sort of utility powers people will be getting though...
they seem to be holding that info back for a later reveal.


----------



## Amy Kou'ai

Shroomy said:
			
		

> The paragon paths are somewhat truncated, since they left out the powers for all but the stormwarden, but stomwarden exploits = awesome!




The flavor text for "Throw Caution to the Wind" amuses me, I have to say.


----------



## Sojorn

Wait, heavy blade? It's a category now?

This article just keeps getting more and more interesting.


----------



## Thasmodious

Kensei Focus +1 with weapon.  This is an 11th level ability.  A bonus of only +1 is still relevant at 11-20.  This makes me happy.


----------



## Shroomy

For some reason, the Arcane Riposte ability from the Battle Mage has really captured my attention.  I can vividly imagine it now.


----------



## Simplicity

Hmmm...



> Be sure to return Friday for a look at power *cards!*


----------



## BarkingDeathSquirrel

Hrm, I kinda expected it, but I'm not liking that each paragon path (thus far) requires you to be a specific class. Most of the paths seem like they could complement other classes as well... Kensei, for instance, fits just about any class... and Shadow Assassin would be equally useful for a Ranger as a Rogue (with, perhaps, a feat to give sneak attack with different weapons if necessary).


----------



## jaelis

Sojorn said:
			
		

> Wait, heavy blade?



.hack//sign, anyone?


----------



## mach1.9pants

Amy Kou'ai said:
			
		

> Yeah, I thought that paragon paths weren't so class-specific based on what I'd read earlier, but notice that the Prerequisites say things like "Paladin class" and so on.



Yep maybe that is changed. Sad IMO I'd hope to see non-class specific paths to do a similar thing to PrC..ie powers/features specific to a certain order or guild or whatever.
Nothing to stop you (or splat books!) making a classless paragon path.



			
				Amy Kou'ai said:
			
		

> Hah



LOL between the pair of us we got it right


----------



## That One Guy

This update was an easy one for me to love. Paragon Paths are pretty much how I made house-ruled versions of PrCs in a 3.5 game and this is like... like wanting something really badly, but knowing you couldn't get it... and then suddenly Wizards is like, "Yeah, we do want your money... but here's that awesome thing you wanted."

.....Just pretend that made sense, okay?


----------



## bjorn2bwild

hmm... stances are utility powers now... very interesting


----------



## DandD

Hmm, I wonder how Multiclassing will function. Also, I thought that two classes could always share one paragon path. Well, at least, you get additional stuff, it seems. 
But I somehow wonder if you're even more restricted into your class-role. I guess we just need to see more.


----------



## Novem5er

Overall very nice!

However, I'm not sure all the Paragon powers are balanced. Look at this level 11 power for the Battle Mage:

Arcane Riposte (11th level): Imbued with magical might, your hands bristle with arcane energy in the heat of battle. When a creature provokes an opportunity attack from you, make an opportunity attack with one of your hands (Dexterity vs. AC). Choose cold, fire, force, or lightning. You deal 1d8 + Intelligence modifier damage of that type with this attack.

Um... So the mage gets an opportunity attack? A) When is a monster going to try moving PAST the mage to provoke an OA? B) Isn't d8 +(4/5) kind of wussy for a "power"?

Compare that to the Warlords power:

Disciplined Blade (11th level): When you miss with a melee attack when using a heavy blade, you gain a +2 bonus to your next attack roll against the same enemy.

How many times will a Warlord likely use this power? Probably at least every battle! Everyone misses on occasion and an extra 10% bonus to hit afterwards is pretty dang useful. Much more useful than "oh no! the level 11 monster better think twice about moving past the wizard... it might get hit for 12 damage!!"



But over all... very nice!


----------



## Stalker0

Vaeron said:
			
		

> The paladin paragon path is amazing...  saving throw rerolls for all allies, allies immune to charm and fear, using an action point weakens all adjacent enemies.  Crazy!




No kidding. Obviously we haven't seen the encounter ones yet, but this one seemed to be the strongest of the paths by far. Automatic saves, and weakening of all your enemies, that's awesome!!

My second favorite is the doomsayer's fear ability. An aura of 10 squares!! Reroll all fear saving throws and take the lowest one...ouch!! And of course the action point to deal damage to all your curse victims. If you had that doublecurse feat, you could do 3 minor actions to curse 6 people, and drop some bomb with an action point that hurts all 6 and then does some area damage on them as well (if warlocks get any area effects later on).

Further, this article gave us a lot more incite into feats. Looks like many feats will have ability point prereqs. I think that whole Str X, Con Y style will be common, it gives some benefit to a big strength person who still throws some points into con even though it doesn't help his fort defense.


----------



## redsand26

_Be sure to return Friday for a look at power cards!_

This should be interesting!


----------



## That One Guy

Rechan said:
			
		

> Some things I noticed:
> 
> 
> Spears and polearms push!
> 
> 
> We also get confirmation of "Off hand" weapon. Hmm.
> 
> I wonder what "and are capable of making an opportunity attack" means? When you can take one, or that you haven't all ready made one this round?




There are certain things (Stunned for sure. I believe Dazed and Staggered too) that prevent one from making an opportunity attack. Thus, I think it means that as long as you could make an OA, you can do that little damage.


----------



## Engilbrand

Not only does the Kensei get a +1, he also get +4 to damage. That's pretty nifty. By 16th level, a Dragonborn Kensei with max strength could be getting +11 on his damage rolls. With the right weapon and a good power, we're looking at some serious power being thrown around. That's not even taking magic items or weapons into account. Just straight strength plus bonus. I love it.
I also really liked the Stormwarden. I definitely want to see if the powers for other paths are as good as those. I also wonder if an Eladrin Stormwarden could teleport twice in a round. I haven't really paid attention to actions and stuff.


----------



## Stalker0

redsand26 said:
			
		

> _Be sure to return Friday for a look at power cards!_
> 
> This should be interesting!



 I just hope we get some powers to go along with those power cards are I'm going to be really disappointed


----------



## Fallen Seraph

Novem5er said:
			
		

> However, I'm not sure all the Paragon powers are balanced. Look at this level 11 power for the Battle Mage:
> 
> Arcane Riposte (11th level): Imbued with magical might, your hands bristle with arcane energy in the heat of battle. When a creature provokes an opportunity attack from you, make an opportunity attack with one of your hands (Dexterity vs. AC). Choose cold, fire, force, or lightning. You deal 1d8 + Intelligence modifier damage of that type with this attack.
> 
> Um... So the mage gets an opportunity attack? A) When is a monster going to try moving PAST the mage to provoke an OA? B) Isn't d8 +(4/5) kind of wussy for a "power"?




I may be reading it wrong... But given the name and the way it is written. I think Arcane Riposte is really powerful actually, whenever the Wizard is attacked from causing a OA. He gets to do damage to his attacker.


----------



## Surgoshan

Stalker0 said:
			
		

> No kidding. Obviously we haven't seen the encounter ones yet, but this one seemed to be the strongest of the paths by far. Automatic saves, and weakening of all your enemies, that's awesome!!




Put your pants back on, it's not _perfect_.  Those powers work on *adjacent* allies.  Given how movement oriented 4e is, I don't know how much that'll come into play.


----------



## bjorn2bwild

Novem5er said:
			
		

> However, I'm not sure all the Paragon powers are balanced. Look at this level 11 power for the Battle Mage:
> 
> Arcane Riposte (11th level): Imbued with magical might, your hands bristle with arcane energy in the heat of battle. When a creature provokes an opportunity attack from you, make an opportunity attack with one of your hands (Dexterity vs. AC). Choose cold, fire, force, or lightning. You deal 1d8 + Intelligence modifier damage of that type with this attack.
> 
> Um... So the mage gets an opportunity attack? A) When is a monster going to try moving PAST the mage to provoke an OA? B) Isn't d8 +(4/5) kind of wussy for a "power"?




Well, it lets the mage threaten without wielding a weapon.  That's pretty impressive in my opinion.

Also, the battle mage ought to be toe to toe with the fighter, not hanging out in the back.  There's plenty of potential for OA's.


----------



## breschau

> Be sure to return Friday for a look at power cards!




I just hope they don't sell them in randomized packs of cards with independent rules on how to play with just the cards. Damn, that would be lame.


----------



## Stalker0

Further, we do know that TWF rangers CAN get two attacks per round, though it may only be with big powers. But with that daily, the ranger get 2 attacks per target.


----------



## Sojorn

Stalker0 said:
			
		

> Further, we do know that TWF rangers CAN get two attacks per round, though it may only be with big powers. But with that daily, the ranger get 2 attacks per target.



Recharges their second wind too. Just because it can I guess?


----------



## FadedC

Note the keywords for throw caution to the wind

EncounterMartial, Stance

It also doesn't have a duration listed. This suggests that stances modfiy you until the end of the encounter or until you adopt a new stance.


----------



## HeinorNY

breschau said:
			
		

> I just hope they don't sell them in randomized packs of cards with independent rules on how to play with just the cards. Damn, that would be lame.



Maybe the word "cards" here means:
"11. a menu or wine list."


----------



## DandD

Fallen Seraph said:
			
		

> I may be reading it wrong... But given the name and the way it is written. I think Arcane Riposte is really powerful actually, whenever the Wizard is attacked from causing a OA. He gets to do damage to his attacker.



I don't think it works that way. The way I read it, he simply uses an attack that deals 1d8+Intelligence Modifier with a energy type by choice when he makes an Opportunity Attack. The Battle Mage doesn't make an 'extra-attack' against an enemy that makes an Opportunity Attack against him. It's just an unarmed Opportunity Attack with fancy ligh-shows. Of course, being 1d8+Int Modifier and free choosable energy type might be leagues above all the other classes who don't have the luxury to choose if they had to do it unarmed too.


----------



## Surgoshan

But by the upper levels, that's an unarmed opportunity attack that's averaging 10 damage, possibly against a racial weakness.


----------



## Fallen Seraph

Perhaps, and actually... Since OA is just basic-attack most of the time, that could be equal to most OAs from fighters and other such classes.

Still think it be neat to have a counter-OA ability.


----------



## Incenjucar

Arcane Riposte is really nice, especially since you can choose the damage type on the fly.  Especially with feats out there like Lasting Frost.

1d8+5+Int Mod is a nice bit of freebie damage.


----------



## A'koss

DandD said:
			
		

> I don't think it works that way. The way I read it, he simply uses an attack that deals 1d8+Intelligence Modifier with a energy type by choice when he makes an Opportunity Attack. The Battle Mage doesn't make an 'extra-attack' against an enemy that makes an Opportunity Attack against him. It's just an unarmed Opportunity Attack with fancy ligh-shows. Of course, being 1d8+Int Modifier and free choosable energy type might be leagues above all the other classes who don't have the luxury to choose if they had to do it unarmed too.



It's also nice in that the Wizard has a number of choices in the energy damage he deals so he can tailor the attack to a specific monster vulnerability (if it has one).


----------



## Sojorn

I like that devastating critical just works on anything.


----------



## Incenjucar

Sojorn said:
			
		

> I like that devastating critical just works on anything.




Arcane Riposte+Lasting Frost+Devastating Critical= 14-23+Int damage.


----------



## Jack99

Hmm this is going to take some getting used to, from my part. Some of those melee powers are just a tad over the top, at least at first glance.


----------



## That One Guy

I'm really interested in reading about multiclassing stuff simply because of the way a class is required for the path. Could a level nine fighter grab a level of ranger to rock the warden exploits? Also, does anyone think that there will be skill/feat based Paths? Assuming one multi-classes at 11 instead of taking a path, would they then be allowed to take either class's epic destiny?

...things I consider with glee.


----------



## DandD

As Incenjucar noted, combined with Lasting Frost, if the Battle Mage gets to make an Opportunity Attack, he might add an elemental weakness. There might be other feats, like if you get hit by fire damage, you continue to burn and take 1d6 damage (save ends). That makes his Opportunity Attack quite powerful. And should the buddies of the Battlemage happen to have the same energy type-attacks (Ice) like their fellow Wizard-companion, they might even all do some more extra-damage. 
Party-synergies could truly well up the damage in heights not imagined until now. 
Imagine a Fighter Kensei hitting at a suddenly ice-vulnerable enemy with some kind of Frostblade... Uuuuuhhhh...


----------



## Ozdec

Well the War Priest also shows that you should be able to make a highly effective Melee Cleric.

The other thing is that given the wording of :

Extra Damage Action (11th level): When you spend an action point to take an extra action, you also add one-half your level to the damage dealt by any of your standard action attacks this turn.


and

Shadow Assassin’s Action (11th level): When you spend an action point to take an extra action, you also gain a +4 bonus to attack rolls until the start of your next turn.


there is encouragement to spend the AP for the extra action first and then apply the bonus to your normal "Standard Action" as well. The SA's one also applies to any OAs or additional attacks prompted by say a Warlord power  - Nasty


----------



## Sojorn

And, hey, you suddenly find yourself in an all Frost resistant all the time campaign? Just retrain that feat next level up.


----------



## Cadfan

A normal wizard is making OAs at Str v AC for [W]+str damage.

A battlemage is making OAs at Dex v AC for 1d8+Int damage.

Assuming a normal wizard's weapon does less than 1d8 damage, and that a wizard is more likely to have good Dex than Str, the advantages are pretty clear.  It changes wizard OAs from something trivial (I'd guess a flat 1d4 for a lot of wizards) into something meaningful.


----------



## Incenjucar

I think a popular tactic will be to load all weapons up with minor cold damage with a ritual, then open up combat with an cold-based burst spell.  Muahahahaha.

Lasting Frost is just an outright great ability.

Arcane Riposte will probably work really well with a warlord around, as I imagine plenty of "Everyone gets an AO!" powers to be in play.


----------



## HeinorNY

Cadfan said:
			
		

> A normal wizard is making OAs at Str v AC for [W]+str damage.
> 
> A battlemage is making OAs at Dex v AC for 1d8+Int damage.
> 
> Assuming a normal wizard's weapon does less than 1d8 damage, and that a wizard is more likely to have good Dex than Str, the advantages are pretty clear.  It changes wizard OAs from something trivial (I'd guess a flat 1d4 for a lot of wizards) into something meaningful.



Most wizards are not even armed, so if the OA/AoO rules remain somewhat the same as the 3.5 rules, they gain OA's even if wielding a wand.


----------



## Lackhand

That One Guy said:
			
		

> I'm really interested in reading about multiclassing stuff simply because of the way a class is required for the path. Could a level nine fighter grab a level of ranger to rock the warden exploits? Also, does anyone think that there will be skill/feat based Paths? Assuming one multi-classes at 11 instead of taking a path, would they then be allowed to take either class's epic destiny?
> 
> ...things I consider with glee.



Can you still grab individually packaged for-resale levels of ranger?


----------



## Sojorn

Lackhand said:
			
		

> Can you still grab individually packaged for-resale levels of ranger?



 I wouldn't think so.

Probably you can snipe a power or feature with a feat, but I think the "pick all the classes with the best level 1-2 features as a human" style of multiclassing is dead.


----------



## NebtheNever

Cadfan said:
			
		

> A normal wizard is making OAs at Str v AC for [W]+str damage.
> 
> A battlemage is making OAs at Dex v AC for 1d8+Int damage.
> 
> Assuming a normal wizard's weapon does less than 1d8 damage, and that a wizard is more likely to have good Dex than Str, the advantages are pretty clear.  It changes wizard OAs from something trivial (I'd guess a flat 1d4 for a lot of wizards) into something meaningful.




At this point we don't know what stats a Wizard is going to have high, but I'm inclined to think they might not focus on Dex all that much, because their AC and Reflex defense are coming from their Intelligence.

But this certainly seems useful considering that most Wizards will be either unarmed or carrying an orb/wand etc.


----------



## TwinBahamut

Honestly, I am a little disappointed. I was hoping Paragon Paths would have a bit more power and flexibility (not to mention flavor text, though I suppose most of that was cut for the purposes of keeping the article short). Right now, they don't seem to really add anything special for a character...

I guess I was hoping for something that let you transcend your starting class, but right now it look a lot more like a repackaged set of normal class options. While I may change my opinion after seeing more of the game in action, it doesn't really seem to be the Fire Emblem style Class Change that I was hoping for.


----------



## ShockMeSane

Wow, great info, best preview article yet. A few thoughts:

With just the Lasting Frost talent (I think its safe to assume we may see feats something like this for other elements, also we have seen a +1 acid/cold dmg feat), a wizard with 20 int will do 1d8+10 damage on an opportunity attack on anyone he has hit with cold damage. 11-18 damage, from what we have seen from the way damage scales, is definitely a non-trivial amount in 4E. Would definitely make the Battle Mage a bit more threat on the battlefield in any case, as I don't imagine they can make OA's with Implements at all.

Star Pact Warlocks are going to have some crazy scary (haha) fear effects. 2 Dice on saves and take the lowest roll is going to definitely prolong those negative effects. It's interesting that the Warlock as a class seems to have a lot of "debuffs". They look like they aren't going to be as intense damage-wise as the Ranger/Rogue (purely hypothetical at this point) but are shaping up to be something in-between a Striker and a Controller.

A few people have mentioned hoping for Paragon Paths without class restriction, and from everything WotC has said I think your hopes will be realized. I distinctly remember hearing from a Dev that every class will have multiple options of Paragon Path. I believe they were simply previewing 1 class-specific paragon path of each class because that is the easiest thing for us to reference based on the preview information that has come before.

The Paragon Paths dont necessarily add a whole ton of new crunch to your character, but I must say it seems like a well balanced amount. I'm so looking forward to playing around with this stuff!


----------



## DandD

TwinBahamut said:
			
		

> Honestly, I am a little disappointed. I was hoping Paragon Paths would have a bit more power and flexibility (not to mention flavor text, though I suppose most of that was cut for the purposes of keeping the article short). Right now, they don't seem to really add anything special for a character...
> 
> I guess I was hoping for something that let you transcend your starting class, but right now it look a lot more like a repackaged set of normal class options. While I may change my opinion after seeing more of the game in action, it doesn't really seem to be the Fire Emblem style Class Change that I was hoping for.



Nah, I think that would have really been too much for a mere pen&paper-game. Adding some bonus thingies seems really to be the only way for non-computer-games to do that, without it bogging down into too complex re-calculations and stuff... That's what I think, at least. 

But I sure hope to be wrong.


----------



## ShockMeSane

TwinBahamut said:
			
		

> Honestly, I am a little disappointed. I was hoping Paragon Paths would have a bit more power and flexibility (not to mention flavor text, though I suppose most of that was cut for the purposes of keeping the article short). Right now, they don't seem to really add anything special for a character...
> 
> I guess I was hoping for something that let you transcend your starting class, but right now it look a lot more like a repackaged set of normal class options. While I may change my opinion after seeing more of the game in action, it doesn't really seem to be the Fire Emblem style Class Change that I was hoping for.




Yea, seeing as you basically only get 3-4 Paragon features, and 1 encounter/utility/daily power from your paragon path, it certainly isn't a redefinition of your character, rather more of a specialization. Keep in mind that you will continue gaining base class powers throughout levels 11-20 at the rate you did from levels 1-10, so it appears that the base class you choose is by far the most "defining" decision you are going to make.

I for one like this approach, as Paragon Paths are small enough to be easily homebrewed with relative balance, and it increases the number (and hence diversity) that can be incorporated into future books. However, I can definitely see how people expecting a Star-Pact Paragon Warlock to be a totally different play experience than a Fey-Pact might be a little dissapointed. Though with all those buffs to "fear" abilities, they may actually play quite a bit differently in-game.

(edited because I didn't proof-read first like a nub)


----------



## Kobold Avenger

We're being presented with the minimal excerpts of paragon paths, as I'm sure the full write-ups will probably have some sort of "suggested builds" entry associated with each of them, and maybe a bunch of more fluff to go with it, and possible multiple powers to pick for some.

I know there's already a mention of a paragon path that lets a wizard use a blade for an implement, so it's possible that's one that isn't a 1 class path.


----------



## Incenjucar

I think the idea is to intensify your strategies rather than to replace them with something new, like with that Cold+COLD+FRICKING COLD combo noted above, or all the fear boosts that Warlock path gets.  It's not really something NEW, but things work a lot better.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Well, I for one dig it.


----------



## DandD

Incenjucar said:
			
		

> I think the idea is to intensify your strategies rather than to replace them with something new, like with that Cold+COLD+FRICKING COLD combo noted above, or all the fear boosts that Warlock path gets.  It's not really something NEW, but things work a lot better.



3-hit combo! Super! 12-hit combo! Awesome! 32-hit combo! Super Street Fighter Turbo Ex 2 Alpha +1! 

D&D 4th edition is Street Fighter!!!


----------



## Colmarr

Ozdec said:
			
		

> Extra Damage Action (11th level): When you spend an action point to take an extra action, you also add one-half your level to the damage dealt by any of your standard action attacks this turn
> 
> ...
> 
> there is encouragement to spend the AP for the extra action first and then apply the bonus to your normal "Standard Action" as well. The SA's one also applies to any OAs or additional attacks prompted by say a Warlord power  - Nasty




I noticed this too, but there is a potential issue here in that the power can retrospectively affect the outcome of an attack that's already been made _and resolved_.

Eg. 1

Warpriest in combat with orc.
Standard action: Warpriest attacks orc 1. Reduces it to 3 hp.
Move action: Warpriest moves to orc 2, taking a OA and 10hp damage from orc 1.
Action Point: Warpriest uses an action point to attack orc 2. As soon as he spends the action point, orc 1 keels over and dies.

Or even worse:

Eg. 2
Warpriest fighting an orc.
Move action: Warpriest moves into melee with orc.
Standard action: Warpriest attacks orc 1. Reduces it to 3 hp.
Action Point: Warpriest uses his action point to take an extra action. Orc keels over. The Warpriest is left with no other targets.

Eg. 3 
Warpriest fighting orc.
Standard Action: Warpriest uses Cascade of light. Reduces orc to 10hp. Makes it vulnerable radiant 5.
Action Point: Warpriest does something. Orc takes 5 points of extra damage from the Cascade of Light. The ability is radiant and the ork is now vulnerable 5 to radiant damage so it takes a total of 10 damage. The orc dies.



It can be explained as blood loss, shock, etc but it still seems like a wonky rule to me...


----------



## DandD

Or it might be because of the glowing weapon... Or more abstractively, while you're going away, you're doing something like a cleave action. I mean, a round is approximately 6 seconds. Quite much can happen in 6 seconds.


----------



## Stalker0

Ozdec said:
			
		

> there is encouragement to spend the AP for the extra action first and then apply the bonus to your normal "Standard Action" as well. The SA's one also applies to any OAs or additional attacks prompted by say a Warlord power  - Nasty




If the pregen rules hold up, this is not possible. The rules state a specific order of events, action point actions occur AFTER your regular actions, so you can't pull off that little trick


----------



## Victim

Colmarr said:
			
		

> I noticed this too, but there is a potential issue here in that the power can retrospectively affect the outcome of an attack that's already been made _and resolved_.
> 
> It can be explained as blood loss, shock, etc but it still seems like a wonky rule to me...




I think the idea is that the AP is used and THEN the player takes his actions:

The Warpriest is in melee with an orc, and spends an AP.
Standard: Attack orc 1, with bonus.
Move: approach orc 2
AP Action: Attack orc 2, with bonus


----------



## Lurker59

I highly doubt damage would be retroactively added to attacks. Rather it makes the decision to use the action point first and gain the benefit for two standard attacks, or wait to see if you can drop the monster in one attack and then use an action point if it's still on its feet.


----------



## ShockMeSane

Yea, I'm pretty sure the spirit of the power isn't that it retroactively damages enemies. I mean, if thats how you want to do it, thats cool with me, but it ain't happening in my campaign. Too obtuse for my tastes.


----------



## Incenjucar

DandD said:
			
		

> 3-hit combo! Super! 12-hit combo! Awesome! 32-hit combo! Super Street Fighter Turbo Ex 2 Alpha +1!
> 
> D&D 4th edition is Street Fighter!!!




Oh noes, we are doomed!  

But yeah, paths seem to be more about opening up your strategies in new ways rather than rewriting them completely.

Say you wanted to make a wizard named Kelvin Zero.

Levels 1-10, the wizard might focus on getting some cold spells, some defensive spells, and a get out of jail free card, and some feats to boost the cold damage.

Levels 11-20, Kelvin goes warmage, and gets a ritual that adds cold damage to the attacks his allies make, and gets cold-based movement-inhibiting powers (which will force more movement actions, making AOs more likely, and making him and his allies more able to focus that cold damage at will), and, of course, Lasting Frost to make it all extra nasty.

Levels 21+, Kelvin might be covering the battlefield with jagged ice shards, and raining the same from the sky, while shielding his allies from cold damage, and maybe summoning an Ice Archon to fight beside him while he flies or teleports around the battlefield, freezing anything that tries to fly away from the killing field so that it drops to an icy death.

<3 <3 <3


----------



## Colmarr

Stalker0 said:
			
		

> If the pregen rules hold up, this is not possible. The rules state a specific order of events, action point actions occur AFTER your regular actions, so you can't pull off that little trick




Scalegloom Hall disagrees with you.

It says:

*Any Order.* You can take your actions in any order, and you can skip any of them.
...
*Extra Action.* You can take an extra standard action by spending an action point (see "Action Points).
...
*Action Points* (...nothing about having to take them after normal actions...)


----------



## MaelStorm

Paragon Paths are way better than I imagined. 4E RAWK!

There are 8 paths in this preview, 1 for each class. It has been revealed that there is a total of 12 paths in the first PH. It will be interesting to see what will be these additional paths.

I think an Eladrin or Half-Elf Ranger who choose the Stormwarden path makes a really nice combo. (I'm still waiting for the Druid, and the primal power source.)

-The choice to Multiclass instead, is really cool.
-Confirmation on build choice for different class, TWF for Ranger, and Melee for Cleric.
-Spear and polearm push, that's fun.
-Weapon categories: light blade, and heavy blade.

I'm impressed so far by the plethora of new options in 4E. It's a completely new game. To make an analogy with software version, it's almost as if it was a jump from v1.1 to v3 in one shot! 

Plus power cards next. Yay!


----------



## Colmarr

Lurker59 said:
			
		

> I highly doubt damage would be retroactively added to attacks. Rather it makes the decision to use the action point first and gain the benefit for two standard attacks, or wait to see if you can drop the monster in one attack and then use an action point if it's still on its feet.




I understand what you're saying, but can't help noticing that the "Shadow Assassin's Action" power applies "until the start of your next turn". That's a different wording, and IMO implies that the intended effect of the Warpriest ability is something other than "until the start of your next turn".



			
				ShockMeSane said:
			
		

> Yea, I'm pretty sure the spirit of the power isn't that it retroactively damages enemies. I mean, if thats how you want to do it, thats cool with me, but it ain't happening in my campaign. Too obtuse for my tastes.




I don't like the possibility of retrospective damage either, but that seems to be what the power allows for.


----------



## Talath

Colmarr said:
			
		

> I understand what you're saying, but can't help noticing that the "Shadow Assassin's Action" power applies "until the start of your next turn". That's a different wording, and IMO implies that the intended effect of the Warpriest ability is something other than "until the start of your next turn".
> 
> 
> No it doesnt, because common sense and logic dictate that you don't retroactively cause additional damage. Nothing in D&D does that. And if it does, it is a rare and special case, which is not the case for the Warpriest's action point enhancement.


----------



## Colmarr

Talath said:
			
		

> common sense and logic dictate that you don't retroactively cause additional damage. Nothing in D&D does that. And if it does, it is a rare and special case, *which is not the case for the Warpriest's action point enhancement*.




Emphasis mine. Who says?

My point is that this rule is either (A) problematic in its operation (if it does apply retrospectively) or (B) poorly drafted (if it doesn't). I stand by that position.

And in case people are about to "fire up", don't get me wrong. I'm not rubbishing 4e. I was the one who pushed my defunct gaming group back into D&D when 4e was announced. IIRC I have loved 90% of the information released about 4e so far. The great majority of my 4e posts have been positive. But as a long-time DM, I read this power and immediately saw problems with it...


----------



## Kordeth

Colmarr said:
			
		

> Emphasis mine. Who says?
> 
> Don't get me wrong. I'm not rubbishing 4e. I was the one who pushed my defunct gaming group back into D&D when 4e was announced. IIRC I have loved 90% of the information released about 4e so far.
> 
> However, I consider that this rule is either (A) problematic in it's operation (if it does apply retrospectively) or (B) poorly drafted (if it doesn't).




Note that the power says "this *turn*," not "this round." Could be that "turn" has a specific definition that clarifies this.

Just one possibility.


----------



## Minigiant

Two blades.
Aw man, I like axe and mace.

Stormwardens = minionbane, I like.


----------



## Pistonrager

Surgoshan said:
			
		

> But by the upper levels, that's an unarmed opportunity attack that's averaging 10 damage, possibly against a racial weakness.





Have you forgotten already?  stat mods are based on level as well as the actual stat.  by the time you get that ability at 11th level(mods increase by 1/2 per level so +5 then and it only gets better...).  and with a 16-20 int to start... we're talking 1d8+10 or easily up to +14, when you first get the ability.

plus all the other stacking things that people posted already...

Very powerful... even more so since you can choose the element to use and hit a vulnerability.


----------



## Torchlyte

*Cold Steel Hurricane Stormwarden Attack 20*
_You rush into the midst of your enemies and, like a freezing wind, flay them alive._

That's like saying...

Ultimate Rogue Power 20
_You run up to someone and, like a camel, stab them in the face._


----------



## That One Guy

Colmarr said:
			
		

> Emphasis mine. Who says?
> 
> Don't get me wrong. I'm not rubbishing 4e. I was the one who pushed my defunct gaming group back into D&D when 4e was announced. IIRC I have loved 90% of the information released about 4e so far.
> 
> However, I consider that this rule is either (A) problematic in it's operation (if it does apply retrospectively) or (B) poorly drafted (if it doesn't).




So, I think it's that the AP use gives the buff on any standard actions taken after it. Shadow Assassin's coolness is that his AP thing carries over until the end of his next turn. The whole wording of "When you spend an action point..." implies (to me, at least) that the sweet damage bonus does not kick in until after it is used. 

/2 cents


----------



## Fallen Seraph

Minigiant said:
			
		

> Two blades.
> Aw man, I like axe and mace.
> 
> Stormwardens = minionbane, I like.



Probably just a loose term.


----------



## Kordeth

Pistonrager said:
			
		

> Have you forgotten already?  stat mods are based on level as well as the actual stat.  by the time you get that ability at 11th level(mods increase by 1/2 per level so +5 then and it only gets better...).  and with a 16-20 int to start... we're talking 1d8+10 or easily up to +14, when you first get the ability.
> 
> plus all the other stacking things that people posted already...
> 
> Very powerful... even more so since you can choose the element to use and hit a vulnerability.




We haven't actually seen this born out by any official rule, and in fact it's directly contradicted by all the monster stats we've seen so far.


----------



## small pumpkin man

Minigiant said:
			
		

> Two blades.
> Aw man, I like axe and mace.
> 
> Stormwardens = minionbane, I like.



Well, all of the Stormwarden Mechanics say things like "You must be wielding two melee weapons." or "(main weapon and off-hand weapon), two attacks per target", and never mentions "blades", so it's probably (hopefully) just fluff.


----------



## Colmarr

That One Guy said:
			
		

> Shadow Assassin's coolness is that his AP thing carries over until the end of his next turn.




Shadow Assassin applies until the _start_ of the PCs next turn, not the end.

If it was the end, I'd be less worried by the different wording of the power.


----------



## Pistonrager

Kordeth said:
			
		

> We haven't actually seen this born out by any official rule, and in fact it's directly contradicted by all the monster stats we've seen so far.




really?

from succubus(level nine)
Str 11 (+4) Dex 18 (+8) Wis 19 (+8)
Con 10 (+4) Int 15 (+6) Cha 22 (+10)

from war devil(level 22)

Str 27 (+19) Dex 23 (+17) Wis 19 (+15)
Con 25 (+18) Int 15 (+13) Cha 18 (+15)

EDIT  

and from the Phane(level 26)

Str 24 (+20)
Dex 30 (+23)
Wis 25 (+20)
Con 23 (+19)
Int 28 (+22)
Cha 22 (+19)


----------



## small pumpkin man

Pistonrager said:
			
		

> Have you forgotten already?  stat mods are based on level as well as the actual stat.  by the time you get that ability at 11th level(mods increase by 1/2 per level so +5 then and it only gets better...).  and with a 16-20 int to start... we're talking 1d8+10 or easily up to +14, when you first get the ability.
> 
> plus all the other stacking things that people posted already...
> 
> Very powerful... even more so since you can choose the element to use and hit a vulnerability.



I'm pretty sure this is wrong. Characters get half their level to attacks, defenses and skills (and possibly initiative), not to the base stat bonus itself, which is used unmodified for damage, healing surges and other things. The number in monster stats is the monster's untrained skill modifier.


----------



## ShockMeSane

Is the PHB truly confirmed to have only 12 paragon paths? This seems almost impossible to me, as one of the paragon paths previewed here is for Star-pact Warlock. If there are only 4 more paragon paths, that basically leaves 1 available for the remaining 3 warlock builds and an alternate wizard path option all in one path. Of course, this doesn't even mention:

Bow using Rangers.
Spellcasting Clerics.
Defensive Fighters.
Charisma/Tactical Warlords.
etc etc

or ANY options. Indeed, if your Star Pact Warlock hit level 11, you would virtually be FORCED to take Doomsayer as your paragon path. Seeing as this completely invalidates the entire idea of further customizing your character choice via Paragon Paths, I'm about 99% certain that the PHB must contain substantially more than 12 Paragon Paths. Perhaps you were thinking Epic Destinies? I believe Epic Destines are purposefully more vague than Paragon Paths, and I could see only having 12 of them in the first PHB. But Paragon Paths?


----------



## Kordeth

Colmarr said:
			
		

> Shadow Assassin applies until the _start_ of the PCs next turn, not the end.
> 
> If it was the end, I'd be less worried by the different wording of the power.




I suspect the difference in wording is entirely because it's actually possible to make nonspecified attacks after the end of your turn but before the start of your next one, whereas your standard-action attacks only occur on your turn. The "exception" is the wording on the rogue power, to assure you that it applies to OAs and the like, while the cleric's is the "standard," affecting only the remainder of your turn.

Put another way, if an enemy hit you with an Opportunity Attack that beat your AC by 1, and the warpriest's power instead said "you gain a +1 bonus to AC against all opportunity attacks this turn," would you argue that the OA that hit you should be retroactively erased? If not, why should the damage from a previous attack be retroactively increased?


----------



## That One Guy

Colmarr said:
			
		

> Shadow Assassin applies until the _start_ of the PCs next turn, not the end.
> 
> If it was the end, I'd be less worried by the different wording of the power.




My mistake. Can I blame the 2:39 AM thing?


----------



## Mouseferatu

Torchlyte said:
			
		

> That's like saying...
> 
> Ultimate Rogue Power 20
> _You run up to someone and, like a camel, stab them in the face._




Please don't make me laugh like that when my wife's trying to sleep in the next room.


----------



## Kordeth

ShockMeSane said:
			
		

> Is the PHB truly confirmed to have only 12 paragon paths?






			
				Paragon Path Excerpt said:
			
		

> The Player’s Handbook supplies *many paragon paths* (you’ll find *one* for each class, previewed below), plus upcoming products and Dragon Magazine features will include even more paths as time goes on.




I see nothing that says there are only a dozen paragon paths--considering that would be less than two paragon paths per class, I'm reasoably comfortable saying that wherever you got that information from, it was incorrect.


----------



## ShockMeSane

Pistonrager said:
			
		

> really?
> 
> from succubus(level nine)
> Str 11 (+4) Dex 18 (+8) Wis 19 (+8)
> Con 10 (+4) Int 15 (+6) Cha 22 (+10)
> 
> from war devil(level 22)
> 
> Str 27 (+19) Dex 23 (+17) Wis 19 (+15)
> Con 25 (+18) Int 15 (+13) Cha 18 (+15)
> 
> EDIT
> 
> and from the Phane(level 26)
> 
> Str 24 (+20)
> Dex 30 (+23)
> Wis 25 (+20)
> Con 23 (+19)
> Int 28 (+22)
> Cha 22 (+19)




Check the monsters damage bonuses. They certainly do not reflect anything other than the unmodified bonus to the appropriate attack type. For example the Pit Fiend's entry shows his Strength as Str 32 (+24), his base bonus is +11, +13 more for 1/2 his level. Yet all his bonus damage is at +11. The conventional wisdom is that the number in parenthesis is the modifier that is used for NPC skill-checks, as these do progress at 1/2 level.

It was confusing for me at first too


----------



## small pumpkin man

ShockMeSane said:
			
		

> Is the PHB truly confirmed to have only 12 paragon paths? This seems almost impossible to me, as one of the paragon paths previewed here is for Star-pact Warlock. If there are only 4 more paragon paths, that basically leaves 1 available for the remaining 3 warlock builds and an alternate wizard path option all in one path. Of course, this doesn't even mention:
> 
> Bow using Rangers.
> Spellcasting Clerics.
> Defensive Fighters.
> Charisma/Tactical Warlords.
> etc etc
> 
> or ANY options. Indeed, if your Star Pact Warlock hit level 11, you would virtually be FORCED to take Doomsayer as your paragon path. Seeing as this completely invalidates the entire idea of further customizing your character choice via Paragon Paths, I'm about 99% certain that the PHB must contain substantially more than 12 Paragon Paths. Perhaps you were thinking Epic Destinies? I believe Epic Destines are purposefully more vague than Paragon Paths, and I could see only having 12 of them in the first PHB. But Paragon Paths?



Thing is, when they said that, they also said Paragon paths were good for two different classes, since several seem to be only for one build of one class, I think it's safe to say the Paths have changed a bit since then. I _think_ I remember someone saying there was now a lot more of them, but I could be wrong.


----------



## Green Knight

Pistonrager said:
			
		

> really?
> 
> from succubus(level nine)
> Str 11 (+4) Dex 18 (+8) Wis 19 (+8)
> Con 10 (+4) Int 15 (+6) Cha 22 (+10)
> 
> from war devil(level 22)
> 
> Str 27 (+19) Dex 23 (+17) Wis 19 (+15)
> Con 25 (+18) Int 15 (+13) Cha 18 (+15)
> 
> EDIT
> 
> and from the Phane(level 26)
> 
> Str 24 (+20)
> Dex 30 (+23)
> Wis 25 (+20)
> Con 23 (+19)
> Int 28 (+22)
> Cha 22 (+19)




Those are skill bonuses. They don't affect things like bonus to hit and damage due to strength. A Fighter with Str 18 gets +4 to hit and +4 to damage due to his strength at Level 1, and he gets +4 to hit and +4 to damage due to his strength at Level 30.


----------



## MindWanderer

Kordeth said:
			
		

> Note that the power says "this *turn*," not "this round." Could be that "turn" has a specific definition that clarifies this.



Turns are defined, yes: Each character's action is one turn (so the bonus wouldn't apply to AoOs.  Doesn't help for this "retroactive damage" debate--which I seriously doubt is an interpretation anyone considered before now.


			
				Sojorn said:
			
		

> Wait, heavy blade? It's a category now?



Well, light blade was known as a category already (rogue article), so heavy blade stands to reason.  What I found interesting is that they feel they have to mention it specifically, since warlords get military melee weapons proficiency automatically.  I wonder under what circumstances a warlord might not have that proficiency.


			
				mach1.9pants said:
			
		

> I would be willing to bet that you can m-c from level one.  (even if it is only cross-training initially)



They mentioned in a playtest report, a long time ago, that's it's possible to be a rogue/wizard at level 1, and in a different report that you can be a warlord/wizard at low levels as well.  But one option might be to "multiclass" via a Class Training feat at level 1, then when you reach level 11, take up a second class "for real" and retrain the original feat into something else.


			
				Thasmodious said:
			
		

> Kensei Focus +1 with weapon.  This is an 11th level ability.  A bonus of only +1 is still relevant at 11-20.  This makes me happy.



Of course.  The math works out the same way at all levels, so if you're trying to hit AC 25 when your attack bonus is +13, then you should be trying to hit AC 35 when your attack bonus is +23.


			
				MaelStorm said:
			
		

> There are 8 paths in this preview, 1 for each class. It has been revealed that there is a total of 12 paths in the first PH. It will be interesting to see what will be these additional paths.



I'm hoping they changed their minds about this.  If only 4 paths are unaccounted for, then those 4 paths have to offer something to an awful lot of builds: archer rangers, fey and infernal pact warlocks, and warlords who somehow aren't proficient with heavy blades for starters, then trickster rogues, "pacifist" clerics and wizards, and anyone else who doesn't feel like the fit their class-specific PP.  We also know that one PP allows a wizard to use a sword as if it were a wand, and there must be other, similar paths.  If they stuck with 12, I think it's going to feel really limiting--you either match the archetype they thought up for you, or you multiclass, foregoing the more potent options, like action point broadening, available to those who stayed within the lines.


----------



## That One Guy

ShockMeSane said:
			
		

> Is the PHB truly confirmed to have only 12 paragon paths? This seems almost impossible to me, as one of the paragon paths previewed here is for Star-pact Warlock. If there are only 4 more paragon paths, that basically leaves 1 available for the remaining 3 warlock builds and an alternate wizard path option all in one path. Of course, this doesn't even mention:
> 
> Bow using Rangers.
> Spellcasting Clerics.
> Defensive Fighters.
> Charisma/Tactical Warlords.
> etc etc
> 
> or ANY options. Indeed, if your Star Pact Warlock hit level 11, you would virtually be FORCED to take Doomsayer as your paragon path. Seeing as this completely invalidates the entire idea of further customizing your character choice via Paragon Paths, I'm about 99% certain that the PHB must contain substantially more than 12 Paragon Paths. Perhaps you were thinking Epic Destinies? I believe Epic Destines are purposefully more vague than Paragon Paths, and I could see only having 12 of them in the first PHB. But Paragon Paths?




I was thinking something similar. Another possibility (although I doubt it) is that there are different class features available to each paragon path (yes, a star pact warlock would be a doomsayer, but could have different features). At the same time, that does seem weak. Bow wielding rangers, non heavy blade walords, spell focused clerics are almost definitely in, right? But then there are the other warlock paths. While I was initially quite joyful with the excerpt, now I am slightly confused and worried.


----------



## ShockMeSane

Kordeth said:
			
		

> I see nothing that says there are only a dozen paragon paths--considering that would be less than two paragon paths per class, I'm reasoably comfortable saying that wherever you got that information from, it was incorrect.




MaelStorm posted earlier in the thread on the third page that 12 paths had been confirmed for the PHB. My post was meant to be incredulous to that, and I ought to have quoted him but I was feeling lazy. I'm quite certain it's more than 12 paths as well.

In fact, as it seems that a basic design decision for 4ED for each class was (Rogue example in parenthesis)

One primary stat (Dex)
Choice of secondary stat out of two options (Str or Cha)

The secondary stat you choose seems to have a substantial effect on how your character is going to play over the long run. I would be extremely dissapointed if each of the 2 basic build options per class did not have at least 3 viable Paragon Paths. And honestly, I'd prefer the number be closer to 5-6, though I realise that is bringing us into the neighborhood of 90+ paragon paths and might be a bit much to ask for the PHB1. 

I'm personally expecting the number to be closer to 40.


----------



## Fallen Seraph

> Well, light blade was known as a category already (rogue article), so heavy blade stands to reason. What I found interesting is that they feel they have to mention it specifically, since warlords get military melee weapons proficiency automatically. I wonder under what circumstances a warlord might not have that proficiency.



Perhaps, it is something where there are Heavy Blades in various proficiencies, so it means that the Warlord can use any Heavy Blades?

Or perhaps... With multiclassing you may not gain access to the Warlord's proficiencies but could say have a feat that allows for Heavy Blades use?

As for number of of paragon paths, I remember them saying 2 dozen.


----------



## DevoutlyApathetic

I can not claim to be impressed by the flavor of the options on offer. (I'm a warlord, but I  _really really_ like swords!)  Though you are all ignoring the option to multiclass instead of a path.

I wonder what you get instead of the AP boost thing then?


----------



## Lurker59

Considering we've already seen the Iron Vanguard, Battle Captain, Battle Archer, Astral Weapon, and a few others in blogs I think its apparent that there's more than 12 paragon paths. I seem to remember hearing 24 at some point. And if they decided to limit each path to only one class then it's possible they've expanded the number further.


----------



## That One Guy

Fallen Seraph said:
			
		

> Perhaps, it is something where there are Heavy Blades in various proficiencies, so it means that the Warlord can use any Heavy Blades?
> 
> Or perhaps... With multiclassing you may not gain access to the Warlord's proficiencies but could say have a feat that allows for Heavy Blades use?
> 
> As for number of of paragon paths, I remember them saying 2 dozen.




24 is mathematically sound. It offers 3 paths per class. Or even 2/class and then 8 universal. Even if there are 24 (which sounds like a good number), I hope the DMG offers even more... although I doubt it.



			
				Lurker59 said:
			
		

> Considering we've already seen the Iron Vanguard, Battle Captain, Battle Archer, Astral Weapon, and a few others in blogs I think its apparent that there's more than 12 paragon paths. I seem to remember hearing 24 at some point. And if they decided to limit each path to only one class then it's possible they've expanded the number further.




You don’t stop being a cleric when you become a *radiant servant.*  4 + 1 =5.  13>12. Rock and roll. Bold mine.


----------



## MaelStorm

MindWanderer said:
			
		

> I'm hoping they changed their minds about this.  If only 4 paths are unaccounted for, then those 4 paths have to offer something to an awful lot of builds: archer rangers, fey and infernal pact warlocks, and warlords who somehow aren't proficient with heavy blades for starters, then trickster rogues, "pacifist" clerics and wizards, and anyone else who doesn't feel like the fit their class-specific PP.  We also know that one PP allows a wizard to use a sword as if it were a wand, and there must be other, similar paths.  If they stuck with 12, I think it's going to feel really limiting--you either match the archetype they thought up for you, or you multiclass, foregoing the more potent options, like action point broadening, available to those who stayed within the lines.



I know it's a small sample, but there will be additional paths in future splatbooks, in the Dragon magazine, and future PH, etc. I'm pretty sure EN World will be filled with additional path when the core books will be out.


----------



## Colmarr

Kordeth said:
			
		

> Put another way, if an enemy hit you with an Opportunity Attack that beat your AC by 1, and the warpriest's power instead said "you gain a +1 bonus to AC against all opportunity attacks this turn," would you argue that the OA that hit you should be retroactively erased?




That's a straw man. How I would argue about an arbitrary alternate power in no way impacts on the proper interpretation of the power in question.

Having said that, and in answer to your question: no I wouldn't. I'm not sure why. I think largely it would be because turning a hit into a _possible_ miss is too much trouble in terms of the maths and record keeping involved. Adding 5 damage to one character's hits (that happened in the last 2 minutes) is much easier than figuring out which OA hits become misses and which OA inflicted what damage.

I'm already satisfied that I will play this as a "prospective only" power and the damage will not apply retrospectively. However, I'm not satisified that that interpretation is the correct RAW one (and I'm generally a stickler for RAW). Nor am I satisfied that this rule is as clear as it should be.

As a lawyer in RL, I know that clarity is a _big deal_ in law/rule making. Getting this power crystal-clear would have been as simple as inserting the words "until the end of your turn" or "until the start of your next turn" or even substituting the word "After" for the word "When" at the beginning of the power.


----------



## Dire Bare

Lurker59 said:
			
		

> Considering we've already seen the Iron Vanguard, Battle Captain, Battle Archer, Astral Weapon, and a few others in blogs I think its apparent that there's more than 12 paragon paths. I seem to remember hearing 24 at some point. And if they decided to limit each path to only one class then it's possible they've expanded the number further.



I'm pretty sure that there has been 12 confirmed for the PHB, and at least several of the PHB paths are open to more than one class.  So each PHB class should have 2-3 path options out of the 12 paths offered in the PHB.  But I'm too lazy to look it up, so no linky for you!

Of course, Paragon Paths look super easy to create, and I'm sure we'll see at least a few in Dragon before the next hardcover even hits the shelves.  By the end of the year, we'll be up to our ears in Paragon Paths!!!


----------



## Sojorn

On paragon paths:

Likely 4ish per class.

http://www.gleemax.com/Comms/Pages/Communities/BlogPost.aspx?blogpostid=52842&pagemode=2&blogid=2132


----------



## Torchlyte

Fallen Seraph said:
			
		

> Perhaps, it is something where there are Heavy Blades in various proficiencies




Agreed.

*Danger Sense* — _Roll twice for initiative, use the higher result_

*Seize the Moment Dex* Dex 17 _Gain combat advantage over foe with lower initiative_ 

Any Rogue that doesn't abuse these should be ashamed of himself. Also, Spider Man.


----------



## MaelStorm

Dire Bare said:
			
		

> I'm pretty sure that there has been 12 confirmed for the PHB, and at least several of the PHB paths are open to more than one class.  So each PHB class should have 2-3 path options out of the 12 paths offered in the PHB.  But I'm too lazy to look it up, so no linky for you!
> 
> Of course, Paragon Paths look super easy to create, and I'm sure we'll see at least a few in Dragon before the next hardcover even hits the shelves.  By the end of the year, we'll be up to our ears in Paragon Paths!!!



It was an old news. Maybe at that time there were only 12 confirmed path but there is now a total of 24.


----------



## Colmarr

Torchlyte said:
			
		

> *Danger Sense* — _Roll twice for initiative, use the higher result_
> *Seize the Moment Dex* Dex 17 _Gain combat advantage over foe with lower initiative_
> 
> Any Rogue that doesn't abuse these should be ashamed of himself. Also, Spider Man.




Yep, one of my co-players has already noticed that combo. Nasty isn't it


----------



## ShockMeSane

That One Guy said:
			
		

> 24 is mathematically sound. It offers 3 paths per class. Or even 2/class and then 8 universal. Even if there are 24 (which sounds like a good number), I hope the DMG offers even more... although I doubt it.




I could see 24. 1 per class build (16), and 8 general. Sounds reasonable. 40 would be better


----------



## Lurker59

In addition to the eight in the preview there are at least five others in blogs (Iron Vanguard, Battle Captain, Battle Archer, Spellstorm Mage, and Astral Weapon) that are from the PHB (and one, wildfire genasi, which is probably in the FR PHB). So we've already seen 13 from PHB, and I seriously doubt they've shown us all of the paths.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

At first I thought (reading the Cleric and Fighter entries): "Huh? That's not a lot of stuff for a Path." Then I got to the Stormwarden entry...
Suffice to say that I was stupid and unable to notice that they didn't post the powers for most paths. 

So, now, after seeing the Stormwarden entry - Paragon Paths look good. My only remaining disappointment is that they seem to be more class-focused then advertised earlier (R&C). But maybe multiclassing can compensate that, and looking at the Stormwarden, there isn't necessarily something wrong with class-focussed Paths.  I really hope there are more then 2 Paths for each class.


----------



## ShockMeSane

Colmarr said:
			
		

> Yep, one of my co-players has already noticed that combo. Nasty isn't it




I wouldn't be at all surprised to see that "Seize the moment" ability to have some restrictions. Remember, we're basically just seeing the information that is contained in the feat summary chart, not the actual listing for the feat itself. Free sneak attacks for the entire battle with a good initiative roll seems pretty unlikely to me. But who knows, the first time I saw a chained, empowered, maximized, split-rayed, twin-spelled enervate deal 24 negative levels to 8 enemies, I was a little incredulous as well. Sadly, its possible depending on your interpretation of how certain feats stack =/


----------



## That One Guy

Lurker59 said:
			
		

> In addition to the eight in the preview there are at least five others in blogs (Iron Vanguard, Battle Captain, Battle Archer, Spellstorm Mage, and Astral Weapon) that are from the PHB (and one, wildfire genasi, which is probably in the FR PHB). So we've already seen 13 from PHB, and I seriously doubt they've shown us all of the paths.




+1 radiant servant (I edited a post of mine up above to include this cleric path briefly mentioned in the excerpt).
14.


----------



## ShockMeSane

Mustrum_Ridcully said:
			
		

> At first I thought (reading the Cleric and Fighter entries): "Huh? That's not a lot of stuff for a Path." Then I got to the Stormwarden entry...
> Suffice to say that I was stupid and unable to notice that they didn't post the powers for most paths.
> 
> So, now, after seeing the Stormwarden entry - Paragon Paths look good. My only remaining disappointment is that they seem to be more class-focused then advertised earlier (R&C). But maybe multiclassing can compensate that, and looking at the Stormwarden, there isn't necessarily something wrong with class-focussed Paths.  I really hope there are more then 2 Paths for each class.




Yea, that Druid entry someone posted seemed to indicate about 4 paragon paths per class, though that may simply be because it is being published in PHB2 and takes into account that the book will include additional Paragon Paths for existing classes (very likely). 3 Paragon paths/class seems likely.


----------



## MaelStorm

I could see 18 paths linked to each class:

Cleric, 2 paths
Fighter, 2 paths
Paladin, 2 paths
Ranger, 2 paths
Rogue, 2 paths
Warlock, 4 paths (1 for each pact)
Warlord, 2 paths
Wizard, 2 paths

Plus 6 paths available to multiple class.


----------



## FadedC

ShockMeSane said:
			
		

> I wouldn't be at all surprised to see that "Seize the moment" ability to have some restrictions. Remember, we're basically just seeing the information that is contained in the feat summary chart, not the actual listing for the feat itself. Free sneak attacks for the entire battle with a good initiative roll seems pretty unlikely to me. But who knows, the first time I saw a chained, empowered, maximized, split-rayed, twin-spelled enervate deal 24 negative levels to 8 enemies, I was a little incredulous as well. Sadly, its possible depending on your interpretation of how certain feats stack =/




Seize the moment may also only work on the first round of combat, like the rogue class feature (making it useless for rogues but useful for other classes). I guess we will have to read the longer description of it when it comes out.


----------



## Kobold Avenger

Nothing says a Stormwarden can't use Blade-Storm and Twin Blade-Storm in the same round, or can't target the same opponent 3 times.


----------



## Destil

*Magical martial!*

Interesting... We now see what R&D was talking about when it comes to the martial power source being only the 'least magical' instead of entirely nonmagical. 

Kensei fighters gaining a mystical bond with their chosen weapon.

Stormwarden rangers slipping into wild plane of existence and empowering their attacks with lightning.

Not high magic, but both fit their classes well. The rogue and warlord paths, on the other hand, look to be firmly rooted in the mundane. Hopefully such options will be open for all 4 martial classes.


----------



## Spatula

bjorn2bwild said:
			
		

> Well, it lets the mage threaten without wielding a weapon.  That's pretty impressive in my opinion.



If threatening opponents in melee was a prime task of a wizard, I would agree.  Generally melee is someplace that a wizard does not want to be, though.  But perhaps the battlemage's powers focus on protecting the wizard from physical harm.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Destil said:
			
		

> Interesting... We now see what R&D was talking about when it comes to the martial power source being only the 'least magical' instead of entirely nonmagical.
> 
> Kensei fighters gaining a mystical bond with their chosen weapon.
> 
> Stormwarden rangers slipping into wild plane of existence and empowering their attacks with lightning.
> 
> Not high magic, but both fit their classes well. The rogue and warlord paths, on the other hand, look to be firmly rooted in the mundane. Hopefully such options will be open for all 4 martial classes.



You're right, I totally missed that implication!


----------



## wedgeski

Torchlyte said:
			
		

> Ultimate Rogue Power 20
> _You run up to someone and, like a camel, stab them in the face._



And there goes my morning coffee... /sigh


----------



## Plane Sailing

Colmarr said:
			
		

> Emphasis mine. Who says?
> 
> My point is that this rule is either (A) problematic in its operation (if it does apply retrospectively) or (B) poorly drafted (if it doesn't). I stand by that position.
> 
> And in case people are about to "fire up", don't get me wrong. I'm not rubbishing 4e. I was the one who pushed my defunct gaming group back into D&D when 4e was announced. IIRC I have loved 90% of the information released about 4e so far. The great majority of my 4e posts have been positive. But as a long-time DM, I read this power and immediately saw problems with it...




You're seeing a problem that doesn't exist IMO.

The drafting of the rule is fine. I think that the vast majority of people would just assume that extra damage would be applied from the point the action point is spent onwards. 

Applying damage 'retroactively' is such a bizarre thing to do that IF they had wanted to do that, *they would have spelt it out in the power*.

The intention seems obvious to me; I venture to suggest that most users of 4e will follow the logic of 'effect follows cause' rather than invert it for no reason.

Cheers


----------



## Fiendish Dire Weasel

I think there is some confusion going on between *Paragon Paths * and *Epic Destinies* due to our lack of familiarity with 4E.

I believe the *Paragon Paths * (11th-20th) are class specific and we'll see 3-4 of them per class in the PHB. While the *Epic Destinies* (21st-30th) are each open to several classes, we may only see a dozen or so of these in the PHB.


----------



## Cirex

Torchlyte said:
			
		

> Agreed.
> 
> *Danger Sense* — _Roll twice for initiative, use the higher result_
> 
> *Seize the Moment Dex* Dex 17 _Gain combat advantage over foe with lower initiative_
> 
> Any Rogue that doesn't abuse these should be ashamed of himself. Also, Spider Man.




We got to see the restriction on Seize the Moment. It may be once per encounter or something like that.

I really like the preview. The paragon paths are looking quite good, with some new kind of feats (dealing auto-damage based on stat on certain circunstances, kinda like new cleave) and interesting powers (sadly we only got to see ranger ones).


----------



## ShockMeSane

Well, we also know that some Paragon paths are related to Race, as one of the playtesters or Devs or somebody posted about choosing a Genasi Paragon Path (Wildfire Genasi) for their Warlock. I'd say this indicates that there will be pre-requisites for Paragon Paths (and general usefulness, as opposed to specific) other than class.

(edited to change wizard to warlock and added the paragon path's name)


----------



## Fallen Seraph

One fun one people have missed to is this:



> *Underfoot * - Halfling, trained in Acrobatics - Move through spaces of Large or larger creatures



Now I don't know about you, but that is quite fun.


----------



## Plane Sailing

Destil said:
			
		

> Interesting... We now see what R&D was talking about when it comes to the martial power source being only the 'least magical' instead of entirely nonmagical.
> 
> Kensei fighters gaining a mystical bond with their chosen weapon.
> 
> Stormwarden rangers slipping into wild plane of existence and empowering their attacks with lightning.
> 
> Not high magic, but both fit their classes well. The rogue and warlord paths, on the other hand, look to be firmly rooted in the mundane. Hopefully such options will be open for all 4 martial classes.




Of course, for those who want less magic in their martial...

Kensei business is just flavour text

Stormwarden rangers - the teleport could be redefined as a shift that doesn't cause OA, and the lightning damage can be redefined as weapon damage.

So it is still looking promising for keeping martial non-magical.


----------



## Darth Cyric

Stormwarden = Desert Wind but with lightning instead of fire. I like, I like.



			
				Kobold Avenger said:
			
		

> Nothing says a Stormwarden can't use Blade-Storm and Twin Blade-Storm in the same round, or can't target the same opponent 3 times.



Half-correct. "Two enemies" with TBS seems pretty straightforward to me.

I think it'll either be:

3 enemies hit (one with BS, two with TBS), or

2 enemies hit (one hit twice w/ TBS + BS, the other w/ just TBS)


----------



## ShockMeSane

Plane Sailing said:
			
		

> Of course, for those who want less magic in their martial...
> 
> Kensei business is just flavour text
> 
> Stormwarden rangers - the teleport could be redefined as a shift that doesn't cause OA, and the lightning damage can be redefined as weapon damage.
> 
> So it is still looking promising for keeping martial non-magical.




Well, Rangers have always been a bit magical 

As far as the Kensei, yea, its pretty easy to just describe that as weapon focus/specialization if you want to de-mystify it.


----------



## Derren

Cadfan said:
			
		

> and that a wizard is more likely to have good Dex than Str,




Dex adds to the same saving throw than int, or?

Also whats up with the Sword Marshal path? It mentions heavy and light blades but all powers so far are either generic or heavy blade only.
Is it correct that those are all PPs which will appear in the core books?


----------



## frankthedm

Fallen Seraph said:
			
		

> Rechan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But I like them.
> 
> Also, Star pact mentions. Doesn't look very Far Realms, as some were suspecting. Star Pacts may be related to Fate, perhaps.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I noticed that too. Makes me very happy
Click to expand...


Don't be too certain there isn't lovecraftian flavor in there.  



> Warlock: Doomsayer
> “I speak for the cold darkness beyond the stars. I see the myriad ways that doom comes upon you.”


----------



## Graf

Shame that they're all class based. 

I'd predicted that but I did secretly hope that the CW (that they would be broad, or have interesting story mechanics instead of just "you're more of a ranger" was going to be true).

The Doomsayer has good flavor though. I don't mind shameless cribbing, if it's lovecraft.


----------



## Fallen Seraph

Oh I bet there will be some Lovecraft bent, but... Still, the fact there is references to Fate makes me happy  I am hopeful it means I can atleast pick and choose my powers to be completely Fate, Time, Destiny, etc, etc. oriented.


----------



## FireLance

DevoutlyApathetic said:
			
		

> I can not claim to be impressed by the flavor of the options on offer. (I'm a warlord, but I  _really really_ like swords!)  Though you are all ignoring the option to multiclass instead of a path.
> 
> I wonder what you get instead of the AP boost thing then?



See here for my speculation.

Short answer: choose one of the following from the secondary class: 
1. weapon proficiencies
2. armor proficiencies
3. one trained skill
4. one at-will ability


----------



## Graf

Mustrum_Ridcully said:
			
		

> At first I thought (reading the Cleric and Fighter entries): "Huh? That's not a lot of stuff for a Path." Then I got to the Stormwarden entry...
> Suffice to say that I was stupid and unable to notice that they didn't post the powers for most paths.
> 
> So, now, after seeing the Stormwarden entry - Paragon Paths look good. My only remaining disappointment is that they seem to be more class-focused then advertised earlier (R&C). But maybe multiclassing can compensate that, and looking at the Stormwarden, there isn't necessarily something wrong with class-focussed Paths.  I really hope there are more then 2 Paths for each class.



 But you multi-class -isntead- of taking a paragon class, no?

I was not so happy to hear that multi-classing will be that restricted. Somewhat restricted is fine but only-once-at-this-level (10th) seems a bit harsh.

Maybe they've fixed skills in some fashion so this isn't as weird as it sounds.


----------



## Fallen Seraph

Graf said:
			
		

> But you multi-class -isntead- of taking a paragon class, no?
> 
> I was not so happy to hear that multi-classing will be that restricted. Somewhat restricted is fine but only-once-at-this-level (10th) seems a bit harsh.
> 
> Maybe they've fixed skills in some fashion so this isn't as weird as it sounds.



I personally don't think it will be the only multi-classing. I think it will just be on option. You figure we have:

-This one: Where you select powers you wish
-The Progression one: Where the more you multi-class the more of the class you achieve.
-Class-Training: Where you gain specific benefits from a class.


----------



## FireLance

ShockMeSane said:
			
		

> Check the monsters damage bonuses. They certainly do not reflect anything other than the unmodified bonus to the appropriate attack type. For example the Pit Fiend's entry shows his Strength as Str 32 (+24), his base bonus is +11, +13 more for 1/2 his level. Yet all his bonus damage is at +11. The conventional wisdom is that the number in parenthesis is the modifier that is used for NPC skill-checks, as these do progress at 1/2 level.
> 
> It was confusing for me at first too



I'm guessing that a reference to the ability itself includes the +1/2 level increase, e.g. Strength vs. AC, Intelligence vs. Reflex, Wisdom vs. Will.

A reference to the ability "modifier" does not include the +1/2 level increase and is simply 1/2 ability score - 5, e.g. 2[W] + Strength modifier damage, you slide the target a number of squares equal to your Charisma modifier, the bonus to attack rolls that you grant equals 1 + your Intelligence modifier.


----------



## FireLance

Fallen Seraph said:
			
		

> Perhaps, it is something where there are Heavy Blades in various proficiencies, so it means that the Warlord can use any Heavy Blades?
> 
> Or perhaps... With multiclassing you may not gain access to the Warlord's proficiencies but could say have a feat that allows for Heavy Blades use?



Or, it could just be redundant prerequisites, e.g. the Elven Precision feat listed elf and Elven Accuracy as prerequisites even though (as far as we know) all elves get the Elven Accuracy encounter ability.


----------



## frankthedm

Fallen Seraph said:
			
		

> Oh I bet there will be some Lovecraft bent, but... Still, the fact there is references to Fate makes me happy  I am hopeful it means I can atleast pick and choose my powers to be completely Fate, Time, Destiny, etc, etc. oriented.



Yeah, there is  some_thing_ out there that is willing to grant you those powers, all in exchange for dedicating the souls of your foes to It. Good deal eh?


----------



## Pinotage

Have I missed something? Do you HAVE to take a paragon path? There's no option not to? It's either multiclass or paragon path?

Pinotage


----------



## AverageCitizen

I have this terrible fear that this _is_ multi-classing in 4e.

Other than that, everything looks really awesome.

I do hope there's more non-combat abilities. In my games information is better than platinum, and my players almost always have a few who specialize in information gathering. Not to say they can't fight, which I think fits well in 4e, as everybody fights, but some investigation related abilities would be nice. 

We'll have to see how the skills go down I guess.


----------



## Mathew_Freeman

I would like to start a petition to rename "Arcane Riposte" to "I Slap You With My Lightning Hands", please. 

Loving the article - full of lovely crunchy goodness!


----------



## OakwoodDM

AverageCitizen said:
			
		

> I have this terrible fear that this _is_ multi-classing in 4e.




I'm pretty sure you have nothing to fear in that respect. The schedule of Excerpts (shown in a different thread on ENWorld) includes one a week from now entitled 'Multiclassing'. I doubt they'd put out an excerpt simply saying "See the Paragon Paths article". They may get a few complaints if they did.


----------



## Mathew_Freeman

Pinotage said:
			
		

> Have I missed something? Do you HAVE to take a paragon path? There's no option not to? It's either multiclass or paragon path?
> 
> Pinotage




That's correct - but there is no downside to having a paragon path, unlike a Prestige Class. You still gain ALL of the powers that you would do without it, rather than substituting them.


----------



## Minigiant

My guess is about 20 paths in the phb

1 for each class (8)
1 for each power source (3)
4 bonus role paths (striker, leader, etc..)
2 or 3 racial paths (arcane archer, dwarven defender)
2 or 3 proficiency/style paths (melee, ranged, spell, healer)

So and elf fighter might have access to

Fighter path (kensai)
Elf/Half-elf/Eladrin path (arcane archer)
Martial controller path (master thrower)
Generic Melee path (????)

or multiclass


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Tallarn said:
			
		

> That's correct - but there is no downside to having a paragon path, unlike a Prestige Class. You still gain ALL of the powers that you would do without it, rather than substituting them.



Actually, I think that's not entirely correct. This is just me guessing and speculating, but I think if you would take the Heroic Level Advancement and extrapolate it to Paragon levels, and then compare to the actual Paragon levels, I suspect you will notice some spots in your advancement where you learn the Paragon Path powers, where the extrapolated Paragon levels would imply a new class-related power. 
So in way, you're "losing" something. But everybody loses the same and gets compensated with Paragon abilities. 

Oh, I don't just have to speculate - I could use the excerpts!
If you look at the "Power per Class Level" table from the Tiers excerpt, you'll see that characters gain not only better, but also more powers over the course of the Heroic tier. At Paragon and Epic tiers, this advancement stops, and you gain only additional abilities per day/encounter due to your Paragon/Epic paths.

But you still continue improving your class powers. But the number of powers you know does not increase any more.


----------



## Pistonrager

Tallarn said:
			
		

> That's correct - but there is no downside to having a paragon path, unlike a Prestige Class. You still gain ALL of the powers that you would do without it, rather than substituting them.




not quite... it says you can multiclass instead.


----------



## tec-goblin

Amy Kou'ai said:
			
		

> Thoughts:
> Wow, I'm amazed at how compact Paragon Paths are.  I guess we'll be seeing a lot of them.



It's not as compact as it seems. I mean, we don't have the daily powers, nor the full encounter/minor power text, nor the flavour text, nor the sample npc (that we'll soon see in the sourcebooks) etc. I can easily see how it can get 4 pages long without starting stating the obvious.



> Huh, you can do multiclass stuff instead of taking a Paragon Path.  Hopefully this doesn't preclude multiclassing before Level 10.



Yes, I hope too there's some limited form with feats etc.


----------



## Ondo

Fiendish Dire Weasel said:
			
		

> I think there is some confusion going on between *Paragon Paths * and *Epic Destinies* due to our lack of familiarity with 4E.
> 
> I believe the *Paragon Paths * (11th-20th) are class specific and we'll see 3-4 of them per class in the PHB. While the *Epic Destinies* (21st-30th) are each open to several classes, we may only see a dozen or so of these in the PHB.



That's not what is causing the confusion.  Races & Classes specifically said that they were planning 12 Paragon Paths, each aimed primarily at two classes, so each class led to three paths.

Obviously that's changed.


----------



## Xanaqui

Vaeron said:
			
		

> The paladin paragon path is amazing...  saving throw rerolls for all allies, allies immune to charm and fear, using an action point weakens all adjacent enemies.  Crazy!




Note that their abilities require them to be adjacent to the ones they're affecting. That's a big deal (at least on the ally side) in prior editions, at least if the GM uses creatures with area effects or creatures that can move through or around the "front line".


----------



## AllisterH

First thing Im going to do with the paragon paths when I get the PHB is see how "unbalancing" it would be to eliminate the "class" requirement. Don't see why say a warlock wouldn't want Arcane Riposte etc.


----------



## Ulthwithian

I think the best hint as to the number of PPs that exist in the PHB would be the Stormwarden and the Doomsayer (and perhaps others).  Both require a specific 'build option' (TWF for Ranger, Star Pact for Warlock).  To have a PP for some builds and not others seem rather heartless for WotC to do, and thus you can set a minimum number at:

4+3+2+2+2+2+2+2=19 (Warlocks have 4 options; Wizards 3; I assume the others have two)

There are two issues with this number.  First, the Warlock gets more Paths than everyone else.  Second, _every_ build option has only one PP that is optimized for it, and thus the choice inherent in PPs becomes in actuality no choice at all.  Therefore, you could expand the number of choices to 4 per class.  This would eliminate the first issue, and mitigate in large degree the second issue (Warlock would still 'suffer' from it).

I hope they chose this route.


----------



## Charwoman Gene

Ondo said:
			
		

> Races & Classes specifically said




That this is information almost a year out of date.  Races and classes is a nice art and fluff book.  It's also an old design diary.  It's not good on specifics.


----------



## Pinotage

Tallarn said:
			
		

> That's correct - but there is no downside to having a paragon path, unlike a Prestige Class. You still gain ALL of the powers that you would do without it, rather than substituting them.




So, in other words, you get shoehorned into a concept unless you buy the splat books that might containt the concept you're after? I can't believe that you can't progress as a single class only.

Pinotage


----------



## Voss

AverageCitizen said:
			
		

> I have this terrible fear that this _is_ multi-classing in 4e.




Me too.  Coupled with class training feats, I suspect thats the whole package.



On another note, the Doomshaper is reinforcing certain images in my head.
"In the name of the Zero Star, Saggitarrius, I, Sailor Galaxia, will punish you!"

Yep, I can't shake the feeling that the warlock (and the cleric, and bits of the wizard) can feel like Sailor Moon style magical girls.  I don't necessarily feel bad about this, because I'm a disturbed individual, but I can totally see a party of 2 warlocks, 2 clerics and a wizard focused on ray attacks spinning around, posing and shouting out attack names.  Maybe with a 'Tuxedo Moron' paladin mascot.


----------



## Plane Sailing

Pinotage said:
			
		

> So, in other words, you get shoehorned into a concept unless you buy the splat books that might containt the concept you're after? I can't believe that you can't progress as a single class only.




I imagine that it will be possible to great a generic Paragon Path (perhaps called simply "Paragon") which instead of giving paragon-specific abilities gives a slightly broader range of class abilities by extending the pattern of heroic ability gains into the paragon levels.

Of course, the 'multiclassing' alternative to paragon paths might be fine for providing additional character concepts too (since presumably with 8 classes each of which could multiclass with one of 7 other classes, that would provide for an additional 49 character concepts).

Cheers


----------



## Pinotage

Plane Sailing said:
			
		

> I imagine that it will be possible to great a generic Paragon Path (perhaps called simply "Paragon") which instead of giving paragon-specific abilities gives a slightly broader range of class abilities by extending the pattern of heroic ability gains into the paragon levels.
> 
> Of course, the 'multiclassing' alternative to paragon paths might be fine for providing additional character concepts too (since presumably with 8 classes each of which could multiclass with one of 7 other classes, that would provide for an additional 49 character concepts).
> 
> Cheers




I hope there's an answer. I'd be disappointed if you were forced to make a paragon path choice or even if your fighter had to take ranger or warlord abilities in the paragon tier because there was no other way to do it.

Pinotage


----------



## AllisterH

Voss said:
			
		

> Me too.  Coupled with class training feats, I suspect thats the whole package.
> 
> 
> 
> On another note, the Doomshaper is reinforcing certain images in my head.
> "In the name of the Zero Star, Saggitarrius, I, Sailor Galaxia, will punish you!"
> 
> Yep, I can't shake the feeling that the warlock (and the cleric, and bits of the wizard) can feel like Sailor Moon style magical girls.  I don't necessarily feel bad about this, because I'm a disturbed individual, but I can totally see a party of 2 warlocks, 2 clerics and a wizard focused on ray attacks spinning around, posing and shouting out attack names.  Maybe with a 'Tuxedo Moron' paladin mascot.




*LOL*

Don't feel too bad. I was thinking the same thing...

Still wondering *WHY* the added restriction of specific class for the Requirements. Definitely going to be going over that with a fine tooth comb to see how broken it gets if I allow any class to take said path.


----------



## Lizard

Having trouble parsing this:
"Warpriest’s Challenge (16th level): When you hit an enemy with an at-will melee attack, you can choose to mark that enemy for the rest of the encounter. The next time that enemy shifts or attacks a creature other than you, you can make an opportunity attack against that enemy. If you mark a new enemy with this feature, any previous marks you have made with this feature end."

How does "the rest of the encounter" fit with "the next time"? Does the mark go away once it's been triggered once, but lasts until then? Also, are opportunity attacks explicitly melee? 'Cause if you can make them ranged, and it does last the whole encounter, the warpriest just became the ultimate sniper.

(Mark, run, then shoot every time the poor thing shifts...)

I assume I'm misreading this.


----------



## Domon

> Yep, I can't shake the feeling that the warlock (and the cleric, and bits of the wizard) can feel like Sailor Moon style magical girls. I don't necessarily feel bad about this, because I'm a disturbed individual, but I can totally see a party of 2 warlocks, 2 clerics and a wizard focused on ray attacks spinning around, posing and shouting out attack names. Maybe with a 'Tuxedo Moron' paladin mascot.




you, sir, should never, ever, get to play eXalted.


----------



## DeusExMachina

Yes, OA's are exclusively melee attacks...


----------



## Voss

Domon said:
			
		

> you, sir, should never, ever, get to play eXalted.




Eh.  Like most white wolf games, I find the setting interesting, at least until you get to the point of entropy rape demons and 'wild (wyld) = crazy, because we've added a y!', but ultimately the system is pretty terrible. 

But while it does the boy's fighting manga pretty well, it doesn't do much for the magical girl genre. This does.  Now, I'm a bit crazy and kind of like it, but I'd rather avoid that particular flavor in some campaigns- at least my own dark age-ish setting.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Lizard said:
			
		

> Having trouble parsing this:
> "Warpriest’s Challenge (16th level): When you hit an enemy with an at-will melee attack, you can choose to mark that enemy for the rest of the encounter. The next time that enemy shifts or attacks a creature other than you, you can make an opportunity attack against that enemy. If you mark a new enemy with this feature, any previous marks you have made with this feature end."
> 
> How does "the rest of the encounter" fit with "the next time"? Does the mark go away once it's been triggered once, but lasts until then? Also, are opportunity attacks explicitly melee? 'Cause if you can make them ranged, and it does last the whole encounter, the warpriest just became the ultimate sniper.
> 
> (Mark, run, then shoot every time the poor thing shifts...)
> 
> I assume I'm misreading this.



Generally, (barring any exception ability) you make only melee opportunity attacks.
Warlords seem generally more melee focused, which means it is unlikely anyway that they would be good enough at ranged combat to this being a good tactic. (Especially since you still have to make at least one succesful melee attack). It would perhaps be more interesting for a Ranger/Warlord multiclass character.

But I am also not whether "the next time" means that the effect ends or not. I believe the benefit could end, otherwise it should probably be phrased "each time..." But the mark seems to stay.
But I still haven't seen enough abilities to get a feeling for the precise details of the language used for 4E.

It certainly looks more like a class feature that transforms the Warlord a little bit towards Defender instead of Leader.


----------



## Lacyon

Lizard said:
			
		

> Having trouble parsing this:
> "Warpriest’s Challenge (16th level): When you hit an enemy with an at-will melee attack, you can choose to mark that enemy for the rest of the encounter. The next time that enemy shifts or attacks a creature other than you, you can make an opportunity attack against that enemy. If you mark a new enemy with this feature, any previous marks you have made with this feature end."
> 
> How does "the rest of the encounter" fit with "the next time"? Does the mark go away once it's been triggered once, but lasts until then? Also, are opportunity attacks explicitly melee? 'Cause if you can make them ranged, and it does last the whole encounter, the warpriest just became the ultimate sniper.




The target is marked for the rest of the encounter, getting -2 to hit on his attacks if he doesn't include you as a target.

The next time he shifts or attacks someone other than you, you can make an OA on him.

Does that help?



			
				Lizard said:
			
		

> (Mark, run, then shoot every time the poor thing shifts...)
> 
> I assume I'm misreading this.




I'm pretty sure you can't make OAs with a ranged weapon.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Voss said:
			
		

> Eh.  Like most white wolf games, I find the setting interesting, at least until you get to the point of entropy rape demons and 'wild (wyld) = crazy, because we've added a y!', but ultimately the system is pretty terrible.
> 
> But while it does the boy's fighting manga pretty well, it doesn't do much for the magical girl genre. This does.  Now, I'm a bit crazy and kind of like it, but I'd rather avoid that particular flavor in some campaigns- at least my own dark age-ish setting.



I am not really much into anime - not because I don't like it, it's just I never found the time for it. But I remember seeing a little bit of Sailor Moon (my sisters, many years ago, seemed to enjoy it, even though the German version was strongly changed due to the translation, I suppose because it was treated like a "kids show".) and Cowboy Bebop (liked that one a lot). So, I didn't really get that vibe. I suppose it's possible to create it, if you want, and ignore it, if you don't care for it. But it might be a tiny hint that, just maybe, 4E might have some elements that are suitable for attracting female gamers.


----------



## vagabundo

Pinotage said:
			
		

> I hope there's an answer. I'd be disappointed if you were forced to make a paragon path choice or even if your fighter had to take ranger or warlord abilities in the paragon tier because there was no other way to do it.
> 
> Pinotage




You *could* multiclass with your own class...


----------



## Voss

vagabundo said:
			
		

> You *could* multiclass with your own class...




Thats an odd assumption.  What would it give you?  You already have the class features...


----------



## small pumpkin man

Lizard said:
			
		

> Having trouble parsing this:
> "Warpriest’s Challenge (16th level): When you hit an enemy with an at-will melee attack, you can choose to mark that enemy for the rest of the encounter. The next time that enemy shifts or attacks a creature other than you, you can make an opportunity attack against that enemy. If you mark a new enemy with this feature, any previous marks you have made with this feature end."
> 
> How does "the rest of the encounter" fit with "the next time"? Does the mark go away once it's been triggered once, but lasts until then?



It lasts untill the encounter ends, or you mark someone else, whichever comes first. Just like the Paladin's mark.


			
				Lizard said:
			
		

> Also, are opportunity attacks explicitly melee? 'Cause if you can make them ranged, and it does last the whole encounter, the warpriest just became the ultimate sniper.
> 
> (Mark, run, then shoot every time the poor thing shifts...)
> 
> I assume I'm misreading this.



Why would you even think that? Of course you have to threaten them or whatever the 4e equivelent term is when they do it, that should be obvious, in fact threatening beyond adjacent is specifically _harder_ to do in 4e, which you should know since you follow the announcements as much as anyone else on the board.


----------



## WyzardWhately

I wouldn't worry too much about a paragon path shoehorning your character into a concept.  It looks to me like it's just a small collection of combat stuff under the umbrella of some pretty generic flavor text.

Also: I have hated like every little in-character quote they've included in these previews.  Good lord, maybe it's the effects of growing up in a point of light or something, but nobody in D&D-land ever seems to have much interesting to say.  Ugh.


----------



## Lackhand

vagabundo said:
			
		

> You *could* multiclass with your own class...



Ew no.

But I fail to see how a fighter at 10th level multiclassing with marsha-- I mean, warlord -- is a problem. Indeed, it strikes me as very 1st edition.

This free multiclass is completely reasonable for a raft of classes -- fighter, paladin, cleric, wizard, and warlock can all supply some quite reasonable multiclassing -- but I'm not sure what the rogue or ranger would get forcibly multiclassed into.


My guess for how this works, by the way: The class-training feat grants access to a few of the 1st level class features of the class you're after, and maybe a skill or a power.
This grants the rest of the features and regular access to the power list.


----------



## Xanaqui

Ulthwithian said:
			
		

> First, the Warlock gets more Paths than everyone else.  Second, _every_ build option has only one PP that is optimized for it, and thus the choice inherent in PPs becomes in actuality no choice at all.  Therefore, you could expand the number of choices to 4 per class.  This would eliminate the first issue, and mitigate in large degree the second issue (Warlock would still 'suffer' from it).
> 
> I hope they chose this route.



Considering that in every prior edition, certain classes (major spellcasters) consumed far more text than non-spellcasters, I don't expect the number of builds to be exactly equal between classes (at least within the PH). I'm hoping that each class has at least 2. I also don't expect the number of Paths to be equal between classes.

More paths and builds can always be added later. Heck, we have enough information now that we could construct some draft ones ourselves.

[SBLOCK]
_I am your shadow. I am my Shadow. I am everyone's shadow._

Rogue: *Shadow Dancer*
Prerequisite: Rogue class

You become one with the shadows.

Shadow Dancer Path Features

    Shadow Dancer’s Action (11th level): When you spend an action point to take an extra action, you may make a hide check at the end of that action, even if you lack cover.

    Shadow Dancer’s Pointe (11th level): Whenever you critical with an attack, you may make a hide check at the end of that action, even if you lack cover.

    Shadow Dance (16th level): Whenever you make a hide check, you may teleport up to 3 to any place that is not brightly lit as a minor action.

Shadow Dancer Exploits

    Shadow Twirl Shadow Dancer Attack 11
_You twirl around to avoid your opponent's attack, drawing the shadows around you._

    Encounter Shadow,Weapon
    Standard Action Close 1
    Requirement: You must not be in a brightly lit area.
    Target: 1 adjacent enemy
    Attack: Dex vs. AC

    Hit: 1[W] + Dexterity modifier damage, and you gain +4 to your AC until the beginning of your next turn.

    Living Shadow Shadow Dancer Utility 12
_The Shadows are moving!_

    Encounter Shadow
    Minor Action Personal

    Effect: You gain combat advantage against all opponents within 10 squares that are not in brightly lit squares until the beginning of your next turn.

    One with the Shadow Shadow Dancer Attack 20
_The shadows gather to copy your attack._

    Daily Shadow, Weapon
    Standard Action Close 1
    Requirement: You must not be in a brightly lit square. Your opponent must not be in a brightly lit square.
    Target: One enemy in reach
    Attack: Dex vs. Reflex, four attacks per target

    Hit: 2[W] + Dex modifier damage per attack.

    Effect: You gain an action point if all four attacks hit.
[/SBLOCK]


----------



## vagabundo

Voss said:
			
		

> Thats an odd assumption.  What would it give you?  You already have the class features...




More tongue in cheek really. I'm sure you don't have to multi-class, I doubt it will lead to a suboptimal character.


----------



## lightblade

Green Knight said:
			
		

> Those are skill bonuses. They don't affect things like bonus to hit and damage due to strength. A Fighter with Str 18 gets +4 to hit and +4 to damage due to his strength at Level 1, and he gets +4 to hit and +4 to damage due to his strength at Level 30.




Actually, the best guess is they DO affect to hit rolls.  Str versus AC, for example, would take this into account. Basically, this half-level bonus is the new BAB.


----------



## Mathew_Freeman

In terms of multi-classing, if you were a fighter it would be an excellent opportunity to pick up class powers for a different set of weapons.


----------



## Charwoman Gene

WyzardWhately said:
			
		

> I wouldn't worry too much about a paragon path shoehorning your character into a concept.  It looks to me like it's just a small collection of combat stuff under the umbrella of some pretty generic flavor text.




Yeah, just like that time that Aragorn and Drizzt shot lightning bolts out therr arsed.

when Drizzt is used as a sane example of a ranger, worry.


----------



## The_Fan

Tallarn said:
			
		

> I would like to start a petition to rename "Arcane Riposte" to "I Slap You With My Lightning Hands", please.
> 
> Loving the article - full of lovely crunchy goodness!



 Only if I can have my dragonborn warlock's eldritch blast come from his mouth, and call it "Imma Firin Mah Lazar!"


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Xanaqui said:
			
		

> Considering that in every prior edition, certain classes (major spellcasters) consumed far more text than non-spellcasters, I don't expect the number of builds to be exactly equal between classes (at least within the PH). I'm hoping that each class has at least 2. I also don't expect the number of Paths to be equal between classes.
> 
> More paths and builds can always be added later. Heck, we have enough information now that we could construct some draft ones ourselves.
> 
> [SBLOCK]
> _I am your shadow. I am my Shadow. I am everyone's shadow._
> 
> Rogue: *Shadow Dancer*
> Prerequisite: Rogue class
> 
> You become one with the shadows.
> 
> Shadow Dancer Path Features
> 
> Shadow Dancer’s Action (11th level): When you spend an action point to take an extra action, you may make a hide check at the end of that action, even if you lack cover.
> 
> Shadow Dancer’s Pointe (11th level): Whenever you critical with an attack, you may make a hide check at the end of that action, even if you lack cover.
> 
> Shadow Dance (16th level): Whenever you make a hide check, you may teleport up to 3 to any place that is not brightly lit as a minor action.
> 
> Shadow Dancer Exploits
> 
> Shadow Twirl Shadow Dancer Attack 11
> _You twirl around to avoid your opponent's attack, drawing the shadows around you._
> 
> Encounter Shadow,Weapon
> Standard Action Close 1
> Requirement: You must not be in a brightly lit area.
> Target: 1 adjacent enemy
> Attack: Dex vs. AC
> 
> Hit: 1[W] + Dexterity modifier damage, and you gain +4 to your AC until the beginning of your next turn.
> 
> Living Shadow Shadow Dancer Utility 12
> _The Shadows are moving!_
> 
> Encounter Shadow
> Minor Action Personal
> 
> Effect: You gain combat advantage against all opponents within 10 squares that are not in brightly lit squares until the beginning of your next turn.
> 
> One with the Shadow Shadow Dancer Attack 20
> _The shadows gather to copy your attack._
> 
> Daily Shadow, Weapon
> Standard Action Close 1
> Requirement: You must not be in a brightly lit square. Your opponent must not be in a brightly lit square.
> Target: One enemy in reach
> Attack: Dex vs. Reflex, four attacks per target
> 
> Hit: 2[W] + Dex modifier damage per attack.
> 
> Effect: You gain an action point if all four attacks hit.
> [/SBLOCK]



I recommend using the spoiler blocks. Avoids strangely empty looking posts.  
See above for example and below for syntax.



		Code:
	

[sbox]your spoiler here[/sbox]


----------



## Knight Otu

Charwoman Gene said:
			
		

> That this is information almost a year out of date.



Indeed it is.


			
				WotC_Miko said:
			
		

> From the "things have evolved department": There are at least twice that number of paragon paths in the PH now.



I'd hope that the idea that other paragon paths still remain flexible in who can take them, and that the example paths are the only ones that are specific. I think a "*Prerequisite: *Divine or Martial Defender" line wouldn't be out of place, for example.


----------



## Andur

I guess having class specific, as well as class lead in, as well as "general" paragon paths are asking too much from the extrapolative thinking centers of some people here.

Exerpt means it is a brief sample, not encompassing.  Heck we didn't even get all the info on the paths presented, so assuming that a) that is all there is and b) it is the single template there is beyond asinine.

It would appear that nothing in the exerpt "negates" the info in R&C, so both MIGHT hold true.  There may be a Paragon Path for each "Heroic Build" as well as Paragon Paths which would "fit" two or more classes, as well as Paragon paths for race, skillsets, and widget abilities...

What I do see is a clear template in order for a DM to "create his own" Paragon Paths and have a pretty good idea if it is "balanced" with what else is out there...


----------



## Dausuul

Andur said:
			
		

> I guess having class specific, as well as class lead in, as well as "general" paragon paths are asking too much from the extrapolative thinking centers of some people here.
> 
> Exerpt means it is a brief sample, not encompassing.  Heck we didn't even get all the info on the paths presented, so assuming that a) that is all there is and b) it is the single template there is beyond asinine.
> 
> It would appear that nothing in the exerpt "negates" the info in R&C, so both MIGHT hold true.  There may be a Paragon Path for each "Heroic Build" as well as Paragon Paths which would "fit" two or more classes, as well as Paragon paths for race, skillsets, and widget abilities...




We got a long list of paragon paths.  Every single one of them was class-specific.  The excerpt was not described as "class-specific paragon paths" but just "paragon paths."

The logical conclusion is that paragon paths are class-specific now.


----------



## LordArchaon

I must say it's the first time I get to bad conclusions about something from the excerpts.
First thing I don't like is the requirement. Being so directly class-tied, what stopped the developers to just include the related paragon paths in the main classes as normal progression after 11th level? Really sad.
Then there's the progression itself. I and I think everyone else, would have liked a benefit every level, instead of 3 at first level and then loose progression. Ok, we're not really going to see dead levels thanks to the underlying class progression, but I don't think it's optimal design.
THERE'S A COMPLETE LACK OF OPTIONS: Why didn't they separate the paragon path powers from the features, giving the player the ability to choose each related level which power to take? Was it too difficult, or it took too much space? It would have doubled the page-space took by each paragon path, yes, but what do you think? What would have we preferred?
Plus, they could have had at least some paragon feats (say, one feat tree) specifically tied to each paragon path.

About the paragon multiclassing option, I'm not so happy with it either. First of all, a developer who anticipated an alternative to paragon paths, said it was sub-optimal. I so hope he referred to outdated info, but I so think he was referring to this.
Then, I thought paragon paths were MEANT to multiclass better, at least some of them. The assassin for example, could require rogue with at least some fighter training. That way it could give more flavor to powers.

Oh well... Maybe I'll change idea when I'll see them printed with everything else.


----------



## Lizard

Just a quick note -- the seeming inability to 'mix&match' paragon paths will probably cure a lot of the munchkin builds out there. About the only obvious avenue for exploits I see is if multiclass 'dipping' produces unexpected synergies.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Dausuul said:
			
		

> We got a long list of paragon paths.  Every single one of them was class-specific.  The excerpt was not described as "class-specific paragon paths" but just "paragon paths."
> 
> The logical conclusion is that paragon paths are class-specific now.



At least the most likely logical conclusion. 

I would have liked seeing some class/role/power source-spanning paragon paths*. Maybe at a later time?

*) The Warlord path is definitely something that allows him to do some "defending", but that's not the same as a path available both for Warlord and Fighter, for example.


----------



## Cadfan

Random thoughts.

1. A wind can flay someone.  This is not an uncommon metaphor.

2. You "have" to take a paragon path in the same sense that you "have" to take 4th level after 3rd.  My suspicion is that each class will have at least one relatively generic paragon path that "feels" an awful lot like continuing to level solely in your original class.  Look at what we've got so far.  Honestly, does taking Kensai make your fighter less fightery?  It gives you a bonus to attack and damage, and an action point ability that makes your dice more reliable.  That's about as fightery as you can get.

3. Warpriest is almost a fighter/cleric multiclass in itself.  Also, Warpriest Strategy is fun.  I love powers that ever so gently put their fingers on the scales of the game's internal balance.

4. Does the Wisdom prereq in Sly Hunter suggest that the archery build option for rangers will use wisdom as a secondary stat?  Same question re: fighters and the spear and ax feats.

5. Does Lasting Frost only apply to cold damage dealt by_ powers_?  I know we're only seeing the short previews, but that would suggest that while you can deal cold damage with Arcane Riposte, you can't inflict cold vulnerability.

6. Its becoming more and more likely that two weapon fighting is something you get from specific powers, and that these powers are the property of the ranger.  I'm ok with that, but here's my pet peeve- all the character art of characters holding two weapons.  Presumably these are not all rangers.  More art discipline!  I'm filing this with all the characters drawn in Tome of Battle wielding two weapons even though none of the maneuvers available to the drawn character were two weapon oriented, or worse, all the characters in Tome of Battle with ranged weapons in which they were not proficient.  Stop that!


----------



## Lizard

Dausuul said:
			
		

> We got a long list of paragon paths.  Every single one of them was class-specific.  The excerpt was not described as "class-specific paragon paths" but just "paragon paths."
> 
> The logical conclusion is that paragon paths are class-specific now.




With 24 paths (as per Miko) and 2 builds/class (implied by what we've seen), I suspect we'll see two class-specific paths and 8 'hybrid' paths.


----------



## Lacyon

Cadfan said:
			
		

> 4. Does the Wisdom prereq in Sly Hunter suggest that the archery build option for rangers will use wisdom as a secondary stat?  Same question re: fighters and the spear and ax feats.




Wisdom being the basis for Perception, this would make a lot of sense.


----------



## Frostmarrow

Cadfan said:
			
		

> 6. Its becoming more and more likely that two weapon fighting is something you get from specific powers, and that these powers are the property of the ranger.  I'm ok with that, but here's my pet peeve- all the character art of characters holding two weapons.  Presumably these are not all rangers.  More art discipline!  I'm filing this with all the characters drawn in Tome of Battle wielding two weapons even though none of the maneuvers available to the drawn character were two weapon oriented, or worse, all the characters in Tome of Battle with ranged weapons in which they were not proficient.  Stop that!




Art discipline? I'm not bothered at all. If the thief carries a dagger in one hand and a bag in the other I will assume he carries loot in the bag and attacks with the dagger. If the dwarven fighter carries a hammer and an axe I will assume she keeps the axe handy for ranged encounters. 

Still, it's your pet-peeve and as such it is pretty good.


----------



## Klaus

Much to like here.


----------



## Dausuul

After some more reading of the paths presented... my reaction is mostly "meh."  They look like 3.X prestige classes translated into 4E.  Nothing seems particularly innovative about them.  I was hoping paragon paths would have a different emphasis in terms of character abilities--more "hero of the kingdom" and less "bigger badder dungeon-crawler."

Well, guess it's time to start dreaming up my own set of paragon paths. I certainly won't forbid my players to take the ones in the book, but if the rest of the paths are similar to what we've seen here, I suspect I'll want to offer some more interesting possibilities.


----------



## small pumpkin man

Dausuul said:
			
		

> We got a long list of paragon paths.  Every single one of them was class-specific.  The excerpt was not described as "class-specific paragon paths" but just "paragon paths."
> 
> The logical conclusion is that paragon paths are class-specific now.



I'm going to assume 16 class paths and 8 race paths.


----------



## Storm-Bringer

The_Fan said:
			
		

> Only if I can have my dragonborn warlock's eldritch blast come from his mouth, and call it "Imma Firin Mah Lazar!"



You, sir, have won the internets.


----------



## DandD

I somehow get the feeling that the basic heroic tier classes and the more specialised paragon path-level system feels like it's inspired by D20 Modern. There, you only had 6 basic classes who could advance to level 10, and to progress further, they either needed to multiclass, or they took advanced classes. Of course, advanced classes could be take far far earlier than prestige classes and the 4th edition paragon paths. 
I guess the developers took that level progression idea from there.


----------



## MindWright

*Extra Damage Action and Order of Actions*

Why are you assuming the action point needs to be spent on the second standard action you take in a turn? The player can decide what order to take their actions in right?

So instead of:



			
				Colmarr said:
			
		

> Warpriest in combat with orc.
> Standard action: Warpriest attacks orc 1. Reduces it to 3 hp.
> Move action: Warpriest moves to orc 2, taking a OA and 10hp damage from orc 1.
> Action Point: Warpriest uses an action point to attack orc 2. As soon as he spends the action point, orc 1 keels over and dies.



You get:
Action Point: Warpriest attacks orc 1. Orc 1 keels over and dies.
Move action: Warpriest moves to orc 2 without penalty.
Standard Action: Warpriest attacks orc 2.

Instead of:


			
				Colmarr said:
			
		

> Move action: Warpriest moves into melee with orc.
> Standard action: Warpriest attacks orc 1. Reduces it to 3 hp.
> Action Point: Warpriest uses his action point to take an extra action. Orc keels over. The Warpriest is left with no other targets.



You get:
Move action: Warpriest moves into melee with orc.
Action Point: Warpriest attacks orc. Orc keels over and dies.
Warpriest still has a Standard and a Minor action available, and the standard action can be taken as a move if desired. If you attack with the standard action you get the bonus damage.

The only one that is an issue is this one:


			
				Colmarr said:
			
		

> Standard Action: Warpriest uses Cascade of light. Reduces orc to 10hp. Makes it vulnerable radiant 5.
> Action Point: Warpriest does something. Orc takes 5 points of extra damage from the Cascade of Light. The ability is radiant and the ork is now vulnerable 5 to radiant damage so it takes a total of 10 damage. The orc dies.



The problem is that the orc doesn't take damage from Cascade of Light twice, only once.

If you use the action point for the Cascade of Light you get the bonus from your Extra Damage Action ability, but you don't inflict damage a second time to take advantage of the vulnerability, at least not yet.

So I think it goes:
Action Point: Warpriest uses Cascade of Light. Reduces orc to 5hp. Makes it vulnerable radiant 5.
Free Action: Power of the Amaunator, Cascade of Light deals an additional 1d10 damage, on a roll of 5+ the orc dies. You still don't get the bonus vulnerability damage because this power adds to the damage of Cascade of Light it doesn't create new radiant damage.

The Warpriest still has a move, a standard action, and a minor action available. If he uses the standard action to inflict radiant damage on the orc, it will die.

I'm not sure why you are assuming the action point has to be spent on the last action, with this power spending it on the first action makes much more sense.


----------



## Carnivorous_Bean

There's only one thing that I don't like about the paragon paths, and that's the "kensai" stuff. As the runner of a pretty European-based campaign world, I dislike having that oriental flavor hard-wired into the description. In particular, because a slight change -- you are privy to the secrets of an ancient technique of swordsmanship -- would make it fit in with oriental, European, Aztec, Sumerian, or none-of-the-above based campaign flavor. 

Sigh.


----------



## Lacyon

Carnivorous_Bean said:
			
		

> There's only one thing that I don't like about the paragon paths, and that's the "kensai" stuff. As the runner of a pretty European-based campaign world, I dislike having that oriental flavor hard-wired into the description. In particular, because a slight change -- you are privy to the secrets of an ancient technique of swordsmanship -- would make it fit in with oriental, European, Aztec, Sumerian, or none-of-the-above based campaign flavor.
> 
> Sigh.




What does "that oriental flavor hard-wired into the description" mean?



			
				The Kensei description said:
			
		

> “My weapon and I are as one.”
> ...
> You study an ancient form of martial training that makes you one with your chosen weapon, creating a combination of destruction that few foes can long stand against.




I'm not seeing how that doesn't fit with "you are privy to the secrets of an ancient technique of swordsmanship -- would make it fit in with oriental, European, Aztec, Sumerian, or none-of-the-above based campaign flavor."

The only "oriental" flavor is in the name, that I see. The only thing we've seen that the Kensei actually gives you is, in essence, weapon specialization. You could just call it the Fighter paragon path for what it's worth.


----------



## Andor

“Let loose the gift of battle!” - This isn't a mixed metaphor, it's a pureed one.

“When you need something dead, you’ll be hard pressed to find someone better at the job than me.” - Is this an assasin or a grave robber?

“This weapon is my symbol of office, and it shines over the field of battle as I wield it against our enemies.” - Symbol of office? Shines over the battlefield? Is he fighting with a key-to-the-city +3? 






WotC needs to hire a cruel and powerful flavor text editor, who causes pain to writers who turn in stuff like this. A beholder with hemorrhoids would be ideal.


----------



## katahn

Carnivorous_Bean said:
			
		

> There's only one thing that I don't like about the paragon paths, and that's the "kensai" stuff. As the runner of a pretty European-based campaign world, I dislike having that oriental flavor hard-wired into the description. In particular, because a slight change -- you are privy to the secrets of an ancient technique of swordsmanship -- would make it fit in with oriental, European, Aztec, Sumerian, or none-of-the-above based campaign flavor.
> 
> Sigh.




Ok, change the names to fit your campaign.  "Kensai" becomes "Swordmaster" or "Weaponmaster".  Alternatively you could replace "master" in the name with "saint" if you want something closer to the actual translation if I recall correctly.

It just seems pretty silly to take issue with what the paragon path is named to me.


----------



## DandD

Fortunately for D&D 4th edition, it won't be westerner either, nor arabic, mezzo-american or hindi. It will be fantasy, where everything the gaming group accepts for themselves can play without disturbance from others.


----------



## Storm-Bringer

Carnivorous_Bean said:
			
		

> There's only one thing that I don't like about the paragon paths, and that's the "kensai" stuff. As the runner of a pretty European-based campaign world, I dislike having that oriental flavor hard-wired into the description. In particular, because a slight change -- you are privy to the secrets of an ancient technique of swordsmanship -- would make it fit in with oriental, European, Aztec, Sumerian, or none-of-the-above based campaign flavor.
> 
> Sigh.



Yeah, worse is the descriptions they have been using since that Spell Compendium:

*Your* god demands battle to accomplish the tenets of *your* faith, and *you* are the chosen priest at the forefront of the war. When *you* call upon *your* divine powers, *your* weapons glow with holy light.

Whoa, there, Chester.  I am reading a book, pretending to be an Elf.  I don't need this kind of assistance to get into the game.  Let's go back to neutral pronouns, shall we?


----------



## Lizard

Andor said:
			
		

> WotC needs to hire a cruel and powerful flavor text editor, who causes pain to writers who turn in stuff like this. A beholder with hemorrhoids would be ideal.




Hey, give them credit where it's due. There's no Purple Octopus Eats Bananas Attack type stuff in there, and for that, I am very grateful.


----------



## GoodKingJayIII

Colmarr said:
			
		

> That's a straw man. How I would argue about an arbitrary alternate power in no way impacts on the proper interpretation of the power in question.
> 
> Having said that, and in answer to your question: no I wouldn't. I'm not sure why. I think largely it would be because turning a hit into a _possible_ miss is too much trouble in terms of the maths and record keeping involved. Adding 5 damage to one character's hits (that happened in the last 2 minutes) is much easier than figuring out which OA hits become misses and which OA inflicted what damage.
> 
> I'm already satisfied that I will play this as a "prospective only" power and the damage will not apply retrospectively. However, I'm not satisified that that interpretation is the correct RAW one (and I'm generally a stickler for RAW). Nor am I satisfied that this rule is as clear as it should be.
> 
> As a lawyer in RL, I know that clarity is a _big deal_ in law/rule making. Getting this power crystal-clear would have been as simple as inserting the words "until the end of your turn" or "until the start of your next turn" or even substituting the word "After" for the word "When" at the beginning of the power.




Of course the wording of rules is important.  I agree that it is worded poorly, as presented in the preview.

But precedent and spirit of the law are important as well.  There are very few precedents of retroactive damage in 3.x, and what we precedents we do have are for very specific situations (a prestige class ability, a specific spell, etc.).  As of yet, we have know evidence that retroactive damage exists in 4e, and while I'll concede it's possible such a rule exists, the principles upon which 4e is built (fast ease of play) suggests to me that such a rule is not coming any time soon.

Once an action has been resolved, generally that action cannot be changed retroactively.  If I attack a foe and deal 12 damage, I need to make another attack to deal more damage.


----------



## NebtheNever

Knight Otu said:
			
		

> Indeed it is.
> 
> I'd hope that the idea that other paragon paths still remain flexible in who can take them, and that the example paths are the only ones that are specific. I think a "*Prerequisite: *Divine or Martial Defender" line wouldn't be out of place, for example.




Confirmation from WotC (even if from several months ago) that there are at least 24 paragon paths does a lot to ease my concerns about the concept.


----------



## Wormwood

Storm-Bringer said:
			
		

> Let's go back to neutral pronouns, shall we?



Not me, bud. I *love* the second-person---especially in fluff text. Subtle little reminder that I'm playing an RPG.


----------



## Xanaqui

Mustrum_Ridcully said:
			
		

> I recommend using the spoiler blocks. Avoids strangely empty looking posts.
> See above for example and below for syntax.
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> [sbox]your spoiler here[/sbox]



Thanks for the attempt, but I failed my comprehension check.

Using [SBOX]sbox[/SBOX] alone seems to do nothing. Using 
	
	




		Code:
	

[SBOX]sbox inside code[/SBOX]

 seems to give me a box, but doesn't hide the contents.

P.S. - I tried these both capitalized and non-capitalized. I get the same issue both ways.


----------



## Lizard

Wormwood said:
			
		

> Not me, bud. I *love* the second-person---especially in fluff text. Subtle little reminder that I'm playing an RPG.




Have to agree with you here.

"The character is astoundingly skilled with his blade..." is much duller than "You are astoundingly skilled with your blade..."


----------



## Mentat55

I wonder if whatever form multiclassing takes (class training feats, actual "levels") will be sufficient to allow a character to take a paragon path.  For example, I am playing a warlord with a bit of wizard mixed in.  Can I take the battle mage paragon path?


----------



## Andor

Xanaqui said:
			
		

> Thanks for the attempt, but I failed my comprehension check.
> 
> Using [SBOX]sbox[/SBOX] alone seems to do nothing. Using
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> [SBOX]sbox inside code[/SBOX]
> 
> seems to give me a box, but doesn't hide the contents.
> 
> P.S. - I tried these both capitalized and non-capitalized. I get the same issue both ways.




That's becuase it's really 
[s block] blah blah blah[/s block]

Only without the space between the s and block.


----------



## Storm-Bringer

Lacyon said:
			
		

> What does "that oriental flavor hard-wired into the description" mean?
> 
> I'm not seeing how that doesn't fit with "you are privy to the secrets of an ancient technique of swordsmanship -- would make it fit in with oriental, European, Aztec, Sumerian, or none-of-the-above based campaign flavor."
> 
> The only "oriental" flavor is in the name, that I see. The only thing we've seen that the Kensei actually gives you is, in essence, weapon specialization. You could just call it the Fighter paragon path for what it's worth.



You _could_ call it 'superfighter', you _could_ call it 'increased badassery', or you _could_ call it 'ultra scary drunken cow'.  In and of itself, the means to change it does not refute the idea there is a problem.

If there was a throw away line like "... similar to a kensei", there wouldn't be much of an issue.  I can't imagine the paragon path being called 'Bonaabakulu abasekhemu' would get a pass like this.  Being familiar with the term does not invalidate the specificity, which is really the point of contention.


----------



## Lacyon

Xanaqui said:
			
		

> Thanks for the attempt, but I failed my comprehension check.
> 
> Using [SBOX]sbox[/SBOX] alone seems to do nothing. Using
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> [SBOX]sbox inside code[/SBOX]
> 
> seems to give me a box, but doesn't hide the contents.
> 
> P.S. - I tried these both capitalized and non-capitalized. I get the same issue both ways.




[SBLOCK]Try using sblock instead of sbox[/SBLOCK]


----------



## Lacyon

Storm-Bringer said:
			
		

> If there was a throw away line like "... similar to a kensei", there wouldn't be much of an issue.  I can't imagine the paragon path being called 'Bonaabakulu abasekhemu' would get a pass like this.




Of course it would.


----------



## Storm-Bringer

Wormwood said:
			
		

> Not me, bud. I *love* the second-person---especially in fluff text. Subtle little reminder that I'm playing an RPG.



Gah.  My problem is that it isn't subtle at all.  It's like getting a hammer to the face that reminds me that I am intended to be thinking like my character, if my character were to be reading a description of themselves in a fourth wall breaking book they found lying around.

Something like 'your wizard' or 'your cleric' is waaaaaaaay better.  The way it reads now is like someone who has a bit of trouble understanding that I am _playing_ a cleric, not that I _am_that cleric.


----------



## Dausuul

Storm-Bringer said:
			
		

> You _could_ call it 'superfighter', you _could_ call it 'increased badassery', or you _could_ call it 'ultra scary drunken cow'.  In and of itself, the means to change it does not refute the idea there is a problem.
> 
> If there was a throw away line like "... similar to a kensei", there wouldn't be much of an issue.  I can't imagine the paragon path being called 'Bonaabakulu abasekhemu' would get a pass like this.  Being familiar with the term does not invalidate the specificity, which is really the point of contention.




What I don't understand is why they didn't just call it "Weapon Master."


----------



## Storm-Bringer

Lacyon said:
			
		

> Of course it would.



Yes, _of course_.  What was I thinking?


----------



## Storm-Bringer

Dausuul said:
			
		

> What I don't understand is why they didn't just call it "Weapon Master."



Bingo.

(EDIT:  I think 'Master of Arms' would be better.)


----------



## Lacyon

Dausuul said:
			
		

> What I don't understand is why they didn't just call it "Weapon Master."




They did.


----------



## Voss

DandD said:
			
		

> Fortunately for D&D 4th edition, it won't be westerner either, nor arabic, mezzo-american or hindi. It will be fantasy, where everything the gaming group accepts for themselves can play without disturbance from others.




No, please, not the 'We're so Politically Correct everything has been whirled in a blender until its all bland and flavorless'.

There are different flavors of fantasy,  and Vikings vs. Samurai vs Saracens vs Pirates vs. Cowboys doesn't hold a lot of appeal, even though I like everything but the last one.

And yeah, if we're in fantasy-viking-land, and everyone is doing appropriate characters except for player number 4, who insists on playing a ninja, it *is* going to bother me.


----------



## Dausuul

Lacyon said:
			
		

> They did.




Let me rephrase: I don't understand why they didn't just call it "Weapon Master" _in the same language the rest of the Player's Handbook is written in._


----------



## LEHaskell

Dausuul said:
			
		

> What I don't understand is why they didn't just call it "Weapon Master."




Oh, please!  Not more "noun - noun" compound names!


----------



## Dausuul

LEHaskell said:
			
		

> Oh, please!  Not more "noun - noun" compound names!




I said "Weapon Master," not "Weaponmaster."


----------



## DandD

Voss said:
			
		

> No, please, not the 'We're so Politically Correct everything has been whirled in a blender until its all bland and flavorless'.
> 
> There are different flavors of fantasy,  and Vikings vs. Samurai vs Saracens vs Pirates vs. Cowboys doesn't hold a lot of appeal, even though I like everything but the last one.



You understand it wrong. It's the gaming group themselves that define if they like Vikings vs. Samurai vs. Saracens vs. Pirates vs. Cowboys vs. Ninjas vs. D&D 3.X grognards vs. D&D 4.0 fanbois vs. Godzilla. Names are irrelevant. Wizard of the Coast only provides rules how they work. Every gaming group can call their Viking Warriors in their game Imperial Saint Stormtroopers for all I and other people not affiliated to that gaming group care.

It gets really tiresome if people complain about Wotc "forcing" them to accept flavor, the same as they complain about the loss of the dumb Great Wheel, the change of the Succubi to the Devils, the advancement of the timeline for the Forgotten Realms, and all that other stuff. No, they don't force you to accept naming conventions and background lore. Get over it, people. 
D&D is about fantasy. Plain and simple.


----------



## Stormtalon

Storm-Bringer said:
			
		

> You _could_ call it 'superfighter', you _could_ call it 'increased badassery', or you _could_ call it 'ultra scary drunken cow'.  In and of itself, the means to change it does not refute the idea there is a problem.
> 
> If there was a throw away line like "... similar to a kensei", there wouldn't be much of an issue.  I can't imagine the paragon path being called 'Bonaabakulu abasekhemu' would get a pass like this.  Being familiar with the term does not invalidate the specificity, which is really the point of contention.




My only concern with them using the name Kensai for a Paragon Path is it takes the name out of the pool of possible names for the hypothesized Ki power source.  I was thinking yesterday that a Kensai would be an ideal Ki Defender class (with Monk as striker & Samurai as Leader), and now that dream has been dashed.  As dreams go, it's not much of one so no real big loss, I guess.  

Oh, who am I kidding.... _My world has been ruined!_


----------



## Lacyon

Dausuul said:
			
		

> Let me rephrase: I don't understand why they didn't just call it "Weapon Master" _in the same language the rest of the Player's Handbook is written in._




It's English now.

Hang on, I'm still checking the pockets for loose grammar.


----------



## LEHaskell

Lacyon said:
			
		

> It's English now.
> 
> Hang on, I'm still checking the pockets for loose grammar.




Did grammar get loose again?  You know how she gets when she doesn't take her meds.


----------



## Voss

DandD said:
			
		

> You understand it wrong. It's the gaming group themselves that define if they like Vikings vs. Samurai vs. Saracens vs. Pirates vs. Cowboys vs. Ninjas vs. D&D 3.X grognards vs. D&D 4.0 fanbois vs. Godzilla. Names are irrelevant. Wizard of the Coast only provides rules how they work. Every gaming group can call their Viking Warriors in their game Imperial Saint Stormtroopers for all I and other people not affiliated to that gaming group care.
> 
> It gets really tiresome if people complain about Wotc "forcing" them to accept flavor, the same as they complain about the loss of the dumb Great Wheel, the change of the Succubi to the Devils, the advancement of the timeline for the Forgotten Realms, and all that other stuff. No, they don't force you to accept naming conventions and background lore. Get over it, people.
> D&D is about fantasy. Plain and simple.




Which is fine if you're playing by yourself. But in a group, whats in the book is the standard jargon for communication.  If you all have your own special code for what specific names. feats and background you don't like, it quickly becomes a trainwreck.  A gaming group doesn't have a hivemind any more than a message board does.

And of course, that assumes that everyone has 'a' group and sticks with it, and doesn't play at cons or events or anything else.  

So yes, flavor is going to bug people.


----------



## DandD

A gaming group will have better communication than any message board on the world by virtue of people being together, playing together and facing each another face to face, and having their own prefered atmosphere they like. Background lore is what everybody agrees to in advance, and changes to how they want it for their style.


----------



## tresson

Dausuul said:
			
		

> Let me rephrase: I don't understand why they didn't just call it "Weapon Master" _in the same language the rest of the Player's Handbook is written in._




I'm sure if we go back far enough that would disqualify weapon master too. You have to remember that English is the Ali Baba of languages.


----------



## katahn

Stormtalon said:
			
		

> My only concern with them using the name Kensai for a Paragon Path is it takes the name out of the pool of possible names for the hypothesized Ki power source.  I was thinking yesterday that a Kensai would be an ideal Ki Defender class (with Monk as striker & Samurai as Leader), and now that dream has been dashed.  As dreams go, it's not much of one so no real big loss, I guess.
> 
> Oh, who am I kidding.... _My world has been ruined!_




Ki Power Source:
Defender: Samurai
Controller: Wu-Jen
Leader: Monk (ie. shinto priest, buddhist monk, taoist, etc.) or Shogun ("warlord")
Striker: Ninja

Strictly speaking, Kensai isn't needed.  I don't personally see a difference between "martial" and "ki" though, so using Kensai as a paragon path doesn't bother me in the slightest.  The exploits, what I've seen of them thus far, seem like they come pretty close to making "martial" characters approach the standard of "wire fu" already and that only would leave the Wu-Jen (no martial controller).  So outside of campaign-specific fluff and maybe some variant abilities/feats, I don't have a good idea of how a Samurai is really going to be terribly different from a Fighter, or a Ninja from a Rogue.


----------



## Dausuul

Lacyon said:
			
		

> It's English now.




This would be why it doesn't show up anywhere in Merriam-Webster's Online, or Dictionary.com, or Wiktionary?


----------



## GoodKingJayIII

Man, I really feel sorry for the folks coming up with these names.  No matter what they use, they can't win!

Might as well just have called it the Awesomemaster Weaponguy.


----------



## UngeheuerLich

Dausuul said:
			
		

> We got a long list of paragon paths.  Every single one of them was class-specific.  The excerpt was not described as "class-specific paragon paths" but just "paragon paths."
> 
> *The logical conclusion is that paragon paths are class-specific now.*




Wrong. Just plainly wrong. You can´t logically conclude from that subgroup to the rest.

Also we saw two different types:

- Class specific

- Build specific

so maybe we get: One prestige class for the class + 1 prestige class for certain builds. 
Or maybe we get hybrids or role specific paths. We just don´t know yet...


----------



## Lacyon

Dausuul said:
			
		

> This would be why it doesn't show up anywhere in Merriam-Webster's Online, or Dictionary.com, or Wiktionary?




Neither does magocracy.

Nevertheless, if enough English-speakers use the word, it's English.


----------



## Storm-Bringer

Stormtalon said:
			
		

> My only concern with them using the name Kensai for a Paragon Path is it takes the name out of the pool of possible names for the hypothesized Ki power source.  I was thinking yesterday that a Kensai would be an ideal Ki Defender class (with Monk as striker & Samurai as Leader), and now that dream has been dashed.  As dreams go, it's not much of one so no real big loss, I guess.
> 
> Oh, who am I kidding.... _My world has been ruined!_



Depending on how much tongue you have in your cheek, that is a good point, really.

My bigger concern is that it dilutes the meaning of 'kensai'.  Which is much, much more than 'good with a sword'.  As shorthand for an RPG, not such a big deal, really.  I mean, there are more to monks and paladins historically than portrayed in D&D.

Still, it is rather jarring.  And as you mention, if they release 'Oriental Adventures' for this edition, they will be short one class name.


----------



## Stormtalon

I figured I needed to jump on the hyperbolic response bandwagon at least once, ya know?


----------



## DandD

Or they'll just say that Kensei is one of the thematically appropriate paragon paths for whatever heroic tier-basic class there is (most likely Samurai, although they should just be Fighters renamed, but oh well). No big deal.


----------



## Storm-Bringer

Lacyon said:
			
		

> Neither does magocracy.
> 
> Nevertheless, if enough English-speakers use the word, it's English.



To paraphrase Wolfgang Paulli:  That isn't even wrong.


----------



## Masquerade

Mentat55 said:
			
		

> I wonder if whatever form multiclassing takes (class training feats, actual "levels") will be sufficient to allow a character to take a paragon path.  For example, I am playing a warlord with a bit of wizard mixed in.  Can I take the battle mage paragon path?




Maybe you could start as a warlord, take wizard in place of a paragon path, and then take battle mage in place of an epic destiny. Maybe.


----------



## Stalker0

Masquerade said:
			
		

> Maybe you could start as a warlord, take wizard in place of a paragon path, and then take battle mage in place of an epic destiny. Maybe.




Doubt it. I don't think you can bow out of epic destinies. Supposedly epic destines are "really cool" in the way that they completely break the rules. Further, the designers have mentioned that your epic destiny determines how you "leave the game" after 30th level.


----------



## Lackhand

Storm-Bringer said:
			
		

> To paraphrase Wolfgang Paulli:  That isn't even wrong.



Mostly because it's write.

[pejoratively]prescriptivist![/pejoratively]


----------



## Haffrung Helleyes

*good stuff*

I will have to admit that I didn't read this whole thread, but I really like Paragon Paths. I wish that 3E had had them, rather than prestige classes.

They fix several things:

1) since their entry requirements only relate to a class choice, there is no more 'I have to plan my character all the way to level 20 from the get-go'.  You can freely choose feats, etc without having them impact your paragon path availability

2) since they overlap with base classes, they only have to be balanced against each other, unlike Prestige classes which are balanced by features lost from the base class.

3) It looks to me like 'dipping' into paragon paths isn't allowed.  You pick one for 11-20.  Another improvement.

Ken


----------



## malcolm_n

GoodKingJayIII said:
			
		

> Man, I really feel sorry for the folks coming up with these names.  No matter what they use, they can't win!
> 
> Might as well just have called it the Awesomemaster Weaponguy.




Oh no!  Please don't start using Adjective-noun Noun-noun combination of names 

One word, English (british, canadian or american?), Paragon Paths

Warrior  (fighter)
Mage  (wizard)
Killer  (Rogue)
Archer (Ranger)
Champion (Paladin)
WArlock (Warlock, though I'm sure capitalizing two letters is wrong too)
Tactician (Warlord)
Priest (Cleric)

There we go. [ / endhumor]


----------



## The_Fan

Dausuul said:
			
		

> This would be why it doesn't show up anywhere in Merriam-Webster's Online, or Dictionary.com, or Wiktionary?



 Give it time. If it becomes common enough usage, it becomes English. Betcha didn't know that the word "honcho" comes from Japanese, being so intimately associated with westerns. Or the word "skosh," being stereotypically _yiddish_.

But that's a debate for another day.

It seems like the Martial power source will get more mystical through the Paragon level, what with Stormwardens teleporting and flaying people with winds and kensai mystically bonding with their weapons. I like that. I hope the Heroic levels stay relatively grounded though, and the Epic go full out Charles Atlas Superpowers.


----------



## Storm-Bringer

Lackhand said:
			
		

> Mostly because it's write.
> 
> [pejoratively]prescriptivist![/pejoratively]



This battle is not over!!


----------



## Cadfan

Haffrung Helleyes said:
			
		

> 2) since they overlap with base classes, they only have to be balanced against each other, unlike Prestige classes which are balanced by features lost from the base class.



This is particularly important.  In 3e, there was often a mismatch caused by when you entered a PRC.  A tenth level PRC ability might be available at level 15, if you entered the PRC at level 6.  But it also might be gained at level 20.  This meant that it was hard to know whether to balance the L10 PRC ability versus comparable L15 abilities, or L20 abilities.

And even worse, if you exited the PRC after level 15, you were back to 6th level abilities again.

Standardizing when you enter and leave these paths makes things a lot smoother.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Xanaqui said:
			
		

> Thanks for the attempt, but I failed my comprehension check.
> 
> Using [SBOX]sbox[/SBOX] alone seems to do nothing. Using
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> [SBOX]sbox inside code[/SBOX]
> 
> seems to give me a box, but doesn't hide the contents.
> 
> P.S. - I tried these both capitalized and non-capitalized. I get the same issue both ways.



I was stupid and incompetent. *blush*. Damn it, I was using the tag and still managed to get it wrong? *forehead to wall*
Try SBLOCK, not SBOX.
[sblock]
Testing testing testing
[/sblock]


----------



## RefinedBean

Really, people?  Arguing about flavor text?  REALLY?

Kensai, Weaponmaster, who cares?  Maybe the word Kensai mean "weapon specialist" in your race's native tongue, or one of your learned languages, or even Common.  Or just change the name.  There.  Done.

Flavor text isn't meant to be limiting, but to give a basis for expansion.  Look at the rules, not the flavor, then decide how you can work those rules into a character concept that fits your DM's game.


----------



## Michele Carter

1) There are over 30 paragon paths in the PH.

2) My paladin took a multiclass cleric feat so she could qualify for a cleric paragon path.


----------



## Dausuul

The_Fan said:
			
		

> Give it time. If it becomes common enough usage, it becomes English.




And when it does, I will concede the point.  Till then, it's Japanese.  And I don't see it achieving "common usage" status any time soon.



			
				RefinedBean said:
			
		

> Really, people? Arguing about flavor text? REALLY?
> 
> Kensai, Weaponmaster, who cares? Maybe the word Kensai mean "weapon specialist" in your race's native tongue, or one of your learned languages, or even Common. Or just change the name. There. Done.
> 
> Flavor text isn't meant to be limiting, but to give a basis for expansion. Look at the rules, not the flavor, then decide how you can work those rules into a character concept that fits your DM's game.




So we're supposed to have pages and pages of reflavoring text that we pass out to our players?  How is this any better than pages and pages of house rules?


----------



## CubeKnight

WotC_Miko said:
			
		

> 1) There are over 30 paragon paths in the PH.
> 
> 2) My paladin took a multiclass cleric feat so she could qualify for a cleric paragon path.



 *sniff* You make me a happy, happy man.


----------



## Jack99

WotC_Miko said:
			
		

> 1) There are over 30 paragon paths in the PH.
> 
> 2) My paladin took a multiclass cleric feat so she could qualify for a cleric paragon path.




Thanks for confirming that there is indeed multi-classing before and outside the Paragon Paths.


----------



## Voss

DandD said:
			
		

> A gaming group will have better communication than any message board on the world by virtue of people being together, playing together and facing each another face to face, and having their own prefered atmosphere they like. Background lore is what everybody agrees to in advance, and changes to how they want it for their style.




In 22 years of gaming, I have never sat down in advance and agreed on what the background 'lore' was.  The DM was either running something out of a book, or had his own setting. It was never, ever a 'group setting' where various people sprayed their preferences across the landscape in order to mark territory or force a style on the rest of the group.

And I still don't see how conflicting 'preferred atmospheres' magically resolve themselves- someone is still going to have cave and accept things they don't want, or accept they can't have the things they do want.


----------



## OchreJelly

I dunno the game has always had class terms steeped in RL culture that weren't asian:

Druid, Barbarian, Dervish, Skald, Ur-Priest, Templar, Hospitaler, Mountebank, Ollam, Berzerker, Paladin, Gladiator, and of course cleric.

I don't understand why the RL names from the east can't coexist with the names above.


----------



## tresson

malcolm_n said:
			
		

> Oh no!  Please don't start using Adjective-noun Noun-noun combination of names
> 
> One word, English (british, canadian or american?), Paragon Paths
> 
> Warrior  (fighter)
> Mage  (wizard)
> Killer  (Rogue)
> Archer (Ranger)
> Champion (Paladin)
> WArlock (Warlock, though I'm sure capitalizing two letters is wrong too)
> Tactician (Warlord)
> Priest (Cleric)
> 
> There we go. [ / endhumor]





Champion is orginally french....


----------



## RefinedBean

> So we're supposed to have pages and pages of reflavoring text that we pass out to our players?  How is this any better than pages and pages of house rules?




Well, here's how I see it going:

Player:  I'd like to play a Kensai.
DM:  That doesn't really fit my setting.  How about instead of the name Kensai, we call it Weaponmaster?  And the "mystical bond" with your sword is actually long-forgotten memories of you training with the very same weapon with (insert relevant person here)?
Player:  Okay, cool.  But instead...
(discussion of player character follows)

Basically, instead of handing out pages and pages of reflavoring text, just talk to the player about how they see they're character presented, and go with that.  The rules will stay the same, so no big deal!

So Kensai = Fighter who's specialized in a weapon.  What's in a name, eh?


----------



## AllisterH

Er, I think ninjas have become sufficiently westernized that few people are going to blink an eye seeing an asian name in the D&D book.

Seriously, on many geek boards, the question is "Ninjas vs pirates, which is cooler?"

Go NINJA!!!


----------



## Lizard

Storm-Bringer said:
			
		

> To paraphrase Wolfgang Paulli:  That isn't even wrong.




Not really, no. It is, in fact, right.

Dictionaries do not define language. They *describe* it. A word means what most people use it to mean, no more, no less. Language is fluid, and English? English is a superheated gas.

Me has BA in englush. Me noes this stuph.


----------



## Wormwood

RefinedBean said:
			
		

> Basically, instead of handing out pages and pages of reflavoring text, just talk to the player about how they see they're character presented, and go with that.  The rules will stay the same, so no big deal!



Wisdom.


----------



## Voss

RefinedBean said:
			
		

> Well, here's how I see it going:
> 
> Player:  I'd like to play a Kensai.
> DM:  That doesn't really fit my setting.  How about instead of the name Kensai, we call it Weaponmaster?  And the "mystical bond" with your sword is actually long-forgotten memories of you training with the very same weapon with (insert relevant person here)?
> Player:  Okay, cool.  But instead...
> (discussion of player character follows)
> 
> Basically, instead of handing out pages and pages of reflavoring text, just talk to the player about how they see they're character presented, and go with that.  The rules will stay the same, so no big deal!
> 
> So Kensai = Fighter who's specialized in a weapon.  What's in a name, eh?




I've played with enough gamers to know you're glossing over a major detail-
by the fifth time he complains that he can't find the 'weapon master' in the book, you're going to be annoyed enough that you're going to snap and say fine, write 'Kensai' down on your rastafraggling character sheet.


@Ochrejelly- if its appropriate to the setting, it can.  But if it isn't, it stands out like a sore thumb, just like many of those names do if they're tacked onto a setting without thought.  Or how robot halfling dinosaur riders stand out whereever they are.


----------



## Wormwood

Voss said:
			
		

> . . . by the fifth time he complains that he can't find the 'weapon master' in the book, you're going to be annoyed enough that you're going to snap and say fine, write 'Kensai' down on your rastafraggling character sheet.



Proving it wasn't that big a deal in the first place.


----------



## AllisterH

Ok, if we didn't use Kensai and given the hatred of noun-noun (WeaponMaster is right out), what the hell do we call it?


----------



## Stalker0

AllisterH said:
			
		

> Ok, if we didn't use Kensai and given the hatred of noun-noun (WeaponMaster is right out), what the hell do we call it?




Awesome.


----------



## DandD

That rather seems to be a particular problem with your group, where they either are purposefully obnoxious, or a little bit mentally challenged, or the problem is just exagerated out and none of this apply. I mean, how hard can it be to say: "Dudes and dudettes, I'm playing a Kensei, but I'm going to call it the Weapon Master because you don't like the naming." And then, everybody is just: "Yeah, fine, that's good, thanks."
That's really only making an elephant out of a mice.


----------



## Kesh

Voss said:
			
		

> I've played with enough gamers to know you're glossing over a major detail-
> by the fifth time he complains that he can't find the 'weapon master' in the book, you're going to be annoyed enough that you're going to snap and say fine, write 'Kensai' down on your rastafraggling character sheet.




If your players are being that much of a pain, either flat-out tell them that it's becoming a problem, or get another player. If you just "snap and say fine," it sounds like you're not having fun and the player is being pedantic.


----------



## Plane Sailing

Lizard said:
			
		

> Not really, no. It is, in fact, right.
> 
> Dictionaries do not define language. They *describe* it. A word means what most people use it to mean, no more, no less. Language is fluid, and English? English is a superheated gas.
> 
> Me has BA in englush. Me noes this stuph.




English:
"It not only borrows words from other languages; it has chased other languages down dark alley-ways, clubbed them unconscious and rifled their pockets for new vocabulary."

(I can't attribute this quote)


----------



## Thaumaturge

Lizard said:
			
		

> A word means what most people use it to mean, no more, no less. Language is fluid, and English? English is a superheated gas.




This is crazy talk.  If we start thinking like this, "their" will become the correct English _singular_ possessive.  This must not be allowed.  

Ever.

Seriously. 

/shudder.

 

Thaumaturge.


----------



## Wormwood

Kesh said:
			
		

> If your players are being that much of a pain, either flat-out tell them that it's becoming a problem, or get another player. If you just "snap and say fine," it sounds like you're not having fun and the player is being pedantic.



The player is being obtuse. I'd say the _DM _ is being pedantic.


----------



## Voss

Wormwood said:
			
		

> Proving it wasn't that big a deal in the first place.



Only if the best approach to dealing with concerns is to dismiss them entirely if you don't share them.


----------



## epochrpg

Stalker0 said:
			
		

> I just hope we get some powers to go along with those power cards are I'm going to be really disappointed



Each pack retails for $3.95 comes with 12 randomly assorted power cards:
6 at will
4 per encounter and 
2 daily abilities.

Collect them all!


----------



## Lacyon

Dausuul said:
			
		

> So we're supposed to have pages and pages of reflavoring text that we pass out to our players?  How is this any better than pages and pages of house rules?




In this case, it's one word. That's a lot better than pages and pages of houserules.


----------



## TPK

Paragon Paths look pretty nice all in all, but one thing has me worried.

Some of these things look sort of multi-classy, like the warpriest that clearly makes a cleric more defender-ish, or that rumoured PP that lets a wizard use a sword as a wand.

You shouldn't have to wait until level 11 to play the character you want. If you were going for a warpriest, what are the odds that you didn't go for some of that stuff much earlier? And does my gish have to fumble around with sword and wand for ten levels?

I suppose you could probably use stopgap measures until you get to 11th, and then retrain to "get back" the feats and power choices you used to cover the gap, but it strikes me as inelegant.

Oh well, we'll know more when that multiclassing excerpt comes out.

PS Does anyone know more about which excerpts to expect?


----------



## Cadfan

There's a fairy tale where this girl is a maid in an old man's house.  This old man hates the regular names for things, so he renames them all and insists the girl use them.  Eventually his house burns down because the girl tries to convey to him that a spark from the fire has jumped from the fireplace, and is unable to do so in a timely manner due to his arbitrary language constraints.

Its a silly story, but we can take a lesson from it- the essence of an item denoted does not change due to the label we place upon it.  Fire burned his house down even though it was named something else, and a Kensai by any other name will still give you a +1 attack bonus.

No doubt the old man took a different lesson- he undoubtedly concluded that if only the entire language was altered to use the words he invented, no language confusion would exist.


----------



## GoodKingJayIII

WotC_Miko said:
			
		

> 1) There are over 30 paragon paths in the PH.
> 
> 2) My paladin took a multiclass cleric feat so she could qualify for a cleric paragon path.




I was generally ok with being forced into a particular PP based on my "1st" class.  This is better, though.

Dunno if people glossed over this one, or they aren't tuning in, or they consider the matter resolved, but I figured I'd quote this just so people could take a look.


----------



## Wormwood

Voss said:
			
		

> Only if the best approach to dealing with concerns is to dismiss them entirely if you don't share them.



Then may I suggest that your problem could be solved with a simple Sharpie.


----------



## Cadfan

TPK- Don't worry.  A priest who wears heavy armor and smacks people with a mace is quite possible from level 1 onwards.  Your warpriest character won't have already taken these specific abilities because they aren't available, but we already know about other warpriest like abilities available to a low level character and built directly into the cleric class.

As for your gish, no one knows anything yet about gishes.  The Battle Mage PP doesn't seem designed for gishes.  It seems designed for non gishes who want to get a little closer to the front line.


----------



## RigaMortus2

> Sly Hunter
> Wis 15 +3
> damage with bow against *isolated* target




Isolated?  New game term?  What could that mean/reference?  My guess...  A target that doesn't have anyone adjacent to it?


----------



## Wormwood

RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> Isolated? . . . A target that doesn't have anyone adjacent to it?



Sounds logical to me. 

And that would open up some interesting design options as well.


----------



## Dausuul

Lizard said:
			
		

> Not really, no. It is, in fact, right.
> 
> Dictionaries do not define language. They *describe* it. A word means what most people use it to mean, no more, no less. Language is fluid, and English? English is a superheated gas.
> 
> Me has BA in englush. Me noes this stuph.




None of which demonstrates that "kensai" is in common usage in English--as far as I know, it isn't.  The Hubble telescope describes distant galaxies, it doesn't define them... but if the Hubble telescope says a particular galaxy is redshifted, I'm inclined to believe it.  And if a variety of dictionaries say a word isn't an English word (meaning, it isn't in common usage), I'm inclined to believe them, too.



			
				Lacyon said:
			
		

> In this case, it's one word. That's a lot better than pages and pages of houserules.




Yeah, and any one houserule is pretty simple to implement, too.  The question is how _many_ of these "translations" and re-flavorings will be necessary.


----------



## Voss

Wormwood said:
			
		

> Then may I suggest that your problem could be solved with a simple Sharpie.




If you'll front the gas money, I'll buy the sharpie and drive to WotC's printer.


----------



## ThirdWizard

Dausuul said:
			
		

> None of which demonstrates that "kensai" is in common usage in English--as far as I know, it isn't.




I think it is less important whether it is English than whether it is in the common lexicon of gamers.


----------



## Daemonicious

Has no one else noticed this little tidbit under Battle Mage found within the flavor text:
*
You have even learned of a technique for using arcane energy to temporarily stave off death—and you can’t wait to try it out in battle!*

Maybe an arcane utility that grants you another healing surge?  Rock on...


----------



## Lacyon

ThirdWizard said:
			
		

> I think it is less important whether it is English than whether it is in the common lexicon of gamers.




Indeed. Jargon is still English.


----------



## TPK

Cadfan said:
			
		

> TPK- Don't worry.  A priest who wears heavy armor and smacks people with a mace is quite possible from level 1 onwards.




The specifically defender-like feature is the ability at 16th to mark and lock down enemies. Whether something like that can be multiclassed in earlier is current unknown, I believe.

And I won't worry much until a week or so for now...


----------



## RefinedBean

> Yeah, and any one houserule is pretty simple to implement, too.  The question is how _many_ of these "translations" and re-flavorings will be necessary.




My guess would be: however many it takes for everyone to have fun.

If they called it Weaponmaster instead, someone who wanted a _Kensai_ would have to do the exact same "translation."

You can't please all the people all the time.


----------



## Kishin

Dausuul said:
			
		

> And when it does, I will concede the point.  Till then, it's Japanese.  And I don't see it achieving "common usage" status any time soon.
> 
> 
> 
> So we're supposed to have pages and pages of reflavoring text that we pass out to our players?  How is this any better than pages and pages of house rules?




Did the name of a prestige class matter in your campaign world? Did people actually refer to themselves as reaping maulers, highland stalkers, etc. al? Are people going to be referring to each other as Iron Vanguards and Spellstorm Mages in your 4E world?

I don't see why you would need to make 'reflavoring text' for this. What, 'the kensei paragon path is now referred to as the swordmaster'. How is that necessary? Its just a name for a background mechanic encompassing character traits.

No offense, but this is some serious nitpicking over something that makes very little gameplay OR flavor difference.


----------



## Khaim

RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> Isolated?  New game term?  What could that mean/reference?  My guess...  A target that doesn't have anyone adjacent to it?




Or it could be a common English word used in a summary statement to convey the essence of a feat without the five sentences that feat requires to fully explain.

Just a guess.


----------



## Wormwood

Kishin said:
			
		

> No offense, but this is some serious nitpicking over something that makes very little gameplay OR flavor difference.



<placeholder for 'welcome to 4e boards' comment>


----------



## Cadfan

I'd like to toss in my vote for just never referring to characters in-game by their character class.

PC1: I'm Joe.  I'm a Ranger.
PC2: Oh, so you patrol a wilderness region as member of law enforcement?
PC1: Uh, no...
PC2: Do you, per chance, rove between isolated communities and trade furs?
PC1: No, I don't do that either.
PC2: Why are you a ranger then?
PC1: Because I fight with two weapons?
PC3: I'm a Fighter!  I fight!
PC2: Do you now.
PC3: Well... not right now.  Guess I'm a Talker right now.
PC2: Ok then.  So, Joe, what is it that you _do_?
PC1: I guard caravans.
PC2: So you're a guard.
PC1: I can't be a Guardian of the Northern Wastes until I level up a bit.
PC2: What?
PC3: Look!  Now I'm a Walker!


----------



## Engilbrand

I like that there are more than 30 Paragon Paths in the PHB. That means that there are probably also quite a few Epic Destinies. Huzzah! It's also pretty cool that a class training feat can qualify you for a PP. It opens up the possibility for a TWF Ranger with Rogue training going into the Stormcaller and tearing things up. What about a Warlord/Rogue who can suddenly gain some Combat Advantage. Nice.


This is where I feel the need to weigh in on the ridiculous grammar argument:
Dictionaries are dumb. They give you a definition if you come across a word that you don't know, but they can't do that with ALL words. They can't do it with new words or newer meanings for words. "Mouse" was only recently added to the dictionary to mean "that crazy little thing that controls the arrow on your monitor". Before that point, though, it was still a mouse. I become annoyed when my students or fellow teachers try to tell me that something isn't "correct". Words change over time. Especially English. I teach English and German in an American high school. I'm also 25. I can guarantee that I don't have the same view on language that the other English teachers have. As far as I'm concerned, "they" and "their" can be used as 3rd person singular pronouns. "One" is stupid. I prefer "If a student doesn't have anything to do during seminar, they will have to go get a book from my bookcase." to "If one does not have a book, then one must retrieve one from the bookcase." Blah.
I like the Kensei. It has cool powers. "But what about the name?!" So? It's not a big deal. I try to take very little seriously. Especially in reference to a game where you pretend to be a super-intelligent dragon-thing with the power to fly. Why, with everything else that you could get uptight about, would a strange name become an issue? Is there an issue with Stormcaller because you've never used it before? If not, just pretend that you don't know that Kensei is from a different language.
I've seen games talk about using "Brands", "Zweihanders" and other stuff like that. The rest of the game is in English, but they throw out some of these other words. Where's the problem? Nowhere.
Ridiculous.


----------



## ShockMeSane

This thread has gone so far off the deep end of any kind of relevance that I don't even know what to say.

A WotC employee lets us know there are 30+ paragon paths and the argument over paragon class names continue as if nothing happened.

Excuse me if I don't care what the Paragon Paths are called. It isn't like the Prestige classes in 3.x were called anything even remotely sane. WEARER OF PURPLE HOOOOOOO!


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Dausuul said:
			
		

> None of which demonstrates that "kensai" is in common usage in English--as far as I know, it isn't.  The Hubble telescope describes distant galaxies, it doesn't define them... but if the Hubble telescope says a particular galaxy is redshifted, I'm inclined to believe it.  And if a variety of dictionaries say a word isn't an English word (meaning, it isn't in common usage), I'm inclined to believe them, too.



But a dictionary doesn't contain words that are not used and therefor not English. It contains words that are English, yes (but some of them are archaic and no longer in practical use), but that doesn't mean that the word it does not contain don't exist or don't have a place in the English Language. 

A galaxy for some reason unobserved by the Hubble telescope could still be considerably red-shifted. Th inhabitants of the galaxy in question (if there were any) for example would probably be able to ascertain that, from our position, their galaxy would look red-shifted. 

The implication is: English Dictionary (Word) => English Word (Word). 

Okay, enough of this nit-picking from me.


----------



## Fifth Element

Engilbrand said:
			
		

> Why, with everything else that you could get uptight about, would a strange name become an issue?



New to the 4E forum, eh?

I agree with your post pretty much in its entirety. Considering the terms we gamers throw around that non-gamers would not recognize, I don't see why we should be upset by using a name that's not a part of standard English, whatever that is.


----------



## RefinedBean

Cadfan said:
			
		

> I'd like to toss in my vote for just never referring to characters in-game by their character class.




Oh, that might be going a bit far.  What's better is if they describe themselves as a particular class, and then tear down any pre-conceived notions the other characters might have.

But in general, yes, the best RP (and even battle moments) do not stem from your example convo.  

Of course, I feel bad for Joe.  He's obviously not taking advantage of most of his abilities.


----------



## ThirdWizard

Cadfan said:
			
		

> PC3: Look!  Now I'm a Walker!




The eyes of a ranger are upon you.


----------



## Wormwood

Cadfan said:
			
		

> PC3: Look!  Now I'm a Walker!





One of my guiltiest pleasures is _Dungeons & Dragons 2: Wrath of the Dragon God_. And nothing tickles me more than dialogue like "Barbarian, get a hold of yourself!" and "Tread carefully, rogue."

Love it!


----------



## Fifth Element

I just hope they finally get rid of the name "druid". After all, "druid" specifically refers to the ancient Celtic priest/magistrate/scholars of that name, not some shapeshifting nature-magician. It's a specific term referring to a specific culture.

[sblock]What?[/sblock]


----------



## Spatula

Dausuul said:
			
		

> After some more reading of the paths presented... my reaction is mostly "meh."  They look like 3.X prestige classes translated into 4E.  Nothing seems particularly innovative about them.  I was hoping paragon paths would have a different emphasis in terms of character abilities--more "hero of the kingdom" and less "bigger badder dungeon-crawler."



I think your expectations are off, if you were expecting followers & stronghold stuff in the paths.  The dungeon-crawling probably goes all the way up to level 30, given that the designers have talked of epic-level traps (the form the dungeon takes will change with levels, of course).  Anyway, it's a feature that the rules only cover combat interactions, right?


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

ShockMeSane said:
			
		

> This thread has gone so far off the deep end of any kind of relevance that I don't even know what to say.
> 
> A WotC employee lets us know there are 30+ paragon paths and the argument over paragon class names continue as if nothing happened.



Oh, that... That would hardly affect the play at your game table. I mean, we're talking about Scrabble 4E, right?


----------



## Kahoots

Fifth Element said:
			
		

> New to the 4E forum, eh?
> 
> I agree with your post pretty much in its entirety. Considering the terms we gamers throw around that non-gamers would not recognize, I don't see why we should be upset by using a name that's not a part of standard English, whatever that is.



I concur!

On the topic of 30+ Paragon Paths,  my guess falls into the realm of 32 Paths in total - 4 for each of the 8 main classes.

This seems pretty good on the whole except for the Warlock which apparently would have 1 for each of the four different pacts which is a bit of a shoehorn. The other option would be that the total is higher than 32 and some classes get more options in the PHB than others.


----------



## Andor

Cadfan said:
			
		

> I'd like to toss in my vote for just never referring to characters in-game by their character class.
> 
> PC1: I'm Joe.  I'm a Ranger.
> PC2: Oh, so you patrol a wilderness region as member of law enforcement?
> PC1: Uh, no...
> PC2: Do you, per chance, rove between isolated communities and trade furs?
> PC1: No, I don't do that either.
> PC2: Why are you a ranger then?
> PC1: Because I fight with two weapons?
> PC3: I'm a Fighter!  I fight!
> PC2: Do you now.
> PC3: Well... not right now.  Guess I'm a Talker right now.
> PC2: Ok then.  So, Joe, what is it that you _do_?
> PC1: I guard caravans.
> PC2: So you're a guard.
> PC1: I can't be a Guardian of the Northern Wastes until I level up a bit.
> PC2: What?
> PC3: Look!  Now I'm a Walker!




"Who are you?"
"I am Delenn!"


----------



## RefinedBean

I'm just hoping not all PPs are class-based...but it's the PHB, so they might go that route and save other ones for the rest of the core books, and forthcoming splats.  I can see the DMG having the Martial, Arcane, Divine, and Leadership PPs, for example:  something very general to give NPCs when you don't have time to be really focused.

I'd love to see some based on a worshipped deity, a chosen homeland, or even ones based on the specific lands/environs that you went through your Heroic levels in.

Now can we please argue about the English language some more?  I have to get some vocab practice in for Scrabble at GenCon.


----------



## malcolm_n

Cadfan said:
			
		

> I'd like to toss in my vote for just never referring to characters in-game by their character class...



OMG, somebody needs to make that into a comic strip


----------



## Wormwood

RefinedBean said:
			
		

> I can see the DMG having the Martial, Arcane, Divine, and Leadership PPs, for example:  something very general to give NPCs when you don't have time to be really focused.



*shudder*  I see what you are saying, but I would _hate _ for NPC generation to use anything remotely like a class progression system. 

I prefer my NPCs a la carte.


----------



## Thornir Alekeg

Fifth Element said:
			
		

> New to the 4E forum, eh?
> 
> I agree with your post pretty much in its entirety. Considering the terms we gamers throw around that non-gamers would not recognize, I don't see why we should be upset by using a name that's not a part of standard English, whatever that is.



 Halfling
Tiefling
Theurge


----------



## malcolm_n

RefinedBean said:
			
		

> I'm just hoping not all PPs are class-based...but it's the PHB, so they might go that route and save other ones for the rest of the core books, and forthcoming splats.  I can see the DMG having the Martial, Arcane, Divine, and Leadership PPs, for example:  something very general to give NPCs when you don't have time to be really focused.
> 
> I'd love to see some based on a worshipped deity, a chosen homeland, or even ones based on the specific lands/environs that you went through your Heroic levels in.
> 
> Now can we please argue about the English language some more?  I have to get some vocab practice in for Scrabble at GenCon.



 But that would imply players have to also get the dmg (like in 3.x) to get the full list of options.  Per WotC, player material will stay strict to player books.  The same is true with monsters and DM's.  If there will be a Role Paragon Path, it'll be in the PHB.


----------



## Thaumaturge

Engilbrand said:
			
		

> I teach English and German in an American high school. I'm also 25. I can guarantee that I don't have the same view on language that the other English teachers have. As far as I'm concerned, "they" and "their" can be used as 3rd person singular pronouns. "One" is stupid. I prefer "If a student doesn't have anything to do during seminar, they will have to go get a book from my bookcase." to "If one does not have a book, then one must retrieve one from the bookcase." Blah.




Gasp.

Heretic!

You will be the first against the wall when the revolution comes. 

I taught English for a few years, and I'm only five years older than you.  Egads man!  Of course, the best form of your example sentence is: "If a student doesn't have anything to do during a seminar, he will...".  "She" is perfectly acceptable here, too.  Either one is OK.  "One" is inelegant, but "their" is heretical!



Woohoo!  Thirty Paragon Paths in the PHB I.  That's good.  It should provide a little diversity, and leave plenty of room for expansion.  

Thaumaturge.


----------



## Mort_Q

malcolm_n said:
			
		

> If there will be a Role Paragon Path, it'll be in the PHB.




Or online.


----------



## Thornir Alekeg

Thaumaturge said:
			
		

> Woohoo!  Thirty Paragon Paths in the PHB I.  That's good.  It should provide a little diversity, and leave plenty of room for expansion.
> 
> Thaumaturge.



 Not thirty. _More than_ thirty!  All for _less than_ thirty-five dollars!  That's about a dollar per path!


----------



## JohnSnow

Plane Sailing said:
			
		

> English:
> "It not only borrows words from other languages; it has chased other languages down dark alley-ways, clubbed them unconscious and rifled their pockets for new vocabulary."
> 
> (I can't attribute this quote)




The exact quote is:

"The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary." - James D. Nicoll

It's in my sigblock on the WotC site. With trollop substituted in for whore because their censor is nuts. Incidentally, Nicoll is "one of us." He's an RPG and sci-fi reviewer, and used to own a game store. The quote was posted on a newsgroup back in 1990 and has been erroneously attributed to many people, but actually originated with Nicoll.


----------



## Thaumaturge

Thornir Alekeg said:
			
		

> Not thirty. _More than_ thirty!  All for _less than_ thirty-five dollars!  That's about a dollar per path!




Good point.  With the purchase of your _more than_ thirty paragon paths, you get all of the base classes and the entire system for _free_. Essentially, anyone not buying a PHB is burning money out of hatred.

 

Thaumaturge.


----------



## ShockMeSane

Thornir Alekeg said:
			
		

> Not thirty. _More than_ thirty!  All for _less than_ thirty-five dollars!  That's about a dollar per path!




Hah! This made me smile 

Buy our paragon paths for a buck each, and included free is 300 pages of other less useful rules! hehe. It's such a good deal you'd be crazy not to buy it!


----------



## RefinedBean

malcolm_n said:
			
		

> But that would imply players have to also get the dmg (like in 3.x) to get the full list of options.  Per WotC, player material will stay strict to player books.  The same is true with monsters and DM's.  If there will be a Role Paragon Path, it'll be in the PHB.




Huh, didn't know they had made that promise!  Let's see if they keep it.  

I don't really know how they'd do role paths, but I do like to be surprised.  It seems to me that PPs leave way more wriggle room than PrCs, and it's especially nice that you probably don't have to tailor your character from level 1 to get certain PPs.  Awesome.


----------



## Dragonblade

I noticed that one of the powers listed is a stance. I wonder if stances will work the same way as they did in Bo9S.


----------



## Storm-Bringer

The_Fan said:
			
		

> Only if I can have my dragonborn warlock's eldritch blast come from his mouth, and call it "Imma Firin Mah Lazar!"



For everyone's viewing pleasure.


----------



## Storm-Bringer

Lizard said:
			
		

> Not really, no. It is, in fact, right.
> 
> Dictionaries do not define language. They *describe* it. A word means what most people use it to mean, no more, no less. Language is fluid, and English? English is a superheated gas.
> 
> Me has BA in englush. Me noes this stuph.



I was more referring to the assertion that 'kensai' is English.  It is, as I am sure you are aware, more properly a loanword.  I am not arguing for or against the porousness of English, merely that 'kensai' is hardly English.


----------



## Spenser

Ewww, he's throwing up blue.


----------



## Voss

Fifth Element said:
			
		

> I just hope they finally get rid of the name "druid". After all, "druid" specifically refers to the ancient Celtic priest/magistrate/scholars of that name, not some shapeshifting nature-magician. It's a specific term referring to a specific culture.
> 
> [sblock]What?[/sblock]




Your sarcasm aside, I wish they would do this.


----------



## Lizard

Kishin said:
			
		

> Did the name of a prestige class matter in your campaign world? Did people actually refer to themselves as reaping maulers, highland stalkers, etc. al?




Uhm....yes? Unless the DM explicitly said otherwise, it's been assumed PrCs are in-world terms. That's what they began as, after all - a way of modeling guilds, organizations, cults, etc.



> Are people going to be referring to each other as Iron Vanguards and Spellstorm Mages in your 4E world?




Probably.


----------



## Kishin

Lizard said:
			
		

> Uhm....yes? Unless the DM explicitly said otherwise, it's been assumed PrCs are in-world terms. That's what they began as, after all - a way of modeling guilds, organizations, cults, etc.





They began as that. They most definitely evolved beyond that, even by the admission of the design staff, since PrCs were also originally intended to be 'special circumstances only' and most building was to be accomplished through multiclassing and feats (Which didn't happen of course).  There are no organizations behind Frostrage Barbarians, Highlander Stalkers, among others. Its not 100% assumed with every PrC.

I, for one, prefer to use PrCs (And will use Paragon Paths/Epic Destinies) to model what a character is capable of, not to delineate what organizations he belongs to. It leaves their backgrounds a lot more open that way, and thereby I can choose whether I want to tie it to an organization or not.



			
				Lizard said:
			
		

> Probably.




Well, you're a simulationist. I am not. We won't agree on this, so I won't derail the thread with an argument.


----------



## Remathilis

Thaumaturge said:
			
		

> Gasp.
> Heretic!
> You will be the first against the wall when the revolution comes.
> I taught English for a few years, and I'm only five years older than you.  Egads man!  Of course, the best form of your example sentence is: "If a student doesn't have anything to do during a seminar, he will...".  "She" is perfectly acceptable here, too.  Either one is OK.  "One" is inelegant, but "their" is heretical!




I'm actually quite fond of hu myself. 

- Remathilis (B.S. English, Secondary Education. Resume on request).


----------



## The_Fan

Storm-Bringer said:
			
		

> For everyone's viewing pleasure.



 Shoop da whoop!


----------



## Storm-Bringer

Spenser said:
			
		

> Ewww, he's throwing up blue.



Yeah, it was tricky getting a lightning effect with MS *Pain*t.  I figured the rough crayon look would go well with the LOLdragonz.


----------



## TwinBahamut

Storm-Bringer said:
			
		

> I was more referring to the assertion that 'kensai' is English.  It is, as I am sure you are aware, more properly a loanword.  I am not arguing for or against the porousness of English, merely that 'kensai' is hardly English.



Being a loanword and being a word in English are not contradictory things. Actually, something is only a loanword if it is actually part of the language doing the borrowing...

Unless you want to argue that popular French loanwords like "Beef" are not actually English words, then you might want to rephrase your statement.

Personally, I have no problem with words like "kensai" showing up in D&D. Actually, I wouldn't mind seeing a few more words from different languages showing up. It would help WotC avoid the truly terrible names that start showing up when most of the good names are already taken. Maybe a few more blatantly French or German words could be used for class names.

Also, as someone who majored in English myself, I am taking more offense at people citing that dictionary.com is a good source for this kind of debate than I would ever take offense at someone using the word Kensai. The unabridged Oxford English Dictionary is the one true dictionary. Accept no substitutes. As far as I am aware, professional writers don't.


----------



## AlphaAnt

Kishin said:
			
		

> They began as that. They most definitely evolved beyond that, even by the admission of the design staff, since PrCs were also originally intended to be 'special circumstances only' and most building was to be accomplished through multiclassing and feats (Which didn't happen of course).  There are no organizations behind Frostrage Barbarians, Highlander Stalkers, among others. Its not 100% assumed with every PrC.
> 
> I, for one, prefer to use PrCs (And will use Paragon Paths/Epic Destinies) to model what a character is capable of, not to delineate what organizations he belongs to. It leaves their backgrounds a lot more open that way, and thereby I can choose whether I want to tie it to an organization or not.




I've always hated the term Prestige Class to be used as a blanket descriptive for the mechanic.  It implies a certain amount of, well, prestige.  A Champion of Corellan implies prestige.  Shadowdancer, Assassin, and Blackguard do not.  D20 Modern called them Advanced classes, but they moved back to the PrC title for Star Wars Saga Edition, and very few of them implied any prestige or membership.  A member of the Jedi/Jedi Knight/Jedi Master class was not necessarily a member of the Jedi Order, and vice versa, which made the concept even more confusing.

An avid fan of SWSE, I'm already familiar with the concept of "character defines class" as opposed to the more traditional "class defines character", but even in Star Wars (which only has 5 base classes and will never have more) it's proven _extremely difficult_ for a lot of people to wrap their head around.  In D&D it will be even tougher of an uphill battle.


----------



## The Little Raven

Wormwood said:
			
		

> One of my guiltiest pleasures is _Dungeons & Dragons 2: Wrath of the Dragon God_.




I remember I was flipping channels once, and I came across this movie. After a second, I realized what it was and thought "Wow, for a straight to video movie, these sets and costumes are way better than the first one." and I watched it for a little bit with an amused smile... then someone said the words "dragon god of undeath" in all seriousness and I just couldn't watch anymore.


----------



## Polyhedral_Columbia

*"English"?*



			
				Storm-Bringer said:
			
		

> I was more referring to the assertion that 'kensai' is English.  It is, as I am sure you are aware, more properly a loanword.  I am not arguing for or against the porousness of English, merely that 'kensai' is hardly English.



If one includes in "English" only _words that are of Old English descent_, then "kensai" is not English. If one includes in "English" _words that are used in modern spoken and written English_, then "kensai" is surely "English", even if it is only used in the specialized English jargon of Japanese history and RPG gaming.

If one includes in "English" only words of Old English descent, then not only such words as "futon", "ginkgo", "hibachi", "soy", "(head) honcho", and "tycoon" are not "English", but also a large percentage of the words used in your post are not "English", such as "referring", "assertion", "properly", "arguing", and "porousness", which go back to another foreign language: Latin.

Travis


----------



## Knight Otu

As written, I cannot say I have many problems with the name kensai being used - as far as I'm concerned, you could easily write "Weapon Master (Kensai)" or "Thug (Fighter/Rogue)" or "Holy Guardian of the Silver Falls (Paladin|Ascendant Blade)," or something like that. This keeps the re-flavor intact without the worry of "what's that class again?"

It can become confusing if the is a class of the same name, of course, but the notation should point out quickly that this isn't the case.

I'm personally a big fan of trying to keep class names out of in-game dialog. Sometimes, it can be appropriate, but most of the time, it is simply a fourth-wall poke. A mercenary might be a Fighter or a Rogue. A priest may be a Paladin, a Cleric, or an Expert. A sorcerer may understand himself as a sorcerer, a wizard, a witch/warlock, an arcanist, an aberration, a saint... That's what defines the character flavorwise. The classes define the character ruleswise. They can (and should, to avoid "Thief (Cleric of St. Cuthbert)" stuff) inform each other, of course.


----------



## Fallen Seraph

Mourn said:
			
		

> I remember I was flipping channels once, and I came across this movie. After a second, I realized what it was and thought "Wow, for a straight to video movie, these sets and costumes are way better than the first one." and I watched it for a little bit with an amused smile... then someone said the words "dragon god of undeath" in all seriousness and I just couldn't watch anymore.



No, the worst part was when the Wizard character was describing how the two different kinds of magic, I just cringed ><


----------



## webrunner

I think the Kensei thing might be part of their attempt to make it so 4e isn't "Europe + Elves"


----------



## Azurebane

*Howdy!*

Hi all, this is my first post.

I'm going to skip the babblespeak about linguistic nitpicking, because it pales in comparison to this (quoted yet again, for emphasis):



			
				WotC_Miko said:
			
		

> 1) There are over 30 paragon paths in the PH.
> 
> 2) My paladin took a multiclass cleric feat so she could qualify for a cleric paragon path.




This... this is _groovy_.


----------



## Sojorn

Azurebane said:
			
		

> This... this is _groovy_.



THAT's the word I was looking for! Thanks!


----------



## Kobold Avenger

With all this controversy about "Kensai"...  

Are any of you aware that "Assassin" comes from an Arabic word?


----------



## Ulthwithian

Hey, if people think English has it bad, try Japanese.  I think it's perfectly fine to take the occasional word from Japanese into English, since it seems sometimes that Japanese staged ninja raids on the discount repositories of other languages for words.

$5 USD to the first person (without looking up in a dictionary, online or otherwise) what the word 'remokon' refers to in Japanese, and its etymology. 

Along these lines, can anyone tell me when the word samurai started showing up in English dictionaries?

Edit: Hashashin, no?  Old Man on the Mountain, cult fanatics who would apparently near-OD on hashish (thus their name) and go out on suicide missions?  That origin?


----------



## Mirtek

Mourn said:
			
		

> then someone said the words "dragon god of undeath" in all seriousness and I just couldn't watch anymore.



What's wrong with Faluzure? He is one of the coolest deities D&D has to offer. Now that I think about him, too bad that he didn't made him core. He would be way better than Bane or Orcus.

Sure, the movie didn't do him justice, but that's not his fault


----------



## Kordeth

Kobold Avenger said:
			
		

> With all this controversy about "Kensai"...
> 
> Are any of you aware that "Assassin" comes from an Arabic word?




Yeah, and "paladin" is Italian, "cleric" is Latin, and "ranger" is Old French by way of Germanic origins. The point that the kensei-objectors are making is that all of these words have been adopted into the common parlance of the English language and have been divorced from most of their cultural roots (no one objects to calling Oswald an assassin on the basis that he wasn't a member of a Crusades-era Islamic cult, for example), while "kensei" really hasn't. It's a valid point, but at the same time--just pick a different name if it bugs you and move on.


----------



## Guild Goodknife

Ulthwithian said:
			
		

> Hey, if people think English has it bad, try Japanese.  I think it's perfectly fine to take the occasional word from Japanese into English, since it seems sometimes that Japanese staged ninja raids on the discount repositories of other languages for words.
> 
> $5 USD to the first person (without looking up in a dictionary, online or otherwise) what the word 'remokon' refers to in Japanese, and its etymology.
> 
> Along these lines, can anyone tell me when the word samurai started showing up in English dictionaries?
> 
> Edit: Hashashin, no?  Old Man on the Mountain, cult fanatics who would apparently near-OD on hashish (thus their name) and go out on suicide missions?  That origin?




Hmm remokon...knowing that the japanese call a PC (Personal Computer) a persocom, i'd guess that remokon means 'remote control'


----------



## Kobold Avenger

Ulthwithian said:
			
		

> Hashashin, no?  Old Man on the Mountain, cult fanatics who would apparently near-OD on hashish (thus their name) and go out on suicide missions?  That origin?



I checked the etymology of the word there's 2 theories:
1) It comes from the word "Hashishin"
2) It comes from the words "Al Hassan" from "Followers of Al Hassan"


----------



## RefinedBean

Ulthwithian said:
			
		

> $5 USD to the first person (without looking up in a dictionary, online or otherwise) what the word 'remokon' refers to in Japanese, and its etymology.




How about 5 Euro, and we've got ourselves a deal.

Shot in the dark:  Something to do with Emos?


----------



## The_Fan

Ulthwithian said:
			
		

> Hey, if people think English has it bad, try Japanese.  I think it's perfectly fine to take the occasional word from Japanese into English, since it seems sometimes that Japanese staged ninja raids on the discount repositories of other languages for words.
> 
> $5 USD to the first person (without looking up in a dictionary, online or otherwise) what the word 'remokon' refers to in Japanese, and its etymology.
> 
> Along these lines, can anyone tell me when the word samurai started showing up in English dictionaries?
> 
> Edit: Hashashin, no?  Old Man on the Mountain, cult fanatics who would apparently near-OD on hashish (thus their name) and go out on suicide missions?  That origin?



 Remote control. Where's my $5?

Edit: Ninja'd!


----------



## Ulthwithian

Guild Goodknife said:
			
		

> Hmm remokon...knowing that the japanese call a PC (Personal Computer) a persocom, i'd guess that remokon means 'remote control'




Wow, that was fast. 

BTW, guys, if you think 'kensei'/'kensai' is odd in English, I'll let you know I can't find it in either the normal online dictionary I use for Japanese OR my home dictionary.  I believe it's a new term all around.  That, or VERY old and archaic.

The_Fan: Unfortunately a tad too slow, and you didn't give me the kind of etymological data (or construction data) that the winner got.

Speaking of, if the winner could contact me privately, I'll arrange for the money to be sent. 

Seraph: Do they have the kanzi so that I can try to look it up in my kanzi dictionary? 

K.  Is it 'kensei' or 'kensai'?  I looked up both in dictionaries, and didn't find them in either place.  (Kanzi dictionary is easy, because the first kanzi should be the same, sword.)

I would have thought 'kensai' meant 'sword prodigy' whereas 'kensei' was 'sword 'saint'' (I've _always_ hated that translation), but I'm not sure.


----------



## Fallen Seraph

Ulthwithian said:
			
		

> Wow, that was fast.
> 
> BTW, guys, if you think 'kensei'/'kensai' is odd in English, I'll let you know I can't find it in either the normal online dictionary I use for Japanese OR my home dictionary.  I believe it's a new term all around.  That, or VERY old and archaic.



Sounds, somewhat old: _was an honorary title given to a warrior of legendary skill in swordsmanship. The literal translation of "kensei" is "sword saint"_


----------



## The_Fan

Ulthwithian said:
			
		

> Wow, that was fast.
> 
> BTW, guys, if you think 'kensei'/'kensai' is odd in English, I'll let you know I can't find it in either the normal online dictionary I use for Japanese OR my home dictionary.  I believe it's a new term all around.  That, or VERY old and archaic.
> 
> The_Fan: Unfortunately a tad too slow, and you didn't give me the kind of etymological data (or construction data) that the winner got.
> 
> Speaking of, if the winner could contact me privately, I'll arrange for the money to be sent.



 I found it on teh wiki. It's a misspelling of "kensei," meaning roughly Swordsaint (though other possible translations include Fist Saint, Sacred Fist, etc). Often the founders of a dojo, generally considered a fighter of great skill and purity who devotes their life to perfecting their art. And yeah, it's pretty darn archaic.


----------



## nothing to see here

Thaumaturge said:
			
		

> This is crazy talk.  If we start thinking like this, "their" will become the correct English _singular_ possessive.  This must not be allowed.
> 
> Ever.
> 
> Seriously.
> 
> /shudder.
> 
> 
> 
> Thaumaturge.




Hmmm...interesting what one comes accross when reading about paragpn class...

Option one -- impled masculine "his"...not particularly welcoming in these days of gener partity.  Last seen in 2e splats.

Option two -- gender inclusiveness "his or her".  Awkward and ugly - political correctness run amok.  A book full of that would make your eyes bleed.

Option three -- non gendered possiessive pronoun already widely in use -- "their".  No real downside outside of traditon.  Looks like language evolution to me.


----------



## FreeXenon

Remathilis said:
			
		

> I'm actually quite fond of hu myself.




Damn you! Now I feel the overwhelming urge to Blog this. 
Arrrggghhhhh!!! 



Yea on 30+ PP. That is excellent.


----------



## Engilbrand

I'm about to win "Ridiculous Linguistic Debate 2008" with a beautiful selection from Amrbose Bierce's "The Devil's Dictionary".



LEXICOGRAPHER, n. A pestilent fellow who, under the pretense of recording some particular stage in the development of a language, does what he can to arrest its growth, stiffen its flexibility and mechanize its methods. For your lexicographer, having written his dictionary, comes to be considered "as one having authority," whereas his function is only to make a record, not to give a law. The natural servility of the human understanding having invested him with judicial power, surrenders its right of reason and submits itself to a chronicle as if it were a statue. Let the dictionary (for example) mark a good word as "obsolete" or "obsolescent" and few men thereafter venture to use it, whatever their need of it and however desirable its restoration to favor -- whereby the process of improverishment is accelerated and speech decays. On the contrary, recognizing the truth that language must grow by innovation if it grow at all, makes new words and uses the old in an unfamiliar sense, has no following and is tartly reminded that "it isn't in the dictionary" -- although down to the time of the first lexicographer (Heaven forgive him!) no author ever had used a word that _was_ in the dictionary. In the golden prime and high noon of English speech; when from the lips of the great Elizabethans fell words that made their own meaning and carried it in their very sound; when a Shakespeare and a Bacon were possible, and the language now rapidly perishing at one end and slowly renewed at the other was in vigorous growth and hardy preservation -- sweeter than honey and stronger than a lion -- the lexicographer was a person unknown, the dictionary a creation which his Creator had not created him to create.

God said: "Let Spirit perish into Form,"
And lexicographers arose, a swarm!
Thought fled and left her clothing, which they took,
And catalogued each garment in a book.
Now, from her leafy covert when she cries:
"Give me my clothes and I'll return," they rise
And scan the list, and say without compassion:
"Excuse us -- they are mostly out of fashion."
Sigismund Smith


----------



## nothing to see here

Cadfan said:
			
		

> There's a fairy tale where this girl is a maid in an old man's house.  This old man hates the regular names for things, so he renames them all and insists the girl use them.  Eventually his house burns down because the girl tries to convey to him that a spark from the fire has jumped from the fireplace, and is unable to do so in a timely manner due to his arbitrary language constraints.
> 
> Its a silly story, but we can take a lesson from it- the essence of an item denoted does not change due to the label we place upon it.  Fire burned his house down even though it was named something else, and a Kensai by any other name will still give you a +1 attack bonus.
> 
> No doubt the old man took a different lesson- he undoubtedly concluded that if only the entire language was altered to use the words he invented, no language confusion would exist.




Whoa...heavy stuff...I have a hankering to dust off some of my old Wittgenstein books 

How did an off-hand comment about the Kensai come to this?!


----------



## MindWanderer

WotC_Miko said:
			
		

> 1) There are over 30 paragon paths in the PH.
> 
> 2) My paladin took a multiclass cleric feat so she could qualify for a cleric paragon path.



Bless you!  My elf archer-cleric is saved!  All I have to do is take a Ranger Training feat and an archery-ranger paragon path and I should be set... right?  Assuming there isn't a cleric-legal paragon path I like anyway, like a path that lets me use a weapon (a bow) as a divine implement.


----------



## Sojorn

nothing to see here said:
			
		

> Whoa...heavy stuff...I have a hankering to dust off some of my old Wittgenstein books
> 
> How did an off-hand comment about the Kensai come to this?!



Welcome to the internet?

Yeah, none of us know how it works really either. Heck, we're just struggling to figure out English.


----------



## RandomCitizenX

AlphaAnt said:
			
		

> D20 Modern called them Advanced classes, but they moved back to the PrC title for Star Wars Saga Edition, and very few of them implied any prestige or membership.




Just wanted to point out that D20 modern did indeed have Prestige classes in addition to the Base and Advanced classes. Each one was just a more focused concept than the category which came before.


----------



## JohnSnow

TraverseTravis said:
			
		

> If one includes in "English" only _words that are of Old English descent_, then "kensai" is not English. If one includes in "English" _words that are used in modern spoken and written English_, then "kensai" is surely "English", even if it is only used in the specialized English jargon of Japanese history and RPG gaming.
> 
> If one includes in "English" only words of Old English descent, then not only such words as "futon", "ginkgo", "hibachi", "soy", "(head) honcho", and "tycoon" are not "English", but also a large percentage of the words used in your post are not "English", such as "referring", "assertion", "properly", "arguing", and "porousness", which go back to another foreign language: Latin.
> 
> Travis




Add to that list the following words which come up in gaming from time to time:

From French:
paladin, prestige, cavalier, halberd, victual, and countless others.

From Gaelic (Irish or Scots, sometimes hard to tell which):
banshee, bard, blarney, bog, brat, brogue, bunny, cairn, clan, claymore, collie, curragh, donnybrook, dram, galore, glen, hooligan, hubbub, keen (as in 'to wail'), leprechaun, pet, ogham, shamrock, shillelagh, slew, slob, slogan, smidgen, smithereens, sporran, whiskey, and many more.

From Welsh:
coracle, corgi, eisteddfod, flannel, metheglin, pendragon.

From Breton:
menhir, penguin.

From Cornish:
brill, dolmen, gull.

Shall I go on?


----------



## Xanaqui

*Grammer*

If you think that it's Japanese, please use 剣聖, not "kensei"    It's far easier for me to understand, particuarly since there are multiple "kensei" in Japanese that refer to different types of fighting people (using different Kanji, "kensei" is closer to the D&D "Monk" than the D&D "Sword Master").

None of the sentences above about 剣聖 describe the relative importance of the group you're in versus the 剣聖's group. The tenses also seem to be wrong in most (if not all) of the sentences, and some instances of 剣聖 are conjugated completely incorrectly. Even worse, the gender of the author is indeterminate in declarative sentences, inaccurate self-references are present, and I don't even want to get into the complete numerical illiteracy.

Or we could assume that "Kensei" is an English word that has only a bit to do with the language it was originally taken from (heck the pronunciation, meter and meaning are pretty far off just to start with), and ignore the above paragraphs (which, since they're in English, have the exact same problems that they complain about  ).

This is why I think that all loanwords are words in the language they are loaned to, not the language they are loaned from.

For those who are mourning the loss of 剣聖 as a future oriental base class, it really shouldn't be one. 剣士 ("Kenshi") would likely be more appropriate for a base class. Kenshi loosely translates to "Swordsperson", although the weapon classification is a bit more specific than "sword".



			
				Thaumaturge said:
			
		

> Gasp.
> 
> Heretic!
> 
> You will be the first against the wall when the revolution comes.
> 
> I taught English for a few years, and I'm only five years older than you.  Egads man!  Of course, the best form of your example sentence is: "If a student doesn't have anything to do during a seminar, he will...".  "She" is perfectly acceptable here, too.  Either one is OK.  "One" is inelegant, but "their" is heretical!



My understanding is that "their" was preferred when the gender was indeterminate until sometime in the 1800s.

My preferred construction is "hir", but it never seems to catch on  Apparently, academia accepts "tey" these days.


----------



## Storm-Bringer

TwinBahamut said:
			
		

> Being a loanword and being a word in English are not contradictory things. Actually, something is only a loanword if it is actually part of the language doing the borrowing...



That is why I said 'more properly', rather than 'only can be called'.  



> Unless you want to argue that popular French loanwords like "Beef" are not actually English words, then you might want to rephrase your statement.



For myself, I use a guideline of 'how long has it been in common usage?'.  I will grant, this is ridiculously fuzzy, and applies in no way to anyone else's parameters.



> Personally, I have no problem with words like "kensai" showing up in D&D. Actually, I wouldn't mind seeing a few more words from different languages showing up. It would help WotC avoid the truly terrible names that start showing up when most of the good names are already taken. Maybe a few more blatantly French or German words could be used for class names.



I don't either, honestly.  But, as has been noted, it rather sticks out with all the other Germanic and Frankish historical terms.  I realize that 'monk' has done that for three decades now, but that has become part of the canon.  See my above guideline.

And again, I am not really concerned with the inclusion, I am more concerned with the inaccurate usage.  A kensai is someone who is beyond any measure of skill.  They don't need to actually use their swords.  If kensai were included as an Epic path or set of powers that dealt with reducing morale or causing fear effects, I would be less inclined to complain.  As mentioned above, sloppy usage combined with sloppy, florid prose sets my teeth on edge.  

Also, stop using 'you' in the descriptions.  



> Also, as someone who majored in English myself, I am taking more offense at people citing that dictionary.com is a good source for this kind of debate than I would ever take offense at someone using the word Kensai. The unabridged Oxford English Dictionary is the one true dictionary. Accept no substitutes. As far as I am aware, professional writers don't.



Right now, it is sitting at about $1000USD, not counting shipping costs.  That is 20 volumes.  Not an inconsiderable cost to ship.

But if you have a spare you can shoot over my way, I will be forever grateful.


----------



## Mort_Q

Xanaqui said:
			
		

> Apparently, academia accepts "tey" these days.




Not around here; at least not that I've read/heard.


----------



## Storm-Bringer

Mort_Q said:
			
		

> Not around here; at least not that I've read/heard.



That is because it was misspelled.  They meant 'teh'.


----------



## Xanaqui

Ulthwithian said:
			
		

> $5 USD to the first person (without looking up in a dictionary, online or otherwise) what the word 'remokon' refers to in Japanese, and its etymology.



I'd assume that it's [SBLOCK]"Remote Controller"[/SBLOCK], stolen from English post word-war II. However, my 和英辞典 doesn't have that word, so I'd need to do a katakana search on the internet to verify.


----------



## Dragonblade

Guild Goodknife said:
			
		

> Hmm remokon...knowing that the japanese call a PC (Personal Computer) a persocom, i'd guess that remokon means 'remote control'




Technically, its "Pasokon" for a personal computer, but close enough. 

"Remokon" is indeed remote control. Japanese steals liberally from foreign languages. The interesting thing about Japanese is it has a linguistic structure inherent in the language which allows it to import foreign words but also identify them as non-Japanese through the use of the katakana alphabet.

The difficult thing with learning Japanese is that though it borrows most heavily from English, it raids other languages as well, and sometimes it can be hard to identify exactly why a certain word is in katakana and where it came from originally. For example, almost all high tech words come from American English. But most automobile terms from British English. "Boneto" = bonnet, which we in America would refer to as the hood of the car. "Handoru" = handle, which in the U.S. would be steering wheel. Salad is "sarada", but bread in Japanese is "pan" (pronounced PAH-N) and comes from German, I believe.

And then the Japanese take words from other languages and give it a different meaning. For example the Japanese have the expression "rabu rabu" which comes from the word "love" and while its meaning partially depends on context, it can mean to cuddle as a verb, or to be affectionate with.


----------



## Nine Hands

Storm-Bringer said:
			
		

> For everyone's viewing pleasure.




Ughh...go back to /b/


----------



## Xanaqui

Dragonblade said:
			
		

> Technically, its "Pasokon" for a personal computer, but close enough.
> 
> "Remokon" is indeed remote control. Japanese steals liberally from foreign languages. The interesting thing about Japanese is it has a linguistic structure inherent in the language which allows it to import foreign words but also identify them as non-Japanese through the use of the katakana alphabet.
> 
> The difficult thing with learning Japanese is that though it borrows most heavily from English, it raids other languages as well, and sometimes it can be hard to identify exactly why a certain word is in katakana and where it came from originally. For example, almost all high tech words come from American English. But most automobile terms from British English. "Boneto" = bonnet, which we in America would refer to as the hood of the car. "Handoru" = handle, which in the U.S. would be steering wheel. Salad is "sarada", but bread in Japanese is "pan" (pronounced PAH-N) and comes from German, I believe.
> 
> And then the Japanese take words from other languages and give it a different meaning. For example the Japanese have the expression "rabu rabu" which comes from the word "love" and while its meaning partially depends on context, it can mean to cuddle as a verb, or to be affectionate with.



My understanding is that most words stolen into Japanese are Chinese, followed by Ainu, then Korean, then English, then Portugese. Note also that Chinese/Ainu/Korean loan words tend not to use Katakana.


----------



## Xanaqui

Ulthwithian said:
			
		

> Wow, that was fast.
> 
> BTW, guys, if you think 'kensei'/'kensai' is odd in English, I'll let you know I can't find it in either the normal online dictionary I use for Japanese OR my home dictionary.  I believe it's a new term all around.  That, or VERY old and archaic.
> 
> The_Fan: Unfortunately a tad too slow, and you didn't give me the kind of etymological data (or construction data) that the winner got.
> 
> Speaking of, if the winner could contact me privately, I'll arrange for the money to be sent.
> 
> Seraph: Do they have the kanzi so that I can try to look it up in my kanzi dictionary?
> 
> K.  Is it 'kensei' or 'kensai'?  I looked up both in dictionaries, and didn't find them in either place.  (Kanzi dictionary is easy, because the first kanzi should be the same, sword.)
> 
> I would have thought 'kensai' meant 'sword prodigy' whereas 'kensei' was 'sword 'saint'' (I've _always_ hated that translation), but I'm not sure.




Look up 剣聖; if you have a good enough English -> Japanese dictionary, you'll get multiple hits with "kensei". I'd assume that it's centuries old, but I could be wrong. By the way, I think that 剣聖 should really be an Epic destiny.


----------



## Stalker0

Xanaqui said:
			
		

> My understanding is that most words stolen into Japanese are Chinese, followed by Ainu, then Korean, then English, then Portugese. Note also that Chinese/Ainu/Korean loan words tend not to use Katakana.




I think this discussion has officially gone off topic.


----------



## Xanaqui

*Back on topic*

I like the idea of paragon paths, and that they're putting a significant number of them in the initial PH. I think I'd prefer that they'd put a bit more power into the paragon path versus the heroic class (perhaps more abilities that could be selected from either, as opposed to only from one or the other), but my opinion may differ on play.



			
				Stalker0 said:
			
		

> I think this discussion has officially gone off topic.



Thanks; I needed that.


----------



## Dragonblade

Xanaqui said:
			
		

> My understanding is that most words stolen into Japanese are Chinese, followed by Ainu, then Korean, then English, then Portugese. Note also that Chinese/Ainu/Korean loan words tend not to use Katakana.




Since Japan's entire writing system is based on Chinese, I don't know if steal is the right word anymore. Just like English is literally Angle-Saxon Germanic combined with Norman French such that it has become something wholly new and original.

Japanese and Korean also are of the same language family. So Japanese and Korean have many similar words not because they steal from each other but because they have the same root source. Like Spanish and French are both Romance languages derived from Latin.

Only modern loan words use katakana. Although katakana is also used to write Japanese words in the same way that we might use italics, or quotation marks to draw attention to a word or emphasize it.


----------



## Kordeth

Xanaqui said:
			
		

> I like the idea of paragon paths, and that they're putting a significant number of them in the initial PH. I think I'd prefer that they'd put a bit more power into the paragon path versus the heroic class (perhaps more abilities that could be selected from either, as opposed to only from one or the other), but my opinion may differ on play.




What do you mean by abilities that can be selected from either? You don't lose out on any class powers in exchange for paragon path powers.


----------



## Plane Sailing

JohnSnow said:
			
		

> The exact quote is:
> 
> "The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary." - James D. Nicoll
> 
> It's in my sigblock on the WotC site. With trollop substituted in for whore because their censor is nuts. Incidentally, Nicoll is "one of us." He's an RPG and sci-fi reviewer, and used to own a game store. The quote was posted on a newsgroup back in 1990 and has been erroneously attributed to many people, but actually originated with Nicoll.




Thanks for the attribution information - I've loved that quote ever since I first came across it; it seems to capture English so... well


----------



## Campbell

If we're going to use tradition as a guide the kensai has existed in a similar form for 15 years (it initially appeared as a kit in Dragon 189 - The Other Orientals [January 1993]).


----------



## Kahoots

Stalker0 said:
			
		

> I think this discussion has officially gone off topic.



Severely.

So, about Paragon Paths....


----------



## FireLance

Plane Sailing said:
			
		

> Thanks for the attribution information - I've loved that quote ever since I first came across it; it seems to capture English so... well



English seems ideally suited for 4e, given how it kills beats up other languages and takes their stuff words.


----------



## Fifth Element

Engilbrand said:
			
		

> I'm about to win "Ridiculous Linguistic Debate 2008"



You must be joking. This is the internet. At best you'll win "Ridiculous Linguistic Debate, April 23, 2008".


----------



## Andor




----------



## ThirdWizard

Xanaqui said:
			
		

> For those who are mourning the loss of 剣聖 as a future oriental base class, it really shouldn't be one. 剣士 ("Kenshi") would likely be more appropriate for a base class. Kenshi loosely translates to "Swordsperson", although the weapon classification is a bit more specific than "sword".




Yeah, but then the DM would have to yell "FINISH HIM!" before every PC kill.


----------



## FireLance

Plane Sailing said:
			
		

> I imagine that it will be possible to great a generic Paragon Path (perhaps called simply "Paragon") which instead of giving paragon-specific abilities gives a slightly broader range of class abilities by extending the pattern of heroic ability gains into the paragon levels.



One other way to "multiclass" within your own class might be:

At 11th level, you pick one other option from your base class, e.g. if you picked Artful Dodger for your rogue at 1st level, you can now pick Brutal Scoundrel at 11th. The encounter, utility and daily power you get at 11th, 12th and 20th level are simply selected from your class power list.

Not sure what you could get in place of the 11th level action point ability and the 16th level class feature, though.


----------



## FireLance

Lizard said:
			
		

> Purple Octopus Eats Bananas Attack



This makes me want to sic mind flayers on that dancing banana smiley.


----------



## TwinBahamut

Xanaqui said:
			
		

> My understanding is that most words stolen into Japanese are Chinese, followed by Ainu, then Korean, then English, then Portugese. Note also that Chinese/Ainu/Korean loan words tend not to use Katakana.



Yep. Around the time the people of Japan pretty much "borrowed" China's entire writing system, they ended up borrowing practically the entirety of the Chinese language along with it and merged it with the Japanese of the time. The result can be... interesting.

Meanwhile, you can pretty much make a clear distinction between Old English and Middle English simply by noticing the sudden and dramatic influence of French rule over England for a long time, when English finally starts showing up again in things like Chaucer's Canterbury Tales after the period of most writing from England being made in French. This all takes place after the massive scandinavian influence period (which gives us words like skirt and shirt, I believe), and before some people randomly decided to import a ridiculous amount of Latin into modern English. And then Shakespeare went off and made up enough words on his own that you can probably cite him as a significant shaper of the English language in his own right...

Heh... I am suddenly amused by the thought that a _very_ large number of Shakespearisms like "bedroom" are the same kind of Noun-Noun combinations that people around here insult WotC for. And yes, I am pretty sure "Shakespearisms" is not the right word, but this is English and I am talking about The Bard here. I am allowed to make words up.


----------



## hennebeck

epochrpg said:
			
		

> Each pack retails for $3.95 comes with 12 randomly assorted power cards:
> 6 at will
> 4 per encounter and
> 2 daily abilities.
> 
> Collect them all!




And 5 lands per pack. 
/sarcasm


----------



## VannATLC

hennebeck said:
			
		

> And 5 lands per pack.
> /sarcasm





*giggle*

Don't forget Foils.


----------



## Spatula

Campbell said:
			
		

> If we're going to use tradition as a guide the kensai has existed in a similar form for 15 years (it initially appeared as a kit in Dragon 189 - The Other Orientals [January 1993]).



Kensei in D&D dates back to the 1e Oriental Adventures (1985, according to wiki).


----------



## KidSnide

Xanaqui said:
			
		

> I like the idea of paragon paths, and that they're putting a significant number of them in the initial PH. I think I'd prefer that they'd put a bit more power into the paragon path versus the heroic class (perhaps more abilities that could be selected from either, as opposed to only from one or the other), but my opinion may differ on play.



One of the things that I like about small paragon paths is that it seems like it should be pretty easy for GMs to write their own.  Compare to 3E, where it was pretty hard to write balanced prestige classes (WotC designers seemed to routinely fail at the task).  

In my experience, it doesn't take much custom crunch to turn a PC built with the basic rules into a character that really feels like it is a part of a particular game world.  So, I think it's great that we can take small crunch and add to our games without throwing the whole balance out of whack.


----------



## mhacdebhandia

Fallen Seraph said:
			
		

> No, the worst part was when the Wizard character was describing how the two different kinds of magic, I just cringed ><



You think that's bad, consider the fact that the climax of the film involves the protagonist's wife *rediscovering* divine magic for the first time in ages, and using it to beat the dragon.

*THEY HAD A CLERIC OF OBAD-HAI IN THE PARTY*.


----------



## Syunsuke

TwinBahamut said:
			
		

> Yep. Around the time the people of Japan pretty much "borrowed" China's entire writing system, they ended up borrowing practically the entirety of the Chinese language along with it and merged it with the Japanese of the time. The result can be... interesting.



We(I'm Japanese) killed Chinese language and take it's staff   

...Once I asked to translate Chinese text into English by an English speaking guy who knew I'm Japanese.
I replyed "sorry, but this is Chinese."
He said "yep, so I thought you can read."
I said "you know, I'm Japanese. And I've not study Chinese."
He said "WTH? Being Japanese, why you have to study to read Chiniese?."
...Conversation went rather strange  


As a native Japanese speaker, I want to ask about _kawanaga_, mysterious ninja's tool prevailing among English RPGs but no such word exist in Japanese. But this is WAY too off topic


----------



## mhacdebhandia

"They" was good enough for Shakespeare, so it's good enough for me.


----------



## Lizard

mhacdebhandia said:
			
		

> "They" was good enough for Shakespeare, so it's good enough for me.




They WERE good enough for Shakespeare.


----------



## Ipissimus

Torchlyte said:
			
		

> *Cold Steel Hurricane Stormwarden Attack 20*
> _You rush into the midst of your enemies and, like a freezing wind, flay them alive._
> 
> That's like saying...
> 
> Ultimate Rogue Power 20
> _You run up to someone and, like a camel, stab them in the face._




QFT.

Yeah, I don't want to live where the guy who wrote that lives. Either he or she must hang out on the dark side of Neptune or lives in the eye of an antarctic hurricane if they can compare being flayed by steel weapons to wind. And then I'd be hard pressed, even with the best British understatement, to describe such a gale as a 'freezing wind'.

"Bob! Don't go out..." TSHUCK! "Awww, shoot, Bob's gone and got himself flayed by the wind."

-groans- I can hear the jokes at my table already. "I decapitate him like a mild zephyr!" or "I execute my Leaping Panda Strike!"

EDIT: Actually, it's getting pretty bad when I'm wincing at some of this stuff. Usually I'm the anti-grammar nazi.


----------



## mhacdebhandia

Lizard said:
			
		

> They WERE good enough for Shakespeare.



Are you trying to correct my grammar, or imply that we don't write the same way as did Shakespeare?

In the first case, I would remind you that "they" is still a single *word* and therefore "was" is the appropriate form.

In the second, my point is that we do write as Shakespeare did - in using "they" if nothing else.


----------



## That One Guy

*This is my big response - yay!*

This one is correct...







			
				Stalker0 said:
			
		

> I think this discussion has officially gone off topic.



 But...


			
				Andor said:
			
		

> “Let loose the gift of battle!” - This isn't a mixed metaphor, it's a pureed one.
> 
> “When you need something dead, you’ll be hard pressed to find someone better at the job than me.” - Is this an assasin or a grave robber?
> 
> “This weapon is my symbol of office, and it shines over the field of battle as I wield it against our enemies.” - Symbol of office? Shines over the battlefield? Is he fighting with a key-to-the-city +3?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WotC needs to hire a cruel and powerful flavor text editor, who causes pain to writers who turn in stuff like this. A beholder with hemorrhoids would be ideal.




Made my ladyfriend and I giggle. 

So did 







			
				DandD said:
			
		

> ... Every gaming group can call their Viking Warriors in their game Imperial Saint Stormtroopers ...




But nothing made me as happy as this...







			
				WotC_Miko said:
			
		

> 1) There are over 30 paragon paths in the PH.
> 
> 2) My paladin took a multiclass cleric feat so she could qualify for a cleric paragon path.



About name-changing classes. Sometimes an easy house rule is to write the new name and then the real one in parenthesis. For instance, if I dm when 4e comes out (which is likely), there will be unaligned Knights(Paladins).







			
				Daemonicious said:
			
		

> Has no one else noticed this little tidbit under Battle Mage found within the flavor text:
> *
> You have even learned of a technique for using arcane energy to temporarily stave off death—and you can’t wait to try it out in battle!*
> 
> Maybe an arcane utility that grants you another healing surge?  Rock on...



I figured that it would be the level 12 utility spell or a crazy level 20 Paragon Power spell. Or... what about a ritual to somehow make the first killing blow they get (I mean, are hit with) that day only deal half damage? I think that'd be pretty darn handy to have.

Also, I think this is worthy of consideration...


			
				FireLance said:
			
		

> One other way to "multiclass" within your own class might be:
> 
> At 11th level, you pick one other option from your base class, e.g. if you picked Artful Dodger for your rogue at 1st level, you can now pick Brutal Scoundrel at 11th. The encounter, utility and daily power you get at 11th, 12th and 20th level are simply selected from your class power list.
> 
> Not sure what you could get in place of the 11th level action point ability and the 16th level class feature, though.



 I think that there should be an option for that sort of... same-class double dipping and some sort of new AP use associated with it.


			
				KidSnide said:
			
		

> One of the things that I like about small paragon paths is that it seems like it should be pretty easy for GMs to write their own.  Compare to 3E, where it was pretty hard to write balanced prestige classes (WotC designers seemed to routinely fail at the task).



This is something I agree with. It was easy to make up prestige classes, but annoying to balance them. Paragon paths just make sense to me (refers to an old post mentioning a pre-4e attempt two years ago... which in retrospect... everyone's 'prestige class' kicked in at level 11. ...which is eerie and awesome).


----------



## Xanaqui

Kordeth said:
			
		

> What do you mean by abilities that can be selected from either? You don't lose out on any class powers in exchange for paragon path powers.



I was thinking about allowing the powers gained at LV 13, 15, 16, 19 to be chosen from either a list from the initial class or a list from the paragon path.

This isn't in the WOTC text, but it's something that might have given these paths a bit of extra meaning without changing their power much.

On the other hand, there may be enough powers in the base classes that doing so would be largely irrelevant; we'll have to see.


----------



## Stogoe

That One Guy said:
			
		

> I think that there should be an option for that sort of... same-class double dipping and some sort of new AP use associated with it.




Umm... that's exactly what a Paragon Path *is*.


----------



## Cirex

WotC_Miko said:
			
		

> 1) There are over 30 paragon paths in the PH.
> 
> 2) My paladin took a multiclass cleric feat so she could qualify for a cleric paragon path.




Ah, nice information. I guess we will get to see more of this next Wednesday.


----------



## Engilbrand

He means that he would rather be a Cleric with the "Paragon Path" of Cleric than a Cleric with the Paragon Path of Radiant Servant. It's like someone saying that, in 3.5, they want to do 5 levels of Ranger and then redo the first 5 Levels of Ranger so that they get TWF AND Archery.


----------



## Engilbrand

Maybe this will end "Ridiculous Linguistic Debate 2008".


----------



## drjones

If this is all you guys can find to complain about then this must be best game ever made by the hands of man.  Truly the second (well fourth) coming.

Seriously, what is the point of these nit-pick fests other than to reinforce gamer stereotypes and pad post counts?  Might as well launch into Kirk vs. Picard and get it over with.


----------



## Midknightsun

> If this is all you guys can find to complain about then this must be best game ever made by the hands of man. Truly the second (well fourth) coming.
> 
> Seriously, what is the point of these nit-pick fests other than to reinforce gamer stereotypes and pad post counts? Might as well launch into Kirk vs. Picard and get it over with.




Can I get an Amen brotha!


----------



## DandD

Or Ninjas vs. Pirates. Yeah, D&D-geeks.


----------



## JohnSnow

drjones said:
			
		

> If this is all you guys can find to complain about then this must be best game ever made by the hands of man.  Truly the second (well fourth) coming.
> 
> Seriously, what is the point of these nit-pick fests other than to reinforce gamer stereotypes and pad post counts?  Might as well launch into Kirk vs. Picard and get it over with.




Archer for the win!

*Runs and hides*


----------



## Fallen Seraph

DandD said:
			
		

> Or Ninjas vs. Pirates. Yeah, D&D-geeks.



Pfft, just Ninjas vs. Pirates.

The true Geek-Argument.

Predator-Pirate-Piloting a Gundam vs. Alien-Ninja-Piloting a Evangelion.


----------



## Dragonblade

Fallen Seraph said:
			
		

> Pfft, just Ninjas vs. Pirates.
> 
> The true Geek-Argument.
> 
> Predator-Pirate-Piloting a Gundam vs. Alien-Ninja-Piloting a Evangelion.




What? No Macross love? I'll take a Valkyrie any day!


----------



## Fallen Seraph

Dragonblade said:
			
		

> What? No Macross love? I'll take a Valkyrie any day!



Okay then... Who would win:

Predator-Pirate-Piloting a Gundam vs. Alien-Ninja-Piloting a Evangelion vs. Borg-Viking-Piloting a Valkyrie


----------



## Dragonblade

Fallen Seraph said:
			
		

> Okay then... Who would win:
> 
> Predator-Pirate-Piloting a Gundam vs. Alien-Ninja-Piloting a Evangelion vs. Borg-Viking-Piloting a Valkyrie




Oooh... Tough one. Hmm, I prefer Predator's over Aliens, or the borg. But I also prefer Ninja over Vikings and Pirates. But yet of all mecha, the Valkyrie is my favorite.

Gahh!! I don't know!! If there was a predator ninja piloting a Valkyrie it would be a no brainer. Of course, that much cool collected in one place would probably tear a rift in the imagination space time continuum drawing the attention of ancient godlike beings best left slumbering. Like Chuck Norris.


----------



## GoodKingJayIII

Fallen Seraph said:
			
		

> Okay then... Who would win:
> 
> Predator-Pirate-Piloting a Gundam vs. Alien-Ninja-Piloting a Evangelion vs. Borg-Viking-Piloting a Valkyrie




Lou Ferrigno.


----------



## Lacyon

Dragonblade said:
			
		

> Oooh... Tough one. Hmm, I prefer Predator's over Aliens, or the borg. But I also prefer Ninja over Vikings and Pirates. But yet of all mecha, the Valkyrie is my favorite.
> 
> Gahh!! I don't know!! If there was a predator ninja piloting a Valkyrie it would be a no brainer. Of course, that much cool collected in one place would probably tear a rift in the imagination space time continuum drawing the attention of ancient godlike beings best left slumbering. Like Chuck Norris.




It's easy. Just trick the other two guys into shouting "It's a Gundam!". They will then explode, regardless of how little damage they've taken, even if nobody's been shooting at them _at all_.

(The alien will give the Gundam a lot of trouble - I'm not sure if they _can_ shout "It's a Gundam!".)


----------



## DandD

... who would get overrun by Gandalf the White and Gandalf the Grey and the Power Rangers and and and in the ultimate battle of ultimate destiny... 

It would be the awesomegeddon. And it would last for a hundred years.


----------



## webrunner

As much as I like Gundams and Valkyries they're real robots, which means it's going to be very difficult to do the 4000 damage necessary to bypass an AT Field.

Now, if we're talking about SUPERS like Mazinger or SR-X...


----------



## Fallen Seraph

webrunner said:
			
		

> As much as I like Gundams and Valkyries they're real robots, which means it's going to be very difficult to do the 4000 damage necessary to bypass an AT Field.
> 
> Now, if we're talking about SUPERS like Mazinger or SR-X...



Well, the lasers used in Gundam are the same kind used in Evangelion to pierce the AT Field of the Diamond Angel. Soo... Gundam lasers could pierce an AT Field. Valkyries... I dunno, if their projectiles could pierce.


----------



## Ulthwithian

Wow, what a massive derailing.

Small aside: パン　(pan) comes from Portuguese, not German.

I'm actually interested in what WotC_巫女　stated about a 'multiclass feat'.  It was a bit unclear.  Did she multiclass to be allowed to take the Feat, or did she mean a Training Feat, or what, exactly?


----------



## katahn

JohnSnow said:
			
		

> Archer for the win!
> 
> *Runs and hides*




Archer is possibly the coolest captain ever.  Gotta love a Star Trek series where they can't just rely on miracle-level technology to get them out of a jam.


----------



## TwinBahamut

webrunner said:
			
		

> As much as I like Gundams and Valkyries they're real robots, which means it's going to be very difficult to do the 4000 damage necessary to bypass an AT Field.
> 
> Now, if we're talking about SUPERS like Mazinger or *SR-X*...



Tenjou Tenga Nendoh Bakusai Ken! Tenjou Tenga Ichigeki Hissatsu Hou! Err... Sorry... I just needed to do that.  (Note: Those translate as Heaven and Earth Telekinetic Explosion Slash and Heaven and Earth One Shot Sure Kill, I think.)

Banpresto Original mechs are the best. Where else would find a group of three real robots, two of which are piloted by people with immense psychic power, that combine into a giant robot controlled by a guy who can say lines like "My reflexes have been honed by years of video games!" while dodging attacks and still take himself seriously?

We are _really_ off topic now.


----------



## JohnSnow

katahn said:
			
		

> Archer is possibly the coolest captain ever.  Gotta love a Star Trek series where they can't just rely on miracle-level technology to get them out of a jam.




_Star Trek_ captain, I agree. But for absolute bad-ass TV sci-fi captain, I gotta go with my man Malcolm Reynolds.

They really need to give us more crunch to debate in these previews...


----------



## Storm-Bringer

Fallen Seraph said:
			
		

> Okay then... Who would win:
> 
> Predator-Pirate-Piloting a Gundam vs. Alien-Ninja-Piloting a Evangelion vs. Borg-Viking-Piloting a Valkyrie



The hell?

No one read Dynamo Joe?


----------



## Domon

> Where else would find a group of three real robots, two of which are piloted by people with immense psychic power, that combine into a giant robot controlled by a guy who can say lines like "My reflexes have been honed by years of video games!" while dodging attacks and still take himself seriously?




Should i ever start with the wackyness of G Gundam?  although the SRX-Banpreios is a good competitor


----------



## TwinBahamut

Domon said:
			
		

> Should i ever start with the wackyness of G Gundam?  although the SRX-Banpreios is a good competitor



I own 3/4 of the DVDs for that series, actually.  

Honestly, though, nothing made in the last few decades can compare to the wackiness of stuff like Mazinger Z... Not even the Fairlions' Royal Heartbreaker can compare to the pure 70's old-school wackiness inherent to every last mech in Mazinger Z. That said, I vastly prefer the way Super Robot Wars and G Gundam have fun with the wackiness, compared to the way they try to take it seriously in the old Super Robot shows.

At this point, I have absolutely no idea on how to try to make this post relevant to Paragon Paths...


----------



## Remathilis

JohnSnow said:
			
		

> _Star Trek_ captain, I agree. But for absolute bad-ass TV sci-fi captain, I gotta go with my man Malcolm Reynolds.
> 
> They really need to give us more crunch to debate in these previews...




See, if you hadn't included the word "TV" in there, I would've went all Han Solo on you.

"He DID shoot first!"


----------



## webrunner

TwinBahamut said:
			
		

> I own 3/4 of the DVDs for that series, actually.
> 
> Honestly, though, nothing made in the last few decades can compare to the wackiness of stuff like Mazinger Z... Not even the Fairlions' Royal Heartbreaker can compare to the pure 70's old-school wackiness inherent to every last mech in Mazinger Z. That said, I vastly prefer the way Super Robot Wars and G Gundam have fun with the wackiness, compared to the way they try to take it seriously in the old Super Robot shows.




Now would be a good time to bring up Gurren Lagann but the arguments about the scale in that series haven't quelled yet and don't really need to be gotten into here.



			
				TwinBahamut said:
			
		

> At this point, I have absolutely no idea on how to try to make this post relevant to Paragon Paths...




Oh, right, _paragon paths_.. um.  Maybe when 4e modern comes out


----------



## Stogoe

JohnSnow said:
			
		

> _Star Trek_ captain, I agree. But for absolute bad-ass TV sci-fi captain, I gotta go with my man Malcolm Reynolds.
> 
> They really need to give us more crunch to debate in these previews...




I'm torn between Archer and Sisko (he was captain of the _Defiant_, the coolest Federation ship ever, dagnabit!) for _Star Trek_ captain.  For TV sci-fi captain, Mal is probably my choice, too.  But I have a soft spot for Dylan Hunt, with all his attendant cheese.

(_Stargate_ has no starship captains, so sadly it doesn't count in this discussion.)


----------



## Hussar

Hey, Dylan Hunt, another Andromeda fan.  I thought I was the only one.  I thought that show was a blast.  Kinda Dr Who level cheezy meets Trek FX.  

But, come on, best captain on TV?  Sheridan hands down.  People please.  

((Although, to be fair, Adama is coming on strong, but, he's not technically a captain.))


----------



## Patlin

JohnSnow said:
			
		

> _Star Trek_ captain, I agree. But for absolute bad-ass TV sci-fi captain, I gotta go with my man Malcolm Reynolds.




Absolutely.  Remove the TV qualification, and I'd also submit Honor Harrington.


----------



## JohnSnow

Patlin said:
			
		

> Absolutely.  Remove the TV qualification, and I'd also submit Honor Harrington.




So, in a bend-over backwards attempt to bring this back on-topic, does anyone think we'll eventually end up with a Paragon Path for ship captains?

Not sci-fi, obviously, but shouldn't there be a place for Captain Jack Sparrow and his ilk in D&D?


----------



## DandD

Hussar said:
			
		

> But, come on, best captain on TV?  Sheridan hands down.  People please.



Good old 'Nuke-em'-Sheridan. He proves that nukes can solve any problem there is. 

Minbari Flagship coming in for the finishing kill? Nuke it!
Being tricked to the Shadow Capital on Z'ha'dum? Nuke it!
Shadow and Vorlon uberfleets don't give attention to your pathetic force? Nuke them both!
Thirdspace Aliens erupting from an ancient Vorlon Spacegate? Nuke them!

Sheridan proves that the use of nukes brings great reward. The often you use them, the more powerful you get. He became president of the galaxy. 

Londo Mollari recognized that, and did the same. He nuked an island, and became the Emperor of the Centauri. 

Now that's a paragon path for both of them, perhaps even epic destiny. They both used their daily nuke-power to elevate themselves to supreme leaders.


----------



## Stalker0

Hussar said:
			
		

> But, come on, best captain on TV?  Sheridan hands down.  People please.




Amen, I mean, he is the one!!! And unlike all those other captains, he actually got an alien woman to marry him, AND stick around till his dieing days!!


----------



## Lacyon

Stalker0 said:
			
		

> Amen, I mean, he is the one!!! And unlike all those other captains, he actually got an alien woman to marry him, AND stick around till his dieing days!!




[Zathras]Oooooh.... wait... no, not the one. Not the one.[/Zathras]


----------



## Saishu_Heiki

Patlin said:
			
		

> Absolutely.  Remove the TV qualification, and I'd also submit Honor Harrington.



I thought I was the only one... 

Baen donated several boxes of books to the Army while I was enlisted. I read nearly the entire series from those donated books while I was on my tour of duty overseas. The Honor Harrington series is high quality all the way.


----------



## Patlin

JohnSnow said:
			
		

> So, in a bend-over backwards attempt to bring this back on-topic, does anyone think we'll eventually end up with a Paragon Path for ship captains?
> 
> Not sci-fi, obviously, but shouldn't there be a place for Captain Jack Sparrow and his ilk in D&D?




"Master of the High Seas" sounds like a good warlord paragon path to me.  Broad enough to encompass pirates, privateers, and naval officers.  I'd assume that the powers and abilities wouldn't be involved in actually piloting or navigating the ship, though... that'd be a freebee.

How about this:

Boarding Action: As a standard action, Character Jumps across some obstacle and makes a basic attack.  Effect: All allies within 3 squares of the Character can do so as well, as a free action during the characters turn.  If the character succeeds on the acrobatics (athletics?) check, all allies also make the jump succesfully.

I'm sure the lingo is wrong in a hundred ways, but you get the idea.


----------



## That One Guy

Stogoe said:
			
		

> Umm... that's exactly what a Paragon Path *is*.




Haha... I see your point, but what I meant was in response to the quote, "At 11th level, you pick one other option from your base class, e.g. if you picked Artful Dodger for your rogue at 1st level, you can now pick Brutal Scoundrel at 11th. The encounter, utility and daily power you get at 11th, 12th and 20th level are simply selected from your class power list." 

My idea was that if someone wanted to take Brutal Scoundrel at 11th, then there could maybe be an action point bonus thing similar to a paragon path. Similarly, it'd probably be really easy to simply make a paragon path associated with becoming 'a complete rogue' or something.


----------



## D.Shaffer

TwinBahamut said:
			
		

> That said, I vastly prefer the way Super Robot Wars and G Gundam have fun with the wackiness, compared to the way they try to take it seriously in the old Super Robot shows.
> 
> At this point, I have absolutely no idea on how to try to make this post relevant to Paragon Paths...



Well, we COULD drag up Escaflowne.  That's a nice, satisfying mix of robots and fantasy tropes.   What level equipment would a Guymelef be?  Paragon path to be a pilot?

Mmm. Superrobots.  I keep hoping that Nono (Diebuster/Gunbuster 2) eventually shows up in SRW, just to see what happens when everyone meets what has got to be one of the smallest (AND largest) 'Super robots' ever made.


----------

