# Compiled info on upcoming classes & races



## Ondo

So I've decided to try and gather links to sources of info about upcoming classes, races, and power sources, in the hopes that it'll help people (like me, for instance) stay caught up on all the info.

Ranadiel has a thread compiling all known info on upcoming products on WotC's boards here.

Known power sources are Martial, Arcane, Divine, Psionic, Shadow, Primal, Elemental, and Ki (PHB).  These 8 "should take care of basically 90% of the classes they foresee making." (source) 

*Products* 

"New classes are mainly going to be introduced in PHBs" (source). 

The Manual of the Planes will include Bladelings as a playable race (source), done as a Monster Manual style writeup (source).

The Eberron Player's Guide will include the Artificer (source) and the Warforged (source).

*Player's Handbook II*
Amazon lists a release date of March 17th (source). The cover is available here.

The Player's Handbook II covers Arcane, Divine, and Primal heroes (from the cover).

The classes included are the Avenger, Barbarian, Bard, Druid, Invoker, Shaman, Sorcerer, and Warden (source).  We also know these tidbits about the classes:

There's a new class that's a Striker with a different flavor - "a guy who's a little more, maybe, deadly and dangerous kind of guy, not like a rogue, but a killer guy in a different sort of way." (source). _(Probably the Avenger.)_
One of the classes is a Leader class that "travels with a 'buddy' who keeps the party in tip-top shape" (source). _(Probably the Shaman.)_
Gnomes, Half-Orcs, Goliaths, and Shifters will be in the PHB2 (source, source), as well as one more race (source) that starts with De (source, source).  _(Probably Devas, as the Forgotten Realms Player's Guide mentions that is the new name for Aasimars.)_

This thread in Greg Bilsland's blog has pictures of a fight that include four PCs, all with PHB2 classes, and various vague hints.

*Player's Handbook III*
Psionic was the new power source highest on the list to make the PHB2, along with Primal, but they weren't sure if there was room (source).  Apparently there wasn't, so it seems like a good guess for PHB3.

*Specific Power Sources* 
*Primal*
They're using the aspects of the druid as the bedrock to build the other primal classes - they'll do things that will remind you of the druid, but in their own unique way (source).  The primal power source has a theme of transformation (source).

*Specific Classes* 

*Artificer*
The Artificer will be an Arcane Leader, and a playtest version is available here. It will be in the Eberron Player's Guide.

*Avenger*
The Avenger uses the Divine power source (source), and will be in the Player's Handbook II.

*Barbarian*
The Barbarian will be a Primal Striker, and a playtest version is available here. It will be in the Player's Handbook II.

*Bard*
The Bard will be an Arcane Leader (source).  There is a bard preview here (D&D Insider only).  It will be in the Player's Handbook II.

*Druid*
There is a druid preview here (D&D Insider only). It will be in the Player's Handbook II.

*Elementalist*
Elementalists are mentioned in the Dwarf entry in Races & Classes alongside clerics, paladins, fighters, barbarians, rangers, and wizards, so they are likely a planned class.

*Empath*
Empaths will be Psionic Leaders (source).

*Illusionist*
Illusionists will have better Invisibility options than a Wizard (source). They may use the Shadow power source (source).

*Invoker*
There is an invoker preview here (D&D Insider only). "This new controller class has mastered the original source of divine power, and will introduce summoning to D&D 4th Edition." (source)  It will be in the Player's Handbook II.

*Monk*
The Monk uses the Ki power source (PHB).  As of D&D XP 2008 they had not seriously started designing the class (source).

*Necromancer*
Necromancers are mentioned here. They use the Shadow power source (Worlds & Monsters, and here).

*Shaman*
The Shaman is a Primal Leader (source, source, D&D Insider only).  Rich Baker mentions it "includes some neat mechanisms for dealing with nature spirits". (source)  It will be in the Player's Handbook II.

*Sorcerer*
There is a sorcerer preview here (D&D Insider only).  It will be in the Player's Handbook II.

*Warden*
There is a warden preview here (D&D Insider only).  It will be in the Player's Handbook II.

*Specific Races* 
Rich Baker gives his guesstimate of traction for ten races from Aarakocra to Catfolk here.

*Deva*
This is the new name for the Aasimar (FRPG).

*Gnome*
Gnomes will be in the Player's Handbook II.

*Goliath*
"Goliaths are ideal rageblood barbarians" (source), which probably means they get bonuses to Strength and Constitution.  They will be in the Player's Handbook II.

Goliaths will probably be in 4e Forgotten Realms, possibly with a spot in Faerun earmarked for them so you'll know where they're from when they're released (source).

*Half-Giant*
Half-Giants may be too similar to Goliaths (source).

*Half-Orc*
Half-Orcs "imply a very ugly backstory"; they may try to change that (source).  "Half-orcs are often barbarians but don’t favor either of the two types" (source), which probably means they get a bonus to Strength but not to Constitution or Charisma.  They will be in the Player's Handbook II.

*Shifter*
Shifters will be in the Player's Handbook II.

*Warforged*
Warforged will be in the Eberron Player's Guide.


----------



## ShockMeSane

Thanks, a good resource to get people caught up quickly!


----------



## Exen Trik

Ondo said:
			
		

> The Monk is not a Martial Striker, and as of D&D XP they had not seriously started designing the class (source).
> 
> Elementalists are mentioned in the Dwarf entry in Races & Classes alongside clerics, paladins, fighters, barbarians, rangers, and wizards, so they are likely a planned class.



I thought I was paying enough attention, but I've somehow missed these. Thanks!


----------



## Cirex

What role is the monk going to fit then? Melee controller...? With many single-target crowd controls to "spam" all around? 

Hurm.


----------



## Jack99

DDXP interview said:
			
		

> CH: So the monk will be a martial striker? Can we call that a scoop?
> 
> Andy: (laughs) That’s at least 50% wrong. I shouldn’t say too much since we haven’t seriously started designing the class.




Maybe he is a Psionic Striker.


----------



## Khuxan

It's also probably worth mentioning that Martial Power is not slated to contain any new classes, which is interesting since a lot of people were expecting it to.


----------



## Amphimir Míriel

Jack99 said:
			
		

> Maybe he is a Psionic Striker.




In my heavily houseruled game, the Monk killed the Psychic Warrior and took his stuff, losing some monkish stuff in the process.


----------



## Twiggly the Gnome

Cirex said:
			
		

> What role is the monk going to fit then? Melee controller...?




Divine striker? Master of the radiant fist!


----------



## Mort_Q

I always thought of *Ki* as being a subset of _*Psi*_.


----------



## Rechan

Mort_Q said:
			
		

> I always thought of *Ki* as being a subset of _*Psi*_.




Ki: Psionics::Arcane: Divine.

Arcane and Divine are both MAGIC, but they are different.

Ki and Psionics are both internal forces, but they are DIFFERENT.


----------



## Mort_Q

Rechan said:
			
		

> Ki and Psionics are both internal forces, but they are DIFFERENT.




Your opinion is noted.


----------



## Rechan

Mort_Q said:
			
		

> Your opinion is noted.



I'll put it to you this way.

Some people who want mind readers and telekinetics don't want kung fu and ninja.

Some people who want kung fu and ninja don't want mind readers and telekinetics.

While they might be the same thing, there are two different "feels" or "genres" to both: one is oriental, the other is sci-fi.

So, shoe-horning both into the same book, or under the same power source, is probably going to irritate both camps. There is some overlap, but about as much overlap as "I want divine magic without shooting fireballs" "I want arcane magic without healing".


----------



## MaelStorm

Ondo said:
			
		

> So I've decided to try and gather links to sources of info about upcoming classes and power sources, in the hopes that it'll help people (like me, for instance) stay caught up on all the info.  I'm not repeating most info that was in Races & Classes, at least for now.  I'm assuming people know the basics of what a Swordmage is, for example.
> 
> The Player's Handbook will include the Fighter, Ranger, Rogue, Warlord, Paladin, Cleric, Warlock, and Wizard.  The Forgotten Realms Player's Guide will include the Swordmage.
> 
> The Player's Handbook II will include Arcane and Divine information.  Primal and Psionic are the new power sources highest on the list to be included, but they're not sure how much will fit (source).  It will include the Sorcerer (source), as well as the Druid, Barbarian, and Bard (source).
> 
> The Bard will be an Arcane Leader (source).
> 
> Significant Druid info here.
> 
> The Monk is not a Martial Striker, and as of D&D XP they had not seriously started designing the class (source).
> 
> Elementalists are mentioned in the Dwarf entry in Races & Classes alongside clerics, paladins, fighters, barbarians, rangers, and wizards, so they are likely a planned class.
> 
> "WotC has identified 8 power sources that should take care of basically 90% of the classes they foresee making." (source) Known power sources are Martial, Arcane, Divine, Psionic, Shadow (from Worlds & Monsters), and Primal (source).



I'm glad you decided to put all this info together in one post. This confirmed my theory that PH II will complete and close the arcane and divine cycle started with PH I, along with starting a new cycle with the primal and psionic classes. So I don't think we'll see the release of Arcane Powers and Divine Powers before Fall 2009.

I'm pretty confident PH II will devote more space on classes because they confirmed that PH II won't be full of redundant info. So, it'll contain around 9-11 new classes (depending on how much extra space they will devote on new races, new combat rules, new weapons, and new rituals), not just 8 new classes.

In a The Tome podcast, the lead designers Andy Collins (whose specialty is 4E crunch), hinted that WotC is thinking on developing a new Divine class that will fill the role of the controller, it'll be more combat oriented (than the Priest) with ranged attack powers.

I'm eager to try the new Elementalist, Druid, and Sorcerer, in summer 2009. I'm a little bit disappointed I'll have to wait this long to get these classes, but if it means that they'll be playtested I think it's worth the wait. In the mean time, I will buy the new Advanced PH from Necromancer.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

I actually like the idea of the Monk as a Divine Striker... keep the religious classes Divine. (Let's see if someone starts to argue that a Monk isn't religion-based.)

A monk who isn't religion-based is a ninja.

Beside, it might be fun to split back up the Friar Tuck monk and the Yamma Bushi monk.

Fitz


----------



## Stogoe

Rechan said:
			
		

> I'll put it to you this way.
> 
> Some people who want mind readers and telekinetics don't want kung fu and ninja.
> 
> Some people who want kung fu and ninja don't want mind readers and telekinetics.
> 
> While they might be the same thing, there are two different "feels" or "genres" to both: one is oriental, the other is sci-fi.
> 
> So, shoe-horning both into the same book, or under the same power source, is probably going to irritate both camps. There is some overlap, but about as much overlap as "I want divine magic without shooting fireballs" "I want arcane magic without healing".




This is about as clear and sensible an argument as I have found for keeping wuxia and psychics separate.



			
				FitzTheRuke said:
			
		

> it might be fun to split back up the Friar Tuck monk




What exactly would a Friar Tuck monk bring to a party, besides cowering in a corner when the violence starts?  Really, though, I'm having trouble imagining the archetype in an adventuring context.


----------



## Xethreau

I did something like this over on the gleemax forums.  We call it the Classes FAQ


----------



## Ondo

Cirex said:
			
		

> What role is the monk going to fit then? Melee controller...?



Well, Races & Classes says he'll likely be a Striker.  That may change, but it seems unlikely to me that they would be sure of the change before starting serious design.  The power source, though, they probably decided on some time ago.  So I expect he won't be Martial.

The description of the Monk in Races & Classes seems to pretty much rule out Divine, and makes Psionic sound unlikely.  So I'm expecting the Monk to be a Ki Striker.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Stogoe said:
			
		

> What exactly would a Friar Tuck monk bring to a party, besides cowering in a corner when the violence starts?  Really, though, I'm having trouble imagining the archetype in an adventuring context.




I didn't mean personality-wise, I simply meant more of a European feel like most of the rest of your average D&D setting, leaving the Yamma Bushi or Tibetan Monk archetype for an Asian Adventures type book, as one of the designers suggested somewhere.

For the record, there were european monks who were fighting men as well as asian ones. The asian ones just spark the imagination better.

Fitz


----------



## Cirex

Ondo said:
			
		

> Well, Races & Classes says he'll likely be a Striker.  That may change, but it seems unlikely to me that they would be sure of the change before starting serious design.  The power source, though, they probably decided on some time ago.  So I expect he won't be Martial.
> 
> The description of the Monk in Races & Classes seems to pretty much rule out Divine, and makes Psionic sound unlikely.  So I'm expecting the Monk to be a Ki Striker.




I've been reading that is a striker too, but that article says it's not a martial striker...so we will see.

If there has to be a melee controller, I think it should be the monk, with the barbarian being a hybrid between defender and striker (maybe).


----------



## Green Knight

Cirex said:
			
		

> I've been reading that is a striker too, but that article says it's not a martial striker...so we will see.






> CH: So the monk will be a martial striker? Can we call that a scoop?
> 
> Andy: (laughs) That’s at least 50% wrong. I shouldn’t say too much since we haven’t seriously started designing the class.




That 50% is likely a reference to the Martial part, so the Monk will likely be a Striker in 4E. Only question is what the power source will be. Personally, I'm hoping for a Ki power source. I really don't see the Monk as psionic, and as another poster pointed out, I'd rather those two particular flavors of characters stayed separated.


----------



## MaelStorm

Ondo said:
			
		

> Well, Races & Classes says he'll likely be a Striker.  That may change, but it seems unlikely to me that they would be sure of the change before starting serious design.  The power source, though, they probably decided on some time ago.  So I expect he won't be Martial.
> 
> The description of the Monk in Races & Classes seems to pretty much rule out Divine, and makes Psionic sound unlikely.  So I'm expecting the Monk to be a Ki Striker.



This doesn't leave many choices. I don't see them Primal or Shadow, so I predict Monk will be Ki/Striker to be released in PH III or IV.


----------



## Rechan

I'm curious if the Swordmage gets a re-print in PHBII (for those of us who don't want the FR book). I mean, if the Bard pops up in the PHB II, he's going to be Arcane, so there'll be arcane in there too, ne?

And if the Barb and Druid are popping up in the PHB II, I'm wondering what their roles are. Both make decent defenders or strikers (although we've been told that the Druid is a hybrid, can take several roles). What about the Sorcerer and Elementalist? Are they one in the same? 

And man. When are we going to get the Necromancer and Illusionist?


----------



## Green Knight

Rechan said:
			
		

> I'm curious if the Swordmage gets a re-print in PHBII (for those of us who don't want the FR book). I mean, if the Bard pops up in the PHB II, he's going to be Arcane, so there'll be arcane in there too, ne?




One would hope so. Personally, I think it'll pop up. Well, we'll see. I'm also wondering what races we'll get. Gnome is probably a given. The Drow and Genasi may also appear (reprinted from Forgotten Realms Player's Guide, too). Hopefully the Half-Orc as well. What other races can potentially turn up, though? Any must-haves in the PHBII that I'm missing? 



> And if the Barb and Druid are popping up in the PHB II, I'm wondering what their roles are. Both make decent defenders or strikers (although we've been told that the Druid is a hybrid, can take several roles). What about the Sorcerer and Elementalist? Are they one in the same?




Barbarian is most likely a Primal Defender. The Druid is a tough one, though. They've said that the relationship between the Druid and the Barbarian is the same as that between the Cleric and the Paladin. However, that doesn't necessarily mean that the Druid will be a Leader. It's shapechanging leaves a pretty big question mark as to what role it'll fit, as well as spellcasting (they'll have spellcasting, but it doesn't appear that their spellcasting is all that important). As for Sorcerer and Elementalist, they're probably separate classes. 



> And man. When are we going to get the Necromancer and Illusionist?




I want to know the answer to that, too. Especially when it comes to the Necromancer. I plan on converting Ravenloft to 4E as soon as I get my hands on the books, and the lack of a Necromancer is something of a blow. So the sooner that comes out, the better, so I can mine it for abilities for characters like Strahd and Azalin.


----------



## MaelStorm

Rechan said:
			
		

> I'm curious if the Swordmage gets a re-print in PHBII (for those of us who don't want the FR book). I mean, if the Bard pops up in the PHB II, he's going to be Arcane, so there'll be arcane in there too, ne?



IMO FRPH will be the only place to get the Swordmage. You will have to either buy FRPH, or subscribe to DDI to have access to the D&D Rules Compendium (or as another poster suggested you can wait for a PDF to show up somewhere).



> And if the Barb and Druid are popping up in the PHB II, I'm wondering what their roles are. Both make decent defenders or strikers (although we've been told that the Druid is a hybrid, can take several roles).



I predict Druid's role will be Striker/Controller. Barbarian's role is less clear, they can be Defender, or Striker, or hybrid. 







> What about the Sorcerer and Elementalist? Are they one in the same?



I see both of them Primal/Controller.



> And man. When are we going to get the Necromancer and Illusionist?



I think they will be both linked to Shadow power source, and if they decide to favor psionic for PH II, I think they'll show up in PH III along with the Monk in Summer 2010. That's so long. Personally, I would prefer Shadow would be in PH II instead of Psionic. To each their own I guess.


----------



## Ondo

Khuxan said:
			
		

> It's also probably worth mentioning that Martial Power is not slated to contain any new classes, which is interesting since a lot of people were expecting it to.



Okay, I'm updating the first post to include that, along with a note that PHBs will be the main place to introduce new classes.

Also, I'm updating the PHB2 info to note that it was said that classes "not unlike the Druid, Barbarian, and Bard" would appear, which isn't really confirmation of those.


----------



## Nahat Anoj

FitzTheRuke said:
			
		

> I actually like the idea of the Monk as a Divine Striker... keep the religious classes Divine. (Let's see if someone starts to argue that a Monk isn't religion-based.)



I pulling for Monks being Divine Strikers as well.


----------



## Rechan

MaelStorm said:
			
		

> I predict Druid's role will be Striker/Controller. Barbarian's role is less clear, they can be Defender, or Striker, or hybrid.



I think that you could make the case that both the Druid and the Barb could be efficient strikers or defenders. 

A Druid in bear form can be a defender. As could a tough barbarian. A druid in leopard form makes an efficient striker. Barbarians are fast and lightly armored, and can dish out a lot of damage, making it a good striker. 

I don't deny that a druid could take the controller role, or the leader role, due to their spellcasting. But I'm willing to bet that when we see the druid, you're going to have to decide upon creation which they're going to be good at; shapeshifting and beating stuff up, or spellcasting. 

And if Elementalists and Sorcerers are going to pop up, both of them being Controllers, both Primal, then I don't think there's _room_ for a Druid also playing Controller. So they'll likely get the possibility of filling in as a Leader.


----------



## MaelStorm

Rechan said:
			
		

> I think that you could make the case that both the Druid and the Barb could be efficient strikers or defenders.
> 
> A Druid in bear form can be a defender. As could a tough barbarian. A druid in leopard form makes an efficient striker. Barbarians are fast and lightly armored, and can dish out a lot of damage, making it a good striker.
> 
> I don't deny that a druid could take the controller role, or the leader role, due to their spellcasting. But I'm willing to bet that when we see the druid, you're going to have to decide upon creation which they're going to be good at; shapeshifting and beating stuff up, or spellcasting.
> 
> And if Elementalists and Sorcerers are going to pop up, both of them being Controllers, both Primal, then I don't think there's _room_ for a Druid also playing Controller. So they'll likely get the possibility of filling in as a Leader.



All very good points. It'll be interesting to see how they'll handle hybrid roles. Personally, I don't think they'll go that far regarding the Druid's spellcasting abilities. I think they'll have to choose their starting wildshape and that as they progress they will collect new ones. And that their will be build on brute or agile wildshape. I see barbarians as having leader abilities with warcries, plus some good striker or defender powers. Since the druid's controller role will be secondary I think there will be space for one pure controller. In the end, I think the Sorcerer will beat the elementalist and take is stuff.


----------



## Ondo

MaelStorm said:
			
		

> In a The Tome podcast, the lead designers Andy Collins (whose specialty is 4E crunch), hinted that WotC is thinking on developing a new Divine class that will fill the role of the controller, it'll be more combat oriented (than the Priest) with ranged attack powers.



I listened to the podcast, and it is pretty interesting.  Thanks!  This is exactly the type of info I was hoping I'd learn by starting this thread.

Added this paragraph to the opening comment:

On The Tome, Andy Collins was asked about upcoming Controllers, and said they're still in the early design phase of the next wave of classes, but mentioned the Sorcerer is possible for that role, and they're thinking about a Divine Controller and some form of Psionic Controller. (It's at about 23:25 in the podcast.)  He also mentioned "you're not going to see the Cleric throwing around Flame Strike type powers really frequently", but "when we get around to a Divine Controller class he will probably have more of those type of effects". (At about 27:30.)


----------



## Green Knight

Sounds cool. A little more variety with Controllers would be nice, as we only got one so far. As for the Psionic Controller, that'll probably be the Psion (They may change the name, but personally, I like it). 

Anyway, has there been any indication as to how many pages the PHB II will be? I ask because, while the PHB I has eight classes, the PHB II may have more then that if it's got the same page count. The PHB I has dozens of pages devoted to equipment lists, skills, feats, and game rules. The PHB II will probably have some equipment and feats, but it's doubtful that it'll eat up as many pages as the PHB I counterparts. We probably won't get any new skills, and there's no need to repeat the rules in the PHB II. In which case, all that excess space can be used for classes, instead. 

So assuming a 320-page PHB II, it may be possible to pack in 10, or even 12 classes. Boy, I hope so, cause that'd be great. You could stick in the Barbarian, Bard, Druid, Illusionist, Monk, Necromancer, Psion, Psychic Warrior, Sorcerer, and Swordmage, and probably still have enough room left over to stick in another class or two (Maybe a Samurai [Ki Defender] and the aformentioned Divine Controller?). Well, we'll see.


----------



## breschau

Thanks, that's awesome. Could you do us a favor though and paste the gleemax stuff in here? They still own my brain. I'm still unable to log in. It's really damn lame. I'm so hoping the D&D Insider has nothing to do with gleemax.


----------



## Dalamar

I'm thinking they might split Psion into two classes: Kineticist (controller) and Telepath (Leader). I imagine the Telepath would then be somewhat similar to the Warlord, but without swinging a weapon in the frontline, and the Kineticist would have many pushes/pulls/slides alongside damage.

Of course, that's pure speculation/wishful thinking.


----------



## Ondo

So today's Warlord excerpt also mentions the shaman as a class that fills the cleric's role, so that info has been added to the first post.

I think it's pretty safe to assume he'll be a Primal Leader.


----------



## MaelStorm

Ondo said:
			
		

> So today's Warlord excerpt also mentions the shaman as a class that fills the cleric's role, so that info has been added to the first post.
> 
> I think it's pretty safe to assume he'll be a Primal Leader.



Classes in the PH II:
new Arcane Classes: Bard (confirmed)
new Divine Classes: ?divine/striker? and divine/controller
Primal Classes: Barbarian, Druid, Shaman, and Sorcerer. (mostly confirmed)
Psionic Classes: 4 classes maybe???


----------



## jeffhartsell

*Roles*

Defender: Paladin, Fighter
Leader: Warlord, Cleric, Shaman, Bard
Striker: Rogue, Warlock, Ranger
Controller: Wizard

So, where does this put the druid, barbarian, sorcerer, swordmage, and monk for roles?

Also, what other classes might be in PHBII? Necromancer, Illusionist, Psion, Psychic Warrior, Samurai, Ninja, Wilder, Soulknife, Duskblade, Knight, Beguiler, Warmage, Shugenja, Wu Jen, Favored Soul, Hexblade, Swashbuckler, Scout, Spellthief?


----------



## thalmin

I would consider a druid to be hybrid Leader/Controller, but that is based on the 3.x version of druid.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart

jeffhartsell said:
			
		

> So, where does this put the druid, barbarian, sorcerer, swordmage, and monk for roles?



They've said that the druid heals as well as the cleric in an interview.  The only ones who should be allowed to do that are leaders.  But they've said that the Druid's role is more of a hybrid.  I'm guessing Leader/Striker or Leader/Controller.

The Swordmage is definitely a Defender.  One of the designers said that it was the result of looking at the power sources and roles and wondering what an arcane defender might look like.

The sorcerer is very likely to be a controller or striker.  As for Barbarian: Striker or Defender seem like the only valid choices.  Very likely Defender.  Monk...who knows.


----------



## Gizmoduck5000

Mort_Q said:
			
		

> I always thought of *Ki* as being a subset of _*Psi*_.




I always thought of it as being closer to *martial*


----------



## jeffhartsell

If the swordmage is a defender and the barbarian a defender that would cover 4 power sources: martial, divine, arcane, and primal.  It will be interesting to see what a shadow and psionic defender look like.

Maybe the PHBII ends up with 8 more classes to cover 4 classes in each role for each of the first 4 power sources.


----------



## Rechan

jeffhartsell said:
			
		

> It will be interesting to see what a shadow and psionic defender look like.



Shadow: Hexblade. I'd expect the "Marking" technique to be expanded. For instance, the paladin's "Divine Challenge" marks the target, and if the target attacks anyone but the paladin, they take radiant damage. The Hexblade could hex others in a similar fashion.

Psionic: Psychic Warrior. Which I'm curious how it would differ from a psionic version of the Swordmage.


----------



## Rechan

Majoru Oakheart said:
			
		

> They've said that the druid heals as well as the cleric in an interview.  The only ones who should be allowed to do that are leaders.  But they've said that the Druid's role is more of a hybrid.  I'm guessing Leader/Striker or Leader/Controller.



They also said that one of the defining characteristics of the Druid is his shapechange ability, because no one else can do that. 

So I fully expect a build or version fo the druid to be focused on shapechanging, with a few minor spells in his pocket.


----------



## Kobold Avenger

Psionic Classes will likely be:
Psion (Controller)
Psychic Warrior (Defender)
Lurk/Soulknife (Striker)
Ardent (Leader)

Because of those classes were built towards certain roles back in 3e, that'll likely be translated into 4e easily enough.


----------



## Rechan

Kobold Avenger said:
			
		

> Ardent (Leader)



I didn't really like this class. It just didn't feel... right. The feel for it was weird.

I'd be much happier with the Society Mind that was made by a third party. It's a class that's sort've a telepathic hive-mind, sharing powers, etc etc. I could easily see them operating like a telepathic Warlord.

However, the Lurk was sexy.


----------



## Jhaelen

Rechan said:
			
		

> I didn't really like this class. It just didn't feel... right. The feel for it was weird.



Well besides being somewhat like 'Psionic X' it was really only half of a class, since the Ardent and the Divine Mind originally were two parts of one class that was deemed too powerful.
Since there's precendent for combining two or more 3E classes into one 4E class (e.g. ranger & scout), I'd hope we'll see the Ardent and Divine Mind being combined, too. IF they make a reapperance at all.

I wouldn't really mind if they were not converted. They already stated they wouldn't try to fill the whole power source / role matrix. So, it's probably even more likely there won't be a psionic leader class.


----------



## Sadrik

Rechan said:
			
		

> I'll put it to you this way.
> 
> Some people who want mind readers and telekinetics don't want kung fu and ninja.
> 
> Some people who want kung fu and ninja don't want mind readers and telekinetics.
> 
> While they might be the same thing, there are two different "feels" or "genres" to both: one is oriental, the other is sci-fi.
> 
> So, shoe-horning both into the same book, or under the same power source, is probably going to irritate both camps. There is some overlap, but about as much overlap as "I want divine magic without shooting fireballs" "I want arcane magic without healing".



Should there be a voodoo, chakra, zen, or any other similar old world mysticism power source too? Or are you willing to let voodoo be part of the shadow power source, chakra psionic, zen (druid-like-primal). Come on ki or chi needs to remain in the real world, it needs to get gobbled up by high end martial exploits and psionic powers. 

BTW, I would not feel cheated if my monk had psionic power source or if my samurai had a martial power source etc. The two different feels you note should be determined by the players, the fluff, and most importantly the DM.

A high speculation for a power source: Deity! Godlyness for the gods. They get their power from somewhere right...


----------



## Sadrik

jeffhartsell said:
			
		

> Also, what other classes might be in PHBII? Necromancer, Illusionist, Psion, Psychic Warrior, Samurai, Ninja, Wilder, Soulknife, Duskblade, Knight, Beguiler, Warmage, Shugenja, Wu Jen, Favored Soul, Hexblade, Swashbuckler, Scout, Spellthief?



Some of the above have been killed and their stuff taken...
Duskblade --> Swordmage
Knight --> Paladin
Scout --> Ranger


----------



## Sadrik

My list of needs and wants for future PHBs:
new Martial Classes: martial (Controller)
new Arcane Classes: Bard (Leader), Swordmage (Defender), Artificer (Leader)
new Divine Classes: divine (Striker), divine (Controller)
Primal Classes: Barbarian (Defender), Druid (Striker), Shaman (Leader), Sorcerer (Controller)
Psionic Classes: Telepath (Leader/Controller), Keneticist (Controller/Defender), Monk (Striker) 
Shadow Classes: Assassin (Striker), Hexblade (Defender), Illusionist (Controller), Necromancer (Leader)

The Barbarian would be a totem based one
The Druid would be a wildshape based one
The Shaman would be a animal and plant spirit based one
The Sorcerer would be a elemental based one (similar to a shugenja)

The Assassin would kill the shadow dancer and take her stuff
The Hexblade would mark others with curses
The Illusionist would be tricky to create
The Necromancer would be easy to create

The Martial Controller could be an inventor/grenadier type who controls the battle field through his inventions he created

The Divine (Striker) could be a holy assassin- there are many deities that concept would make a lot of sense for.
The Divine (Controller) bring thy divine wrath... or possibly a summoner


----------



## Elphilm

Jhaelen said:
			
		

> They already stated they wouldn't try to fill the whole power source / role matrix. So, it's probably even more likely there won't be a psionic leader class.



Actually, I think Leader and Controller are the two roles that make the most sense for psionic classes given the narrowed focus of psychic powers in 4E. I believe it was Races & Classes where it was said that the Psi power source would consist mostly of enchantment effects and mental control.

I like Dalamar's suggestion of a Telepath (Leader) and a Kineticist (Controller) class. The two are probably the most iconic concepts when it comes to Psi powers.


----------



## Sadrik

Elphilm said:
			
		

> I like Dalamar's suggestion of a Telepath (Leader) and a Kineticist (Controller) class. The two are probably the most iconic concepts when it comes to Psi powers.



I totally agree with those two as well. Psionics also have two other aspects from previous editions:
Body control: Graft weapons, stretch your arms, form a weapon from your hand, absorb energy, become as light as a feather
Precognition: Object reading, telling the future, clairvoyance, clairaudience, jedi-like reflexes, visions, play back a past event

That said there is a lot of ways that those concepts could be implemented.


----------



## Mr. Teapot

Rechan said:
			
		

> Shadow: Hexblade. I'd expect the "Marking" technique to be expanded. For instance, the paladin's "Divine Challenge" marks the target, and if the target attacks anyone but the paladin, they take radiant damage. The Hexblade could hex others in a similar fashion.
> 
> Psionic: Psychic Warrior. Which I'm curious how it would differ from a psionic version of the Swordmage.




The Hexblade's Curse as a marking ability makes a lot of sense.  Hexblade as Defender is really straightforward, especially as it seems like only or primarily Defenders use marks.  Hexblade might be Shadow, but it could also be Arcane or it might have been absorbed into the Swordmage or something else.  As far as I know, we haven't seen any indication that they'll update the Hexblade at all.


----------



## Rechan

Sadrik said:
			
		

> Should there be a voodoo, chakra, zen, or any other similar old world mysticism power source too?



Not really, no. I just don't think there's enough material there. Some third party can do it, sure, but not WotC. 



> BTW, I would not feel cheated if my monk had psionic power source or if my samurai had a martial power source etc.



You may not. Others may. 

WotC is more likely to split them apart, becuase that means more books.


----------



## Rechan

Sadrik said:
			
		

> Body control: Graft weapons, stretch your arms, form a weapon from your hand, absorb energy, become as light as a feather



This would be intriguing for a defender. Very "Claw of the Vampire/Bite of the Wolf/Biofeedback" etc. Their powers relate to changing their body to toughening it up, growing larger, etc.


----------



## Kobold Avenger

Rechan said:
			
		

> You may not. Others may.
> 
> WotC is more likely to split them apart, becuase that means more books.



I wouldn't because the moment the Psychic Warrior came out, I saw a class that was better at being a monk than the monk was.  It became even more of that case once the Swordsage came out.

Also I don't like there being a separate power source "Asian" because I think it's stupid.  Because if there's an "Asian" power source, then why isn't there an "Arabian" or "African" power source?

As I'd like most of my Asian characters represented by classes that are more culturally neutral, like Fighters and Rogues and Warlocks.  Only the monk needs to be it's own class, and it's power source can very much be a part of other power sources out there like martial or psionic or divine.


----------



## Rechan

Kobold Avenger said:
			
		

> I wouldn't because the moment the Psychic Warrior came out, I saw a class that was better at being a monk than the monk was.  It became even more of that case once the Swordsage came out.



That's really nice, but there are so many things that people want the Monk to be:

Kung fu interior mystic (See: 3e)

Non-mystical, non-magical unarmed attacker.

A divine-related class. A psionic class. A ki class. A martial class. 

A striker, a controller. And you're saying a defender. 

There's too much that people expect from the monk for it to all go into one thing. A decision must be made. And it's easier to split the Monk up into different areas than to try and do it either one way or cram them all together.

As to the "asian" power source, you have any idea how much complaining has gone on since the Monk was in 3e? How it didn't "Fit" the "Fantasy Genre" that most people wanted? Same thing. The genre or flavor didn't fit. So the monk/ninja/samurai gets put in its own little area because the "I don't like oriental flavor in my fantasy" is too vocal a group to ignore. 

You're dealing with different _vocal_ fanbases that expect different things, and thus the biggest groups will get what they want, not individuals that want it all.

I'm not telling you what I want. I'm telling you how it's going to be. I will bet you cash that market research reflects the above, and what I said here is how WotC is going to do it. No matter individual preferences to the contrary.


----------



## katahn

For a generic western fantasy setting the monk class most certainly doesn't fit, but the monk as a "cloistered cleric" does - of course so would an order of 'cloistered religious wizards' or any other class.  Monk is a motiff, a style, a collection of fluff.  It is not an iconic class outside of "shaolin monk" which is very specifically asian.

So what is the classic "shaolin monk"?  Not much more than a striker specializing in unarmed attacks and culturally distinct weapons and a penchant for meditating when not punching things.  Honestly, I can represent that with the rogue and a selection of alternative talents and class abilities: a lightly (or non-) armored, high-damage, highly-mobile martial striker.

What's a ninja but a thiefy/assassiny rogue with really good PR?  A samurai, minus the visual fluff, cultural references, and ultra-strict code of honor is basically either a fighter or a paladin.  A shogun is a warlord perhaps.  A wu-jen is a wizard.  I don't see a need for new classes for these cultural-specific types, just careful RP and at worst some new talents and alternative class abilities to mimic some specific functions (like being amazing at punching and kicking for instance).


----------



## Kobold Avenger

katahn said:
			
		

> What's a ninja but a thiefy/assassiny rogue with really good PR?  A samurai, minus the visual fluff, cultural references, and ultra-strict code of honor is basically either a fighter or a paladin.  A shogun is a warlord perhaps.  A wu-jen is a wizard.  I don't see a need for new classes for these cultural-specific types, just careful RP and at worst some new talents and alternative class abilities to mimic some specific functions (like being amazing at punching and kicking for instance).



These are the reasons why there shouldn't be an "Asian" power source.


----------



## Rechan

katahn said:
			
		

> What's a ninja but a thiefy/assassiny rogue with really good PR?  A samurai, minus the visual fluff, cultural references, and ultra-strict code of honor is basically either a fighter or a paladin.  A shogun is a warlord perhaps.  A wu-jen is a wizard.  I don't see a need for new classes for these cultural-specific types, just careful RP and at worst some new talents and alternative class abilities to mimic some specific functions (like being amazing at punching and kicking for instance).



What's a psion but a wizard with a few different power selections and fluff change? What's a druid but a cleric with a few different power selections and fluff change? What's a paladin but a fighter with a few different power selections and fluff changes?


----------



## Lackhand

Rechan said:
			
		

> What's a psion but a wizard with a few different power selections and fluff change? What's a druid but a cleric with a few different power selections and fluff change? What's a paladin but a fighter with a few different power selections and fluff changes?



While you're right, there's a difference of degree.

Maybe rogue is too broad, and needs to be narrowed to include less ninja. But as it stands, there's a lot in there, and if you took it out, the rogue would be anemic.
Maybe fighter is too focussed, and needs less blademaster. But, again, as it stands, those aspects are what make the fighter awesome.

Wizard, however, is defined as "the guy who does magic" -- so it's clear there's room to chop around in there. And, indeed, we've seen that they've done some work to make the roles different, and the outcry at this ("nerfing wizards' charms?! outrage outrage outrage!") points out just how much overlap they have had before.

In many ways, 3e psions really were just wizards in funny hats. Now they're not. And?


----------



## Rechan

And material on the ninja have a lot to do with special, quasi-magical things. The ghost step "Turn invisible" or "turn ethereal" is about right in terms of the mythology associated with them. Yes, there's a lot of rogue there. But there's also the mystical powers. Sure, a "Rogue + Some new abilities like a Quivering Palm" could do it.

So could "Unarmed fighter + Mystical tricks" function for a kung-fu artist.

At the same time, a paladin could be achieved with: Base fighter guy + Lay on hands and this or that. 

I don't see WotC taking the "Base + Stuff" approach.

Andy Collins, in the Tome podcast, said that the class design philosophy for 4e is "What does this character Bring to the Table in combat that no one else can do at all". He specifically pointed at the monk and said "Well, he can jump around and climb on stuff. Well the wizard can fly; jumping around isn't so great. So aside from having a nice story, what's the point of playing a monk?" 

Therefore, _each class introduced_ has to be able to do something that No One Else can do, at the same time as it fits into the role paradigm of "where you fit in the party". So the Monk, if it's going to _exist_, *must* do something that the other classes can't. Same with the Ninja. This is why enchantment was held for psionics, so that they'd have something the wizard can't do. Same with Necromancers, et al.

Dollars to donuts, I'll bet the monk will have stunning ability, and tricks like "Move six squares. You can make a base attack against three opponents in that line, and you do not receive OAs for it", because no one else can do things like that yet.


----------



## Kobold Avenger

Rechan said:
			
		

> As to the "asian" power source, you have any idea how much complaining has gone on since the Monk was in 3e? How it didn't "Fit" the "Fantasy Genre" that most people wanted? Same thing. The genre or flavor didn't fit. So the monk/ninja/samurai gets put in its own little area because the "I don't like oriental flavor in my fantasy" is too vocal a group to ignore.



Try 1e, that's where the Monk first appeared.

Samurai gets the least amount of things making it different from any other class, and therefore doesn't deserve to have it's own class.  

Sohei was basically a Paladin/Monk/Barbarian. 

Shaman will probably appear again as a "Primal" power source class rather than an "Asian" power source.  The 4e shaman will probably take some things both from the OA Shaman and the Spirit Shaman, that are so similarly named.

Shugenja, had really nothing differentiating it from any other spellcasting class, expect it to get it's stuff taken by the Sorcerer and Divine Controller or the suggested "Elementalist" class.  

Wu Jen or (Wu Ren if we're using modern Chinese romanization) was basically a wizard with a bit of elemental/druid thrown into the mix.  Expect them to be somewhere in one of the "Primal" classes, getting their stuff taken from them.

Monk, does have enough things to make it an unique class on its own.  But it should be grouped with other power sources.  In some ways they're more mind over matter, so they could be Psionic, in other ways they're a lot about skill so they could be Martial, they're also related to a religious background so they could be Divine.

Ninja, does have a few unique things, and they're best grouped with the "Shadow" power source, combined with the Assassin and Shadowdancer.


----------



## Rechan

Kobold Avenger said:
			
		

> Try 1e, that's where the Monk first appeared.



Which doesn't impact the complaints. The Assassin was in 1e, and it was regulated to Evil PrC in DMG in 3e. 

But, okay, with your predictions and where things should be, we'll see if WotC groups them in an Asian power source or not.


----------



## MaelStorm

Rechan said:
			
		

> That's really nice, but there are so many things that people want the Monk to be:
> 
> Kung fu interior mystic (See: 3e)
> 
> Non-mystical, non-magical unarmed attacker.
> 
> A divine-related class. A psionic class. A ki class. A martial class.
> 
> A striker, a controller. And you're saying a defender.
> 
> There's too much that people expect from the monk for it to all go into one thing. A decision must be made. And it's easier to split the Monk up into different areas than to try and do it either one way or cram them all together.
> 
> As to the "asian" power source, you have any idea how much complaining has gone on since the Monk was in 3e? How it didn't "Fit" the "Fantasy Genre" that most people wanted? Same thing. The genre or flavor didn't fit. So the monk/ninja/samurai gets put in its own little area because the "I don't like oriental flavor in my fantasy" is too vocal a group to ignore.
> 
> You're dealing with different _vocal_ fanbases that expect different things, and thus the biggest groups will get what they want, not individuals that want it all.
> 
> I'm not telling you what I want. I'm telling you how it's going to be. I will bet you cash that market research reflects the above, and what I said here is how WotC is going to do it. No matter individual preferences to the contrary.



I really agree 100% with you.

Maybe 4E will introduce an oriental flavored Player's Handbook. Or maybe they'll go on with the Ki power source in a future Player's Handbook.


----------



## Kobold Avenger

Kensai is quite clearly in the Martial power source as a Paragon Path for a Martial power source class, and not in any "Asian" power source.


----------



## Irda Ranger

jeffhartsell said:
			
		

> It will be interesting to see what a ... psionic defender look like.



Jedi.  Though he's possibly a Controller with Force Push.  And a Striker with Force Choke and Force Lightling.  And a Leader with Cloud the Weakminded ("_Arise, those wounds are not as bad as you think they are_.").

Awh, forget it. Jedi is just the 3E Cleric of Star Wars (the movies, not SWSE).


Oh, and Ki is just "Asian Martial."  There is no need whatsoever for a Ki Power Source. The Kensei Fighter-only Paragon Path says WotC agrees with me.  One of my first characters may well be a "ninja" that's just a Rogue in black pyjamas, or maybe a Shaoulin Monk that's just a Rogue in red pyjamas, has the Unarmed Attack feat and took "Religion" instead of "Thievery."


----------



## Kobold Avenger

What I'm interested with psionic classes is how they'll deal with previous psionic ideas in previous editions.

Psionic Focus: Was described as being one of WotC's early attempts at having encounter powers.  Could be in, but might be too complicated with the whole Maintained/Expended Focus dichotomy everything had.

Attack Modes: I'm 95% sure that most of the psionic attack modes will be At Will powers.

Power Points: Probably out of the system now, based on how powers work.

Crystals/Snot/Ectoplasm: Probably in, because it's something unique for psionics, even though it doesn't match a lot of people's ideas on what psionics should use.

Dorjes/Psi-crowns: Possibly in as "psionic implements", but then again they were "psionic-X" versions of wands and staffs, so they could be out.

Mantles/Auras: If there's an Ardent/Divine Mind 2.0 these might be back in.

Soulknives: Probably will be in, in some form, since the imagery of soulknives is something that WotC probably wouldn't want to give up.


----------



## JohnSnow

Given that western fantasy has been swiping concepts and elements from eastern cultures for decades now, I wholeheartedly endorse the elimination of "cultural specificity" in D&D, especially in regards to power sources.

And I say that as someone who very much enjoys European fantasy all by itself. However, I can see the value in the fantastic hodgepodge WotC is pushing. One example of a work that has done this sort of cultural hodgepodge (though not everyone enjoys it) is Robert Jordan's _Wheel of Time_ series. It has elements borrowed from Japanese culture, arabic culture, and various others. They're all thrown together and it is sometimes hard to identify where each piece comes from. The whole is more fantastic and original than just "Europe with a fantasy overlay."

As far as D&D itself goes, given that the monk was introduced to the game decades ago, and the last few editions gave us various celtic archetypes using scimitars, I think we're long past any "cultural purity" in D&D. Hell, one of my first homebrew items back when I was new to D&D was adding a ninja class.

Which is a long way of saying that I highly doubt we'll see a "Ki" power source. We may see the monk reappear as a psionic striker or a martial striker. On the other hand, the class we get may more closely resemble the swordsage instead.

I think it's highly likely that somewhere along the way, we'll get a class that closely resembles Jedi. As far as role, it might be a striker, or a defender, with or without a sub-role that has aspects of control to it.


----------



## Ondo

JohnSnow said:
			
		

> We may see the monk reappear as a psionic striker or a martial striker.



Actually, Andy Collins has said he won't be a martial striker.  (That's the kind of info this thread is for, though it's wandered far.)


----------



## FabioMilitoPagliara

JohnSnow said:
			
		

> I think it's highly likely that somewhere along the way, we'll get a class that closely resembles Jedi. As far as role, it might be a striker, or a defender, with or without a sub-role that has aspects of control to it.




well... the psionic leader should be the perfect fit to the Jedi class in fantasy dress

the monk could be the psionic striker or martial controller (since it's 50% wrong that it's the martial striker), I would cast it as the martial controller


----------



## FabioMilitoPagliara

Kobold Avenger said:
			
		

> What I'm interested with psionic classes is how they'll deal with previous psionic ideas in previous editions.




I hope they steer more toward the "mind mage" archetype than the more sci-fi psionicist of old editions, it's more a question of flavor than power

telekinesis -> mind hands
telepathy -> mind tongue

and so on


----------



## Green Knight

You know, thinking about it, I wouldn't mind if the Monk were recast as a Divine Striker. That'd actually be kind of neat. Throw in a Priest (or whatever his name is) for a Divine Controller, and you can have a party which consists of members of a religious order. The Divine Defender, Divine Leader, Divine Striker, and Divine Controller. Paladin, Cleric, Monk, and Priest. That sounds pretty good to me.


----------



## Ondo

Added to the first post that Primal has been pretty much confirmed for PHB2 by this Dungeoncraft article, and that Races & Classes mentions the Druid & Barbarian as classes that will appear in PHB2.


----------



## Ondo

Added the following Sorcerer info to the first post:

It appears the Sorcerer will be an Arcane Controller.  Rich Baker mentions thinking hard about "how it could occupy the same role and power source as the wizard but be a different class" (source), and Christopher Perkins mentions Sorcerer as a possibility for members of the Arcane Caste, along with Wizard and Warlock (source).


----------



## jackston2

The monk must be martial.  Making the monk psionic or ki or etc would devalue the martial power source.


----------



## Ondo

Added to the first post a note that there's significant info on the Sorcerer here.


----------



## glass

Rechan said:
			
		

> Ki: Psionics::Arcane: Divine.
> 
> Arcane and Divine are both MAGIC, but they are different.
> 
> Ki and Psionics are both internal forces, but they are DIFFERENT.



Makes sense to me. 


glass.


----------



## RandomCitizenX

jackston2 said:
			
		

> The monk must be martial.  Making the monk psionic or ki or etc would devalue the martial power source.




How does a divine monk devalue the martial power source? The Paladin existing doesn't somehow detract from the fighter. The warlock doesn't make the ranger and the rogue worthless. With the association of monks, fantastic powers, and religion it really makes more sense for the monk to be non-martial. That being said I do want to see an unarmed combatant for the martial side, even if it would just be a set of powers for the fighter which could only be used unarmed.


----------



## Ondo

Added Elemental and Ki as confirmed power sources, as reported by people who have the Player's Handbook.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Lackhand said:
			
		

> In many ways, 3e psions really were just wizards in funny hats. Now they're not. And?



Actually, Psions where the Wizards _without_ the funny hats.

As hong would they, instead they got snot.


----------



## Final Attack

Jack99 said:
			
		

> Originally Posted by DDXP interview
> CH: So the monk will be a martial striker? Can we call that a scoop?
> 
> Andy: (laughs) That’s at least 50% wrong. I shouldn’t say too much since we haven’t seriously started designing the class.




Ki striker ki striker ki striker

Am I the only one who sees this as blatantly obvious?  Ki is confirmed in the PHB.  Though since it has not been released i think you can be forgiven 

I usually lurk, but after reading the 6th monk = divine/psi controller I dropped my head into the keyboard and posted


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Final Attack said:
			
		

> Ki striker ki striker ki striker
> 
> Am I the only one who sees this as blatantly obvious?  Ki is confirmed in the PHB.  Though since it has not been released i think you can be forgiven
> 
> I usually lurk, but after reading the 6th monk = divine/psi controller I dropped my head into the keyboard and posted



For a head falling onto a keyboard, not a bad post. 

And I agree. The Monk will most likely be a Ki Striker.


----------



## drothgery

Final Attack said:
			
		

> Ki striker ki striker ki striker
> 
> Am I the only one who sees this as blatantly obvious?  Ki is confirmed in the PHB.  Though since it has not been released i think you can be forgiven




It's obvious once you know/strongly suspect there's a _ki_ power source (assuming WotC won't change their mind about monk=striker from races and classes). Before that, not so much.


----------



## docdonuts

Final Attack said:
			
		

> Ki striker ki striker ki striker
> 
> Am I the only one who sees this as blatantly obvious?  Ki is confirmed in the PHB.  Though since it has not been released i think you can be forgiven
> 
> I usually lurk, but after reading the 6th monk = divine/psi controller I dropped my head into the keyboard and posted





Thank you!!! It just seemed way obvious to me if they were including the ki power source.

I fully suspect the PHBII will include the psionic power source because the Eberron campaign setting will be coming out and psionics plays a significant role in that world.  Also, the one class likely to be included in the ECS is the Artificer.  I totally see this class as a leader/controller.  They can buff up their party members with their infusions to armour/weapons and then they could infuse a variety of implements to mimic the powers of wizards/warlocks/clerics. 

I really like the idea of the Telpath (psionic leader) and Kineticist(psionic controller).  While the Lurk appears to me to be a better striker, there's something a little more iconic to the soulknife being the psionic striker instead.  I'm a little worried about the pyschic warrior being another swordmage.  Maybe they'll make the Soulknife a psionic defender instead and keep the lurk as a striker.

I'm really curious as to what they plan to do with the elemental power source.  Since I have no clue what former 3E classes mesh with this power source.  I've seen the shugenja/wujen but they were just clerics/wizards with a slightly different spell selection and flavour.


----------



## Ondo

Final Attack said:
			
		

> Ki striker ki striker ki striker
> 
> Am I the only one who sees this as blatantly obvious?  Ki is confirmed in the PHB.



No, you're not the only one, but in their defense all the posts arguing otherwise were posted before Ki was confirmed.


----------



## TwinBahamut

Ondo said:
			
		

> Added Elemental and Ki as confirmed power sources, as reported by people who have the Player's Handbook.



Really? That is pretty depressing. Those two were my least favorite Power Source concepts. Elemental doesn't do anything that couldn't be handled by Arcane, and Ki doesn't really do anything that wouldn't be better suited as Martial, Divine, Arcane, or Psionic.

I guess I may be able to make peace with Ki if they give us a proper samurai who can perform a long-ranged wind slash attack and other such things, but if it is just another name for an "Asian Martial" Power Source I will be _very_ disappointed.


----------



## Ondo

Added this to the first post:

On Gamer Radio Zero Mike Mearls lists the first letters of each class in the PHB2 - D, R, B, W, I, T, S, S.  He also says "I think only three of those are classes that anyone has ever seen before. I think the other ones are all new classes, completely new to Dungeons & Dragons." (source, at about 8:30 in the video.)


----------



## Ondo

Added this to the first post:

Keith Baker says "you can expect to see an early version of the artificer in next month's Dragon. I don't know if it will be the full class or a partial build, but it should give you something to work with." (source)


----------



## Ondo

Added to the first post a note about the Shaman - Rich Baker mentions it "includes some neat mechanisms for dealing with nature spirits". (source)


----------



## MeMeMeMe

I wonder if there'll ever be a martial controller. What would that look like?


----------



## Brimmel

MeMeMeMe said:
			
		

> I wonder if there'll ever be a martial controller. What would that look like?




He'd be a tinkerer who throws grenades, flash bombs, and nets that do area damage, cause blindness, and restrain, respectively.  Sort of like an artificer but without infusing magic into anything--it'd be all realworld oriented powers.

I don't see how you could do him realistically without each attack costing money, though . . . .


----------



## Rpgraccoon

Hmm.. I wonder when the other specialist mage's will show up. Especially the Summoner.


----------



## Puggins

D, R, B, W, I, T, S, S?

Well, now we know that the bard isn't making an appearance in a PHB 'til at least 2010, since the barbarian is all but assured.

I don't see Psionics working here.  No *P*sion, no *P*sychic warrior.  I suppose *W*ilder is theoretically there, but I'm dubious.


----------



## Ander00

Could be psion disciplines (Shaper, Seer, Telepath), or other psionic classes (Soulknife, War Mind), but I wouldn't bet on any of that.

Personally hoping for a general psion class that does a lot of moving things around/messing with the enemies' minds (with possibly build options specializing in either), but we'll see.


cheers


----------



## Kobold Avenger

Another thing is that he could have thought Psion, and forgot it started with a "P" that's silent.  He didn't guarantee he got all of them right or possible mentioned one twice.


----------



## Ashardalon

Ondo said:
			
		

> Added this to the first post:
> 
> On Gamer Radio Zero Mike Mearls lists the first letters of each class in the PHB2 - D, R, B, W, I, T, S, S.  He also says "I think only three of those are classes that anyone has ever seen before. I think the other ones are all new classes, completely new to Dungeons & Dragons." (source, at about 8:30 in the video.)



Hmmm....

*D*ruid, surely - Primal Controller/Defender?
R???
*B*arbarian - Primal Striker; or *B*ard - Arcane Leader
W???
*I*nquisitor - Divine Striker?
T???
*S*orcerer - Arcane Controller
*S*wordmage (one is allowed to hope, right? ) - Arcane Defender/else *S*haman - Primal Leader

If Psionics makes it into PHB 2, then R, W, and T are likely psionic classes. I guess most likely we're looking at 3 primal, 3 psionic, 1 arcane, and 1 divine class, give/take 1 from the first two power sources. A shift to the other two power sources seems less likely.


----------



## Ander00

Of course not a lot of substantial info, but a couple of tidbits that might or might not hint at things to come in Converting Your Character: PH.


cheers


----------



## cdrcjsn

Puggins said:
			
		

> D, R, B, W, I, T, S, S?
> 
> Well, now we know that the bard isn't making an appearance in a PHB 'til at least 2010, since the barbarian is all but assured.




Not necessarily true.  In one of the threads for DDI, they said that they're releasing one of the classes that was originally slated for PHB2 early in an electronic format.

They're doing the same to Artificers (due out next month on DDI).

So we might see it around the same time next year?


----------



## Cryptos

The classes don't exist in a vacuum, I think that's important to remember.  They have to plan the release of products around the release of classes, with their current plan for "splatbooks."

It's a fairly safe bet that they want to get the Arcane Power and Divine Power sourcebooks out there as soon as possible to get more options out on the core sources (to wizard players especially.)  They're already whipping out an article this month that will include more illusionist-based wizard spells, recognizing that a lot of people were unhappy with the wizard's power selection.

Since new classes are supposed to only appear in PHBs and CPGs (Campaign Player's Guides) I think they're going to want to more or less "complete" the arcane and divine power sources by PHB2, and then put out both sourcebooks that year.  If not, they'll definitely go with Arcane first, then Divine in 2010.

In addition to "completing" the arcane and divine sources, I think they also are starting to recognize they painted themselves into a corner a bit with the arcane and divine stuff by only have two classes out for each.  It seems clear they feel the need to expand arcane powers since that's the first Class Acts article they're doing in the month of release, as opposed to providing a partial write-up on one of the missing classes so that more people convert to the new edition.  They want to get more material out there quickly, but unless they change their production ideas around considerably, they have to wait to release the most of their planned arcane classes for maximum effect.  So I think with PHB2 they'll try to "complete" the Primal power source in one shot, as well.  That's a very long-winded way of saying that I think the Shaman is a given, and so we'll see Shaman, Barbarian, Druid, and one other from Primal, plus two divine and two arcane.

I have a feeling that Psionics are getting pushed back a year, so that they can have a more or less full contingent of arcane, divine, and primal classes.  That gives them the opportunity to release three new power source splat books whenever they feel they're needed, rather than having to wait, if they see the need to expand on certain classes.


----------



## Ander00

The Rouse said:
			
		

> So do you want Psionics now or 12 months from now?
> 
> Does not seem silly from here.



That statement wouldn't seem to make much sense if psionics were only slated to be released in two years.


cheers


----------



## Jhaelen

Puggins said:
			
		

> D, R, B, W, I, T, S, S?



Hmm. My guess:
Druid, 
Runesmith, 
Barbarian, 
Wilder, 
Illusionist, 
Telepath, 
Shaman, 
Sorcerer.


----------



## Gargazon

Ondo said:
			
		

> Added this to the first post:
> 
> On Gamer Radio Zero Mike Mearls lists the first letters of each class in the PHB2 - D, R, B, W, I, T, S, S.  He also says "I think only three of those are classes that anyone has ever seen before. I think the other ones are all new classes, completely new to Dungeons & Dragons." (source, at about 8:30 in the video.)




I bet they're actually seperating the Psion's disciplines into actual classes to give some flavour, so that 'T' is most likely Telepath.

As Shaman has been mentioned and Sorceror confirmed, I think the S's are covered.

Druid and Barbarian will be the D and B.

Which leaves... R, W and I. As they've talked about a Divine Controller I imagine one of them will be it... Incarnate? That's a good name for someone who's offensively channeling divine power (if they've cut warforged built-in armour they'll probably not be doing Incarnum's built-in magic items).

Haven't a clue for R and W...


----------



## Ondo

cdrcjsn said:
			
		

> In one of the threads for DDI, they said that they're releasing one of the classes that was originally slated for PHB2 early in an electronic format.



I'd love to see the source for this - I'll look sometime, but if anyone could find and post it I'd very much appreciate it.


----------



## Entropi

W = Wildmage

Just guessin.


----------



## Gargazon

Entropi said:
			
		

> W = Wildmage
> 
> Just guessin.




Unlikely. Wild magic is apparently the Sorceror's schtick now.


----------



## Cryptos

Assuming they're relying on other books for the Swordmage (FRPHB, we already know) and the Bard, and their minimum ideal for putting out a power source sourcebook is three classes in the source (as it is with Martial Power), I suppose they could still squeeze in Psionics.  In keeping with my other thoughts above, then, we'd be looking at 3 Primal, 3 Psionic, 1 Divine and 1 Arcane.  Three classes would seem to be the minimum to complete a set sufficiently for them to be willing to release a Power sourcebook.  That puts us in an odd place where, although in the core books there would be three to a source for each, including all reference sources arcane would have 5 (perhaps 6 if artificer is fully fleshed out in Dragon) classes by the time PHB2 is out.  That all but cements Arcane Power as the second power sourcebook.

Arcane: Sorcerer
Divine: 1 unknown.
Primal: Barbarian, Druid, Shaman
Psionic: 3 unknown.

I, R, T, and W.

I really don't think "I" is Illusionist.  One, we've seen it before.  Two, they're now going to include some illusion-based power options for Wizards to fill that gap.

Of Psionic, Telepath does seem likely.  

I think the most 4e friendly psionic specialties are probably: Telepathy, Psychoportation, Psychokinesis, and Psychometabolism.  They've effectively relegated ESP-like powers to rituals, and put in the "warning blurbs" for DMs that have PCs that want to attempt scrying, so I can't see them basing a whole class around Clairsentience.  Summoning still doesn't appear to be in elsewhere, so it's unlikely Metacreativity would be the first.  You could probably fold metabolism and teleportation powers together to make one viable defender class with a splash of striker mobility, with the flavor that their control over their bodies allows them to move in unconventional ways.

Wasn't there a short three or five level prestige class somewhere, at one point, for Psionic Nomads called the Wayfarer's Guild?  Or am I imagining that?  Wayfarer (or perhaps Wanderer) is a stretch, but that would be a 'W'.


----------



## Kez Darksun

In regards to the 'W' class and psionics, the possibility of the Wilder has been mentioned by people on the various forums, as well as the War Mind transitioning from a prestige class to a full fledged class.  The latter would also fit with being a new class to D&D instead of a reprint like the Wilder would be.


----------



## Cryptos

Kez Darksun said:
			
		

> In regards to the 'W' class and psionics, the possibility of the Wilder has been mentioned by people on the various forums, as well as the War Mind transitioning from a prestige class to a full fledged class.  The latter would also fit with being a new class to D&D instead of a reprint like the Wilder would be.




You might be right, but I'm almost afraid of that... soon, we'll have entire "War" adventuring parties: Warminds being led by Warlords helping to make sure that Warlocks don't get hit.


----------



## Ondo

Ander00 said:
			
		

> That statement wouldn't seem to make much sense if psionics were only slated to be released in two years.



Thanks!  I've updated the first post with this info:

Scott Rouse says "The license is done but late yesterday we added a bunch of new stuff to the SRD to cover some books coming out next year (like PH2 classes, power sources, and weapons)." (source) When someone complains, he asks "So do you want Psionics now or 12 months from now?" (source)


----------



## Cryptos

Ander00 said:
			
		

> That statement wouldn't seem to make much sense if psionics were only slated to be released in two years.
> 
> cheers




Come to think of it, that statement doesn't make much sense regardless, as "now" has never been an option on the table for Psionics.  It's always been a minimum of about 12 months from now.  I'm assuming that what he means is, "Do you want Psionics when we planned to release them next year, or 12 months from then?"  or "Do you want them in one year or two years?"

Unless he's saying that if they include it in the license, then third parties could start releasing their own psionic material "now" (which would actually be October or November, if I understand the timeline for 3rd party materials correctly.)  And wouldn't have any effect on what WotC does officially with psionics.


----------



## Ander00

In any case, I really want to see the SRD now.


cheers


----------



## mattdm

Cryptos said:
			
		

> Unless he's saying that if they include it in the license, then third parties could start releasing their own psionic material "now" (which would actually be October or November, if I understand the timeline for 3rd party materials correctly.)  And wouldn't have any effect on what WotC does officially with psionics.




That's how I read it.


----------



## Kobold Avenger

Cryptos said:
			
		

> I think the most 4e friendly psionic specialties are probably: Telepathy, Psychoportation, Psychokinesis, and Psychometabolism.  They've effectively relegated ESP-like powers to rituals, and put in the "warning blurbs" for DMs that have PCs that want to attempt scrying, so I can't see them basing a whole class around Clairsentience.



Clairsentience had far more combat powers than the school of Divination.  Many Clairsentience powers were buffing powers, with some that did damage to a single target by altering reality.  It's most likely a lot of Clairsentience powers will go the "ardent" or psionic leader, and "psychic warrior" or psionic defender.


----------



## fba827

From here http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4dnd/20080613a

Barbarian: "class previews on D&D Insider slated for this year" along with suggestions on what to do with barbarian concepts for now which might suggest direction being taken with the class

Bard: "slated for future publication" along with suggestions on what to do with the concepts which might suggest direction being taken with the class. also spells it out as an arcane leader

Druid: While no timeline is mentioned, it does offer options from current cleric builds which might hint at directions being taken for the druid in 4e drafts

Monk: While no timeline is mentioned, it does offer options from current fighter builds which might hint at directions being taken for the monk in 4e drafts (however, it seems vague in terms of concept compared to the conversion suggestions listed for the druid)


----------



## Ondo

Updated the first post with a correction to the PHB2 class initials here.

There is no R class, it is instead another B.

Probably the Bard, though that means either the Sorcerer is out or he was wrong about only 3 old classes.  I'd guess Sorcerer is out, as D R B were the ones he listed first and said were obvious.  However, we have been told Sorcerer will be in PHB2 a couple of times, so who knows.


----------



## Zsig

Ondo said:
			
		

> There is no R class, it is instead another B.
> 
> Probably the Bard, though that means either the Sorcerer is out or he was wrong about only 3 old classes.  I'd guess Sorcerer is out, as D R B were the ones he listed first and said were obvious.  However, we have been told Sorcerer will be in PHB2 a couple of times, so who knows.




Yeah, unless they just changed the barbarian name to "Rampager" or something like that, because as you pointed " D, R and B" were the obvious ones... and honestly, R is not that obvious... at least not to me.

I just find kinda weird though, that the new PHBII will revisit old power sources.


----------



## Flobby

*swordmage?*

I was thinking one of the Ss would be swordmage. i hope so, cause it sounds like a cool class but I have no interest in buying any Forgotten Realms books...


----------



## Kobold Avenger

'I' could be Inquisitor, a divine striker.
'S' could be Scourge for divine controller.


----------



## Kobold Avenger

It's hard to say what the Artificer might be, but somehow I suspect they could actually be of the Elemental power source.

We haven't been given a good idea of what Elemental power is, maybe in some ways it's partially Technology, a power source I've been wanting.  After all so many magic items in Eberron are actually "Bound Elemental" items, and it could be a way of having a Technological character without bringing up the technology level of a campaign.

Then again another ideal Elemental class would be Wu Jen, they've basically been a Druid/Wizard hybrid for a while, as their spells have been Wizard and Druid spells except with an elemental theme.


----------



## Ondo

So there's now the full interview with Mike Mearls from Gamer Radio Zero here.

It's a pretty good watch, if you're interested in this.  

I've updated the first post with the following info, but I'd like feedback on whether this is a decent summary - anything I should add or change?

Mike Mearls discusses the PHB2 on Gamer Radio Zero here.   Some highlights: "If there's stuff in the Player's Handbook that you're like, 'hey, where's this class', it's probably going to be in the Player's Handbook 2." Also new classes - a cleric that's a bit more on the spellcaster-y side, a striker that's a "deadly and dangerous" kind of guy.  The druid (I think the 3.5 druid, but I'm not sure) is the main example of a primal character, and other primal classes do things that will remind you of the druid, but in their own unique way. He lists the first letters of each class in the PHB2 - D, B, B, W, I, T, S, S  (after this correction). He also says "I think only three of those are classes that anyone has ever seen before. I think the other ones are all new classes, completely new to Dungeons & Dragons."


----------



## FabioMilitoPagliara

Ondo said:
			
		

> So there's now the full interview with Mike Mearls from Gamer Radio Zero here.
> 
> It's a pretty good watch, if you're interested in this.
> 
> I've updated the first post with the following info, but I'd like feedback on whether this is a decent summary - anything I should add or change?
> 
> snip summary




I think it's a very good summary!

btw didn't they say that each year they will publish a compilation of "best of dragon"? maybe some classes will find place there?


----------



## Ondo

Added to the first post, just after the summary of the video of Mearls talking about the PHB2:

However, when asked on his blog how many classes are new he says "Three are completely and utterly new. The rest are either classes or old concepts revisited." (source)


----------



## Ondo

So, with all the info we have now, here are my thoughts on PHBII classes.

Bard, Barbarian, Druid, Sorcerer, and Shaman all seem like obvious guesses.  (Some might be wrong, but I don't see any reason to guess against them.)

This leaves I, T, and W classes.  One guess would be Theurge (as the more spell-oriented cleric), Inquisitor (as the "deadly and dangerous" striker), and then W as another Primal class, to give us 4 Primal, 2 Arcane, and 2 Divine.  Count the first 5 as old classes or concepts revived and the last three as entirely new, and everything seems to work out - except that there are no Psionics, which the Rouse seemed to imply were in.

If we assume Psionics are in, it seems fair to assume they'll have at least two classes representing them.  So the I, T, and W need to cover a spell-oriented cleric type, a "deadly and dangerous" Psionic striker, and another Psionic class.  Telepath seems like a possibility, though it might count as an old concept revived - maybe Shaman doesn't?


----------



## Kobold Avenger

The line:


> Like a few other classes, the 4E wizard has a narrower range of power options than the 3rd Edition wizard. Some of these powers are coming later (summoning and illusions, for example), while others simply aren’t appropriate for the character role.



Does not imply they will necessarily create new classes.  It could imply they'll just add new powers to the wizard's selection.


----------



## Ondo

I reorganized the first post, and added some info about DDI.  Specifically: 

Dragon will reveal new classes in playtest mode before they appear in a future Player's Handbook (source).

There will be Barbarian previews on DDI later this year (source).

Wizards has plans to release an annual "Best of" compendium each year (source).


----------



## Burr

Ondo said:
			
		

> So, with all the info we have now, here are my thoughts on PHBII classes.
> 
> Bard, Barbarian, Druid, Sorcerer, and Shaman all seem like obvious guesses.  (Some might be wrong, but I don't see any reason to guess against them.)
> 
> This leaves I, T, and W classes.  One guess would be Theurge (as the more spell-oriented cleric), Inquisitor (as the "deadly and dangerous" striker), and then W as another Primal class, to give us 4 Primal, 2 Arcane, and 2 Divine.  Count the first 5 as old classes or concepts revived and the last three as entirely new, and everything seems to work out - except that there are no Psionics, which the Rouse seemed to imply were in.
> 
> If we assume Psionics are in, it seems fair to assume they'll have at least two classes representing them.  So the I, T, and W need to cover a spell-oriented cleric type, a "deadly and dangerous" Psionic striker, and another Psionic class.  Telepath seems like a possibility, though it might count as an old concept revived - maybe Shaman doesn't?





'I' - Illusionist
'T' - Theurge
'W' - Wombat Master


----------



## Zogmo

Amphimir Míriel said:
			
		

> In my heavily houseruled game, the Monk killed the Psychic Warrior and took his stuff, losing some monkish stuff in the process.




Wow, that sounds cool. I never thought of that kind of combo.  Any chance of you posting your houseruled monk?  If not that's cool. I'll have to make a go of it myself.  Thanks for the inspiration!


----------



## Ondo

Edited the first post to add a mention that in spite of the Rouse's comments earlier, there doesn't seem to be any material from future products in the released SRD.


----------



## Ondo

Added info on upcoming races.  Specifically, mentioned Drow and Genasi in the Forgotten Realm's players guide, and added:

The Manual of the Planes will include a playable race (source), done as a Monster Manual style writeup (source).

One race in the PHB2 starts with Gn.  Others start with D, G, H, and S, and have second letters O, E, and H, and one has the final letter R (source, source).


----------



## Ondo

Ondo said:
			
		

> One race in the PHB2 starts with Gn.  Others start with D, G, H, and S, and have second letters O, E, and H, and one has the final letter R (source, source).



I'm going to go ahead and share my guesses on these.  First off, I'm assuming that there are, in fact, only five races, even though that's not stated.  I'm not assuming the race with the final letter R is a different race from those with a given second letter.  That would be reasonable, but I can't get it to work out as well.   

Gnome, Half-Orc, Goblin, Doppleganger, Shifter.  I expect there would be multiple types of Shifter detailed.  If there were four, that would give the PHB2 the same number of races and classes as the original PHB.

Another possibility, if the final R is from a different races than the given second letters, is Gnome, Hobgoblin, Genasi, Doppleganger, Shifter.  While Genasi is in the Forgotten Realms Player's Guide, it could easily not be a repeat - Genasi (at least in 3rd edition) isn't actually a single race, so they could easily divide the varieties between the two books.  Also, since 4e moves away from the four classic elements, they could add new types.


----------



## Ondo

Ondo said:
			
		

> Gnome, Half-Orc, Goblin, Doppleganger, Shifter.



Except, of course, this doesn't work, as it leaves out the race with E as the second letter.

Genasi is the only one race I can think of that fits that.  Anyone else have an idea for a race that starts De, Ge, or He?


----------



## Zogmo

I'm posting not to add stuff but to support what your doing and hope you keep going with it.  I think your doing an excellent job representing the best these messageboards can be.


----------



## cignus_pfaccari

Ondo said:
			
		

> Except, of course, this doesn't work, as it leaves out the race with E as the second letter.
> 
> Genasi is the only one race I can think of that fits that.  Anyone else have an idea for a race that starts De, Ge, or He?




Desmodu?

Brad


----------



## Zebastian

Ondo said:
			
		

> Except, of course, this doesn't work, as it leaves out the race with E as the second letter.
> 
> Genasi is the only one race I can think of that fits that.  Anyone else have an idea for a race that starts De, Ge, or He?




The only one that comes to mind, and its a stretch, is "Deep Gnome". So, my guesses are:
Deep Gnome
Gnome
Goblin
Hobgoblin
Shifter


----------



## Lurker59

I seem to remember the developers having mentioned a re-imagined Aasimar race, so maybe they got a new name along the way? The only old races I can think of with e as the second letter are the Deep/Desert races, Kenku, Mephlings, and Centaurs so it's probably a new race.

If the Eberron Players' Handbook has only two races then it'll probably be Warforged and Kalashtar. That would leave both Dopplegangers and Shifters for PHB II, though if it has 3 then maybe Shadar-kai will show up? 

I can't imagine that Genasi will show up again, and I think Shifters will end up in the Eberron book since their background is important to Eberron's history. So my guesses based on what we've heard: Gnome, Shadar-kai, Half-orc, Doppleganger, and a new race starting with Ge. If Shadar-kai are saved for the handbook with the Shadow power source then replace them with Shifters.


----------



## Twilightwaits

Pterafolk. I don't know how, but somehow, Pterafolk will make it in this mix.


----------



## evilbob

Ondo said:
			
		

> Gnome, Half-Orc, Goblin, Doppleganger, Shifter.



I think you're close.  My guess is Gnome, Half-something (probably orc), Gensai, Drow, and Shifter.  I don't think they'd put both Doppleganger and Shifter together - they're too similar.  Then again, they put Elves, Eladrin, and Half-Elves in the PHB, so I could be wrong.  

But I think the Forgotten Realms will just be extra detailing of those races - I think the primary will still be PHB2.  And most of those are really popular races that people really want to be.  The only other option to me is that the "G" would be the githzs and githys, but then they'd have to do both.

Oh, except the "don't be evil" mantra of the PHB.  Maybe Drow is out, then.  Unless they're all secretly-good-inside rebels with an emo streak, similar to a certain D we all know...  

(Actually, with the exception of the gnomes, all of those races are typically evil, or at least evil leaning...)


----------



## GMforPowergamers

Ondo said:
			
		

> Except, of course, this doesn't work, as it leaves out the race with E as the second letter.
> 
> Genasi is the only one race I can think of that fits that.  Anyone else have an idea for a race that starts De, Ge, or He?




he----hell bred

De----Derro


----------



## Howndawg

For the races, here are my thoughts:

Gn is gnome.
G + o is goliath.
D + e is deva, which is the renamed aasimar.
S + h and r is shifter, I think MM is getting tricky with us.
H is half-orc.


For the classes:

B and B are barbarian and bard.
D is druid.
S and S and definitely sorcerer and most likely shaman.
T is probably theurge, given that a divine controller is practically given.
I is inquisitor, given that they want to fill out the divine classes.
W is most likely a primal class, either witch or warden. If the druid is primarily a conroller type, I'm going with warden, if not, witch.


----------



## JohnSnow

No idea, about races, but here's my take on classes.

I agree with most people on some:

B and B are barbarian (primal) and bard (arcane).
D is clearly druid (primal).
The most likely W, I think, is "witch," a primal controller.
T is, I'm thinking, Theurge, as others have said: a divine controller.
I'd say one "S" is probably Sorcerer. It was mentioned in _Races and Classes_, and it's probably arcane.

My bet on the others:
"S" is Shadowcaster - a new take on Ari's work for Tome of Magic. 
"I" is Illusionist.

So now we have some extra "old power sources" - one arcane and one divine, and two new power sources: Primal and Shadow.

3 primal
2 shadow
2 arcane
1 divine

That almost matches the PHB in format. Then PHB 3 can give us a couple more from earlier sources and introduce one or two new ones, like Ki, Psionics, or Elemental.

But I'm just guessing.


----------



## Aldarc

Any speculations as to the ability scores which will most likely be tied to each class?


----------



## Zogmo

B is for Bonk
D is for Donk
S is for Sonk
T is for Tonk
I  is for Ionk
W is for Wonk


What we don't have is M is for MONK.

This better be something they are going to do soon in with the DDI.


----------



## hamishspence

*comments*

Friar Tuck in original legends is as good a swordsman as Robin hood.

With the mention of Ki its unlikely that monks will have any other source (pity, I liked Forgotten Realms tying monks strongly to churches)

Monsters: hoping they won't just be in MMs. I see Manual of the Planes as ideal for launching many creatures, not least including planar dragons. Shadow dragon in particular I would like to see.

Necromancer: would be nice if they appear in Open Grave. While PHs and campaign guides should contain most classes, this is one that deserves to come out earlier than PHIII.


----------



## Pierson_Lowgal

There will be monsters in Manual of the Planes (MoP).  If memory serves, and it was just yesterday, during the D&D Videocast a designer said he was working on a monster for MoP.


----------



## Aldarc

JohnSnow said:
			
		

> No idea, about races, but here's my take on classes.
> 
> I agree with most people on some:
> 
> B and B are barbarian (primal) and bard (arcane).
> D is clearly druid (primal).
> The most likely W, I think, is "witch," a primal controller.
> T is, I'm thinking, Theurge, as others have said: a divine controller.
> I'd say one "S" is probably Sorcerer. It was mentioned in _Races and Classes_, and it's probably arcane.
> 
> My bet on the others:
> "S" is Shadowcaster - a new take on Ari's work for Tome of Magic.
> "I" is Illusionist.



Making my own set of guesses: 
- Barbarian: Constitution, Strength, (Dexterity), (Wisdom) 
- Bard: Charisma, Dexterity, (Intelligence) 
- Druid: Wisdom, Dexterity, (Strength) 
- Shaman: Wisdom, Charisma, Constitution 
- Theurge: Wisdom, Charisma, (Dexterity) 
- Sorcerer: Charisma, Dexterity, Constitution


----------



## woodelf

Stogoe said:
			
		

> What exactly would a Friar Tuck monk bring to a party, besides cowering in a corner when the violence starts?  Really, though, I'm having trouble imagining the archetype in an adventuring context.




In tradition, both fictional and historical, the primary strength/power of religious folks is social influence. Even in some fiction where the devoutly religious also have mystical power, their social/political influence is often as or more significant. What Friar Tuck brought to the group was his ability to persuade, and bluff, and so on. Now, in his particular case, he also was pretty good with a staff and a sword, IIRC. 

But, in the more general case, what the Western monk/priest/etc. archetype brings to the group is the sorts of abilities that D&D4E is mostly giving to 'leader' classes. That's if you don't mind them being a bit more militant than the actual source materials--which, for D&D4E, is probably appropriate. 

Personally, i'd prefer to have someone whose role when the violence starts is *precisely* to cower in the corner--but who has sufficient other strengths to balance this weakness out. I have no interest in the combats (and don't mind mostly sitting out when they occur)--i like playing skillmonkeys, or information-gatherers, or social/influence characters. But i just don't see D&D4E having any classes that aren't combat-centric. Which is a large part of why i don't see myself ever playing it, beyond a couple sessions to get a feel for it and make sure i'm not misjudging.


----------



## Ondo

Added a couple tidbits from James Wyatt to the first post:

Swordshock is a 17th level encounter power for Swordmages that sheathes their sword in lightning (source).

"By the time the Eberron Campaign Guide comes out next year, gnomes will be a fully-supported race." (source)


----------



## Mokona

_Martial Power_ won't have new classes but we'll get the swordmage in *Forgotten Realms*.  How many other new classes do we think we'll get before _Player's Handbook II_ comes out?


----------



## Ondo

Mokona said:
			
		

> _Martial Power_ won't have new classes but we'll get the swordmage in *Forgotten Realms*.  How many other new classes do we think we'll get before _Player's Handbook II_ comes out?



My guess is no other full, finalized classes, just previews in Dragon, like the Artificer and Barbarian.


----------



## hamishspence

*Necromancer*

Hoping that Open Grave will have necromancer as a class. Doubt it, but it would go a long way to making it a "must have" NPC class, NPC emplate, PC class. With good items and monsters as well, it could be very good.

Howevber, I fear that they may not go that way with Open Grave.


----------



## Caliber

Without taking the time to read the entire thread, it seems no one suspects the PHB II of containing Psionic classes anymore. Any reason why?

I had been pegging T as Telepath, the location for all of the Wizard's "enchanter-y" powers. 

Am I too far off base?


----------



## Cryptos

Caliber said:
			
		

> Without taking the time to read the entire thread, it seems no one suspects the PHB II of containing Psionic classes anymore. Any reason why?
> 
> I had been pegging T as Telepath, the location for all of the Wizard's "enchanter-y" powers.
> 
> Am I too far off base?




I'm actually hoping that it doesn't at this point, honestly.  And that's coming from someone whose only major 3/3.5 purchases other than the core rulebooks and MotP was the Psionics books. (Although this time around if I'm able I'll probably be getting more, at least Tome of Treasures and all the power sourcebooks as well as MotP.)

There's limited space.  We would get the merest hint of psionics with one or two classes.

We already know Barbarian, Druid, Shaman, and probably Bard and Sorcerer.  That leaves room for three classes.  But the PHB2 is supposed to round out the Divine power source as well, leaving room at most 2 psionic classes.

Further, one extra divine class doesn't really 'round out' the divine classes all that well.  By PHB2, then, we'd have four martial classes and five arcane classes (Bard, Sorcerer, Swordmage, Warlock, Wizard).  For the first three power sources, divine is falling behind.  So it would be nice to see two divine classes in the PHB2.  Theurge and Inquisitor sound good.

Leaving space for one class for a psionics class.  Honestly, why bother?  I'd rather they be introduced in a place where they can get a more complete treatment, even if that means waiting for the PHB3.

This also gets us 4 martial classes (fighter, ranger, rogue, warlord), five arcane classes (bard, wizard, warlock, sorcerer, and swordmage), four divine classes (paladin, cleric, theurge and inquisitor), and four primal classes (druid, barbarian, shaman, and 'W'.)  And whatever the Artificer will be, shortly after that.

Which is a much better rounded lineup than having two or three each of divine and primal, and then two of psionic.  It helps people that are creating campaigns with strong primal, divine, or arcane elements.  It means not having to look up information for primal, divine and arcane characters between yet another PHB by waiting to 'complete' those power sources in PHB3 (already you're looking at the information being spread out between the PHB1, PHB2, campaign setting sourcebooks, and the power source sourcebook.)

It would just be better overall, I think, for all the different power sources if they held off on psionics, including being better for psionics.  I'd rather have to reference just the PHB3 and the psionics sourcebook for psionics characters in the future than have to reference PHB2, PHB3, PHB4 and a psionics sourcebook, which is likely if they do it one or two classes at a time.  Because in addition to classes, each one of those that features  a class of a given power source is likely to also feature feats and additional rules that also apply to that power source in general.  So you'd be looking at carrying a whole library around with you.

Other symmetry issues aside, PHB2 - Arcane, Divine and Primal Heroes and then PHB3 - Elemental, Psionic, Shadow heroes makes a lot more sense to me, for some reason, than PHB2 Arcane, Divine, Primal and Psionic Heroes and PHB3 Elemental, Psionic, Shadow, And Whatever Else We Didn't Get To Complete Yet Heroes.  You might as well just drop the PHB subtitles at that point on the latter set.


----------



## Ondo

Lots of tidbits from posts by Rich Baker on Gleemax added to the first post.

Significant info on the Swordmage here.

Illusionists will have better Invisibility options than a Wizard (source). They may use the Shadow power source (source).

Necromancers are mentioned here. They use the Shadow power source (Worlds & Monsters, and here).

Rich Baker gives his guesstimate of traction for ten races from Aarakocra to Catfolk here.

Goliaths will probably be in 4e Forgotten Realms, possibly with a spot in Faerun earmarked for them so you'll know where they're from when they're released (source).

Half-Giants may be too similar to Goliaths (source).

Rich Baker hopes to have Half-Orcs on DDi pretty soon after the Player's Handbook hits (source; note this is from January).  He expects to see at least a couple of returning classes (Barbarian, Druid, Bard, Sorcerer) on DDi by this summer (source); later he guesses we might see Bard or Druid by late summer or early fall (source).

Half-Orcs "imply a very ugly backstory"; they may try to change that (source).

Gnomes, Half-Orcs, and Goliaths will be mentioned in the 4e Realms products, but not dwelled on because the rules for them will be a ways off (source).

Bards, Druids, Barbarians, and Sorcerers will be in print in 2009 (source).

Sorcerers will get flying a little faster than wizards do (source).

"Multiclassing into swordmage is pretty easy for a wizard (and vice versa)" (source). Swordmages like Int and Str (source).

Genasi ability adjustments "don’t really support warlock all that well"; they have elemental manifestations, which are "really righteous racial abilities"; Firesoul and Stormsoul are two of the options (source).


----------



## Ondo

Added news that Amazon has a release date of March 17th listed for Player's Handbook II (source), and there's info from a 5th level Swordmage in an RPGA adventure here.


----------



## cignus_pfaccari

Ondo said:
			
		

> Goliaths will probably be in 4e Forgotten Realms, possibly with a spot in Faerun earmarked for them so you'll know where they're from when they're released (source).
> 
> Half-Giants may be too similar to Goliaths (source).




Oh, good.

Not that I didn't like half-giants, but I *really* like goliaths.

Brad


----------



## Mokona

Ondo said:
			
		

> release date of March 17th listed for Player's Handbook II



That's the best information I've had all week.  Sooner is better when it comes to new classes given the narrow scope of each 4e class.


----------



## Ondo

Updated the first post with info from the cover of the PHB2 - that it will contain Arcane, Divine, and Primal heroes, and that it shows a Goliath and what could be a Gnome or a Shifter on the cover.

Also removed this bit, since I can't find any significant meaning in it:
Scott Rouse says "The license is done but late yesterday we added a bunch of new stuff to the SRD to cover some books coming out next year (like PH2 classes, power sources, and weapons)." (source) When someone complains, he asks "So do you want Psionics now or 12 months from now?" (source) However, the released SRD doesn't seem to include anything from future products.

Also, while ENWorld was down I copied the first post over to the Summer Camp at http://www.circvsmaximvs.com/showthread.php?t=45770.


----------



## LightPhoenix

Given the look of the Gnome that was in the one cartoon with the Tiefling, I'm guessing that's a Gnome on the cover.  They look very similar, especially in the shape of the head.


----------



## Stogoe

woodelf said:


> Personally, i'd prefer to have someone whose role when the violence starts is *precisely* to cower in the corner--but who has sufficient other strengths to balance this weakness out.



This is never going to happen.  4e is specifically aiming to destroy the combat sucks/skillmonkey god dichotomy, and its counterpart.  You don't get to dominate one arena by ignoring the other.



> I have no interest in the combats (and don't mind mostly sitting out when they occur)--i like playing skillmonkeys, or information-gatherers, or social/influence characters. But i just don't see D&D4E having any classes that aren't combat-centric.



The designers want everyone to be able to participate at all times.  Now, if you personally want to sit out the combat, good on ya.  But don't expect to get more than a pat on the head for it.


----------



## Jhaelen

Having just watched the new Diablo III gameplay movie, I'm guessing W stands for Witch Doctor! Obviously someone at WotC had insider infos...


----------



## balard

Who is just the ugly necro(if that is possible)...


----------



## Ondo

So Rich Baker seems to confirm bards, druids, gnomes, and barbarians for the PHB2 here.

So I've changed around the first post - I removed these three bits:



> Bards, Druids, Barbarians, and Sorcerers will be in print in 2009 (source).





> The PHB2 will include the Sorcerer (source), the Barbarian and Druid (Races & Classes), as well as classes "not unlike the Druid, Barbarian, and Bard" (source).





> "By the time the Eberron Campaign Guide comes out next year, gnomes will be a fully-supported race." (source)




and replaced them with a mention that Gnomes were confirmed and this:


> Barbarians, Bards, Druids, and Sorcerers are all confirmed for the PHB2 (source, source).




Also replaced this:


> Gnomes, Half-Orcs, and Goliaths will be mentioned in the 4e Realms products, but not dwelled on because the rules for them will be a ways off (source).



with this:


> Barbarians, Bards, Druids, and Gnomes will be mentioned in Forgotten Realms products (source),  as will Half-Orcs and Goliaths (source).




Also added this:


> Wizards has no plans to reprint races and classes in the Forgotten Realm's Player's Guide in the PHB2 (source).


----------



## drothgery

The Artificer is an arcane leader, and will appear in the Eberron Player's Guide (source). A playtest/preview version appears in Dragon 365.


----------



## Ondo

drothgery said:


> The Artificer is an arcane leader, and will appear in the Eberron Player's Guide (source). A playtest/preview version appears in Dragon 365.



Added this info to the first post.

Also removed this:
Keith Baker says "you can expect to see an early version of the artificer in next month's Dragon. I don't know if it will be the full class or a partial build, but it should give you something to work with." (source)


----------



## Ondo

Added to the first post a mention that the Forgotten Realms Player's Guide will also include a multiclass-only class for characters with spellscars (source).


----------



## Caliber

Ondo said:


> Added to the first post a mention that the Forgotten Realms Player's Guide will also include a multiclass-only class for characters with spellscars (source).




Uh? Buh? Wth does multiclass-only class mean? Is the preview guy smoking crack or is the FR Player's Guide introducing some crazy new class system?


----------



## GMforPowergamers

Caliber said:


> Uh? Buh? Wth does multiclass-only class mean? Is the preview guy smoking crack or is the FR Player's Guide introducing some crazy new class system?




nope... just as many guessed, the same way to mullti class (feats that swap out powers) is going to be used for uniqe power sets that do not make a full class. I bet Dragon marks will be similar... and i hope this is how they address spell fire as well.


----------



## Walking Dad

Perhaps some thing like:

Perequisites: Spellscared feat, wizard, fighter

So you could take it as a wizard with both the student of war and spellscared feat

or fighter with both the initiate of the arcane and spellscared feat


----------



## Ondo

Finally tracked down a source for Genasi and Drow being in the Forgotten Realm's Player's Guide at http://www.critical-hits.com/2008/02/28/dd-xp-seminar/.


----------



## Phaezen

Don't know if this is 100% relevant as a "new" class but the Bazaar of the Bizarre: Treasures of Ashardalon article  (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/drbaz/20080707)  mentions dragon pact warlocks.  My best guess would be a spoiler for PHB2 or the Arcane Power book

Phaezen


----------



## FabioMilitoPagliara

Phaezen said:


> Don't know if this is 100% relevant as a "new" class but the Bazaar of the Bizarre: Treasures of Ashardalon article  (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/drbaz/20080707)  mentions dragon pact warlocks.  My best guess would be a spoiler for PHB2 or the Arcane Power book
> 
> Phaezen




on the other hand they could also be in the "Arcane Power" since it isn't a new class


----------



## Kobold Avenger

Phaezen said:


> My best guess would be a spoiler for PHB2 or the Arcane Power book
> 
> Phaezen



It's been more or less implied that the Player's Handbooks would be about introducing new classes rather than adding to existing classes so far.

Dragonpact Warlocks are likely to be in Arcane Power, along with Shadow and Vestige Warlocks which have been suggested as well.  And new wizard implements such as familiars.  Whether Swordmages or Artificers will get coverage in that book is unknown, but there's probably some supplementary material on Bards and Sorcerers, like new 'patrons' or whatever.


----------



## Ginnel

Phaezen said:


> Treasures of Ashardalon article (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/drbaz/20080707) mentions dragon pact warlocks. My best guess would be a spoiler for PHB2 or the Arcane Power book
> 
> Phaezen




Or the Draconomicon thingie would be a nice way to get more people to buy it  as its not a new class per se would be getting around the only releasing classes in PHB's or player guides


----------



## Herald of I

This is a little bit speculative, but the Ashardalon Dragon article seems to suggest that druids use staffs as implements.



			
				Dragon 365 said:
			
		

> The only mortal to stand against the full might of Ashardalon was a *druid* named Dydd, and, if legends
> can be believed, he owed much of his success to a mysterious *staff* whose name and function have since
> been lost. Many builders of magic items have worked to recreate his chosen *implement*, basing their efforts
> on tales and myths, while others use such stories for new staffs of their own design.



Emphasis mine.


----------



## andarilhor

No more news about the future classes and races?


----------



## Bigwilly

Sadrik said:


> Primal Classes: Barbarian (Defender), Druid (Striker), Shaman (Leader), Sorcerer (Controller)




I think the sorcerer should be a striker (although maybe that overlaps too much with the warlock). Most 3.x sorcerers seemed to lean more towards blowing things up than controlling the battlefield. That would mean that the druid (spellcaster variant) would fill the controller slot, although the druid (shifter) could be more of a striker or defender. 

Barbarian as a frontline melee class does seem to fit naturally into the defender class, but with their high damage output I think they have at least some striker traits.


----------



## Ondo

andarilhor said:


> No more news about the future classes and races?



There's been at least a little bit, but I haven't been keeping close track or updating the thread.  Sorry.

I'll try to get to it sometime soon.  I've been thinking it would be a good idea to get this info in the wiki, so anyone can update it.  If anyone else wants to do that, feel free.


----------



## drothgery

Bigwilly said:


> I think the sorcerer should be a striker (although maybe that overlaps too much with the warlock).




Maybe it 'should' be, but I'm pretty sure the Sorcerer is an arcane controller.


----------



## samursus

Full write up on Sword mage and Powers for up to 3rd level, as well as all 5 Genasi types in a RPGA release... I have it on my comp, but I can't remember where I got it.  The link was in ENWorld somewhere...I will try and find it.

http://www.wizards.com/rpga/downloads/rpga4_frpgpreview.zip


----------



## Kobold Avenger

One of the PHB2 classes were described as having a "buddy" and happens to be a leader, as one of the vague clues out there in the Confessions of a Full-Time Wizard.


----------



## drothgery

The blurbs for WotC's spring catalog show

PHB2 blurb
- barbarian, druid, and sorcerer classes confirmed for PH2; barbarian and druid confirmed as primal
- gnome, half-orc, and goliath races confirmed for PHB2

Arcane Power
- confirms bard and sorcerer as arcane; strongly implies that the bard will be out before Arcane Power


----------



## Kobold Avenger

drothgery said:


> Arcane Power
> - confirms bard and sorcerer as arcane; strongly implies that the bard will be out before Arcane Power



They've mentioned the bard being in PHB2 a few times, they've mentioned the bard being an arcane leader, and they've implied that there will be a DDI preview of the Bard before PHB2.


----------



## Dire Bare

Herald of I said:


> This is a little bit speculative, but the Ashardalon Dragon article seems to suggest that druids use staffs as implements.



Well . . . while druids may indeed get staff as an implement choice, this fluff is taken directly from the 3e set of adventure modules.


----------



## drothgery

Kobold Avenger said:


> They've mentioned the bard being in PHB2 a few times, they've mentioned the bard being an arcane leader, and they've implied that there will be a DDI preview of the Bard before PHB2.




Yeah, but this is absolutely-down-in-print-somewhere stuff.

I'm trying to finish off the non-arcane leader bard dead-enders...


----------



## Otogi

I know the Elemental power source is about a quarter of decade from release, but is there any idea on what the classes might be, besides the Controller (Elementalist)?


----------



## Ondo

Replaced this:
Gnomes are in the PHB2 (source). Others races in the PHB2 start with D, G, H, and S, and have second letters O, E, and H, and one has the final letter R (source, source). A Goliath appears on the cover, as well as what may be a Gnome or Shifter.

With this:
Gnomes, Half-Orcs, Goliaths, and Shifters will be in the PHB2 (source, source). There will also be a race that starts with a D, and a race (possibly the same one) that has a second letter of E (source, source).

Thanks for the catalog link, drothgery.  I'll try and update with the rest of the info people posted soon.


----------



## fba827

Ondo, nice work in keeping up with this! 



Ondo said:


> *Swordmage*




In your classes section, for this entry, you may want to list that this is confirmed for the Forgotten Realms Player's Guide (it's listed in the book's description on WotC anyway).  And while I may be wrong, I have a strange recollection that in some interview one of the WotC team said there are no plans to recycle info from one guide to the next (so it won't get reprinted in a future PHBX), so chances are high this will be the only book with it.



Ondo said:


> *Genasi*




Since this was listed in the preview pdf for Forgotten Realms RPGA stuff, it's a good extrapolation that this will be in either the PHB2 (which answers the question on the race having an E as the second letter) or in the Forgotten Realms Player's Guide (if they are doing races in that book; the WotC product description mentions classes, feats and so on but no mention of races either way).

Same is true of Drow.



Ondo said:


> *Goliath*




Although you did include this in your PHB2 section, for your races section on this entry, you may want to list it confirmed for the PHB2. (or a note to "see PHB2" or something for those looking down to race rather than knowing it'll be in that book)



Ondo said:


> *Half-Orc*




Same thing I wrote for Goliath, see above.


----------



## jelmore

fba827 said:


> Ondo, nice work in keeping up with this!
> 
> *Genasi*
> Since this was listed in the preview pdf for Forgotten Realms RPGA stuff, it's a good extrapolation that this will be in either the PHB2 (which answers the question on the race having an E as the second letter) or in the Forgotten Realms Player's Guide (if they are doing races in that book; the WotC product description mentions classes, feats and so on but no mention of races either way).
> 
> Same is true of Drow.




The Living Forgotten Realms RPGA preview specifically says that the swordmage, drow, and genasi excerpts come from the Forgotten Realms Player's Guide, not the PHB2.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=rpga/news/lfrcharacters


----------



## redrover

As long as we are speculating on the new classes, I’d like to toss in a “W”: 

  the Witch-Doctor.

  A long time ago (1e MM), nonhuman races had tribal subleader types who were either _shamans_ or _witch-doctors._ The former had cleric spells and the latter had a mix of wizard and cleric spells. 

  The witch-doctor combined Divine and Arcane powers and could well be configured as a Primal Controller.

  Primitive cultures currently have no arcane spellcaster archetype (I suppose you might patch in a Warlock, but this still leaves tribal cultures without a controller type. Druids aren't thematic for a lot of tribal cultures).

  Since the old witch-doctor was very close to the shaman, it is a fertile field for keeping the name and concept, while doing an orginal take for the new edition.

  If you were going to empower a completely Primal setting, then you’d have to fill this niche with something.

  A Witch is a long shot, IMO. I haven’t seen WotC do too many gender-specific classes in core books.


*Shamans:* Definitely a returning concept. It’s appeared in Dragon magazine several times over the years and there was even a 2e “Shaman” book.


----------



## Walking Dad

I don't want to sound rude, but Witch-Doctor is the new confirmed class in the Diablo 3 game. I think WotC should wait with releasing something with that name, or they will be once more accused to steal 4e from computer games.

PS: Shaman was a standard-class in Oriental Adventures 3e and the Spirit Shaman was a standard-class in Complete Divine.


----------



## Andor

Another possibility for a Primal 'T' class occurs to me. The *Totemist*. I would be stoked to see that, the totemist of one of my favorite classes from 3e.


----------



## Vayden

Didn't see it on the front page or the last two pages - the latest previews article mentioned the Warlock gaining another option (Dark Pact) in one of the Forgotten Realms books (I think Player's Guide).


----------



## Aaron L

Mort_Q said:


> I always thought of *Ki* as being a subset of _*Psi*_.





You aren't alone in that, my friend.


----------



## FabioMilitoPagliara

as for the ki vs psi it can be seen as 2 faces of the same medal

chackra vs mental?


----------



## Caliber

The new name for Aasimars, according to the FRPG, is Deva, which meshes quite nicely with the large De- shaped hole in the PHB II's racial lineup. 

I think we now have ourselves a winner.


----------



## Vael

Certainly seems like it. So, the Deva, Gnome, Goliath, Half-Orc and Shifter. Not a bad lineup. I wonder how many Shifters are going to be there, the MM had Razorclaw and Longtooth, but there are 4 others in the core ECS, plus Races of Eberron added some more IIRC.


----------



## GMforPowergamers

I wonder if razor _claw_ shifters will have..._*CLAWS*_?!?!?!?!?!??!?!


----------



## Ondo

Okay, I think I'm now pretty much up-to-date, though I'll be looking for more info.  If there's anything I've missed, let me know.

I'm not including info on new options for existing classes currently.  If anyone else wants to start a thread for that, I'd be happy to link to it and inform you of any news I find.  Until then, please mention such news here for the benefit of anyone who later decides to do this (possibly me, if I change my mind), but I won't be adding it to the OP.

To note one I've found, the Tempest Fighter option from Martial Power is mentioned here.

Here's the changes I made:

Replaced this:
There will be Barbarian previews on DDI later this year (source).
with this:
A playtest version of the Barbarian is planned for the October issue of Dragon (source).

Added this:
_(Probably Devas, as the Forgotten Realms Player's Guide mentions that is the new name for Aasimars.)_

Added this:
One of the classes is a Leader class that "travels with a 'buddy' who keeps the party in tip-top shape" (source).

Replaced this:
The Monk is not a Martial Striker, and as of D&D XP they had not seriously started designing the class (source).
with this:
The Monk uses the Ki power source (PHB).  As of D&D XP 2008 they had not seriously started designing the class (source).

Added this:
Significant preview of the Swordmage here.

Added this:
*Deva*
This is the new name for the Aasimar (FRPG).

*Drow*
Significant preview of the Drow here.

And this:
Significant preview of the Genasi here.

I also added notes on where classes and races will show up in the sections for each class and race, rather than leaving the info only in the products section.


----------



## Ondo

Added this:
Ranadiel has a thread compiling all known info on upcoming products on WotC's boards here.

Replaced this:
There will also be a race that starts with a D, and a race (possibly the same one) that has a second letter of E (source, source).

with this:
as well as one more race (source) that starts with De (source, source).

Added this:
This thread in Greg Bilsland's blog has pictures of a fight that include four PCs, all with PHB2 classes, and various vague hints.


----------



## Mithreinmaethor

De is part of Deva.  Mentioned in the FRPG.  Also The Sh one will be Shifter.  Look at the cover art.


----------



## Ondo

Removed info about races and classes in the Forgotten Realms Player's Guide, since they're no longer upcoming.  Specifically, removed all this:



> The Forgotten Realms Player's Guide will include the Swordmage, as well as Drow and Genasi (source).  It will also include a multiclass-only class for characters with spellscars (source).  Barbarians, Bards, Druids, and Gnomes will be mentioned in Forgotten Realms products (source), as will Half-Orcs and Goliaths (source).





> *Swordmage*
> Significant preview of the Swordmage here.  It will be in the Forgotten Realms Player's Guide.
> 
> Significant info on the Swordmage here. Info from a 5th level Swordmage in an RPGA adventure here.
> 
> "Multiclassing into swordmage is pretty easy for a wizard (and vice versa)" (source). Swordmages like Int and Str (source).
> 
> Swordshock is a 17th level encounter power for Swordmages that sheathes their sword in lightning (source).





> *Drow*
> Significant preview of the Drow here.  They will be in the Forgotten Realms Player's Guide.
> 
> *Genasi*
> Significant preview of the Genasi here.  They will be in the Forgotten Realms Player's Guide.
> 
> Genasi ability adjustments "don’t really support warlock all that well"; they have elemental manifestations, which are "really righteous racial abilities"; Firesoul and Stormsoul are two of the options (source).


----------



## Rechan

You know. A thought occurred to me last night.

What if the I _is_ for the Inquisitor. But the Inquisitor is the _Divine Controller_, not a striker.

When I think of Inquisitors, I don't really see them dancing around the battlefield sticking people in the gut and saying "You never expected that!"


----------



## Iron Dog

Looking at the play test Barbarian, which to me looks like all damage and no tact. The Bard should be the opposite, little damage and lots of buffs. A Leader with some controller abilities. IMHO.


----------



## Walking Dad

Iron Dog said:


> Looking at the play test Barbarian, which to me looks like all damage and no tact. The Bard should be the opposite, little damage and lots of buffs. A Leader with some controller abilities. IMHO.



I wouldn't say no tactics... The use of it's daily is more tactical than the other classes. And the warlock isn't much more tactical. Tactics are most important for controllers and leaders.

Back to topic:
The races section mentions both goliath and half-orc. Goliath seem to favor Str and Con. Half-Orcs Str and neither Con nor Cha.


----------



## andarilhor

Until now we have the following classes confirmed to PHB2:

Barbarian - Primal/Striker
Bard - Arcane/Leader
Druid - Primal/Controller*
Shaman - Primal/Leader
Sorcerer - Arcane/Controller

*I believe he will be so hybrid as the barbarian is a Striker/Defender Hybrid
And we know which will have a Divine Controller.
Thats lets room to the following options:
Divine/Striker
Primal/Defender

My guesses:

I - Inquisitor - Divine/Striker
T - Theurge - Divine/Controller
W - Warchief - Primal/Defender (only because we don´t have classes with War in the name enough)


----------



## yesnomu

andarilhor said:


> Until now we have the following classes confirmed to PHB2:
> 
> Barbarian - Primal/Striker
> Bard - Arcane/Leader
> Druid - Primal/Controller*
> Shaman - Primal/Leader
> Sorcerer - Arcane/Controller
> 
> *I believe he will be so hybrid as the barbarian is a Striker/Defender Hybrid
> And we know which will have a Divine Controller.
> Thats lets room to the following options:
> Divine/Striker
> Primal/Defender
> 
> My guesses:
> 
> I - Inquisitor - Divine/Striker
> T - Theurge - Divine/Controller
> W - Warchief - Primal/Defender (only because we don´t have classes with War in the name enough)



I like Warden, myself. Some people like Witch (Primal/Controller), but they're weird.


----------



## Old Gumphrey

Put me down for Warchief!



^warchief


----------



## Iron Dog

Walking Dad said:


> I wouldn't say no tactics... The use of it's daily is more tactical than the other classes. And the warlock isn't much more tactical. Tactics are most important for controllers and leaders.




Sorry, but I mean "no tact" as in "no class", or no decorum. Not tact as in tactics. Meaning: good for hitting thing, but not for inviting around for dinner, let alone escorting your daughter to the debutant ball.


----------



## Walking Dad

Iron Dog said:


> Sorry, but I mean "no tact" as in "no class", or no decorum. Not tact as in tactics. Meaning: good for hitting thing, but not for inviting around for dinner, let alone escorting your daughter to the debutant ball.



What?? No class? Just a race? 

Ok, I understand.


----------



## Howndawg

I don't know if anybody noticed this or not, but on the Ask the Developer thread on the Forgotten Realms board, Rich Baker mentions a psionic empath.  Could the empath be a psionic leader slated for PHB III?


----------



## Walking Dad

Howndawg said:


> I don't know if anybody noticed this or not, but on the Ask the Developer thread on the Forgotten Realms board, Rich Baker mentions a psionic empath.  Could the empath be a psionic leader slated for PHB III?



Or a monster in the campaign setting...


----------



## Howndawg

The link to the site is:

http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1072927&page=10

The empath is referred to in the same breath as the bard.


----------



## Ondo

Walking Dad said:


> The races section mentions both goliath and half-orc. Goliath seem to favor Str and Con. Half-Orcs Str and neither Con nor Cha.



Yeah, I added that in.



Howndawg said:


> The link to the site is:
> 
> The one and only "Ask the Realms authors/designers thread" 4 - Page 10 - Wizards Community
> 
> The empath is referred to in the same breath as the bard.



Thanks!  Yeah, in context it's clear that the empath will be a psionic leader.  Added to the first post.

Also did a bit of rewriting and maintenance on the first post - specifics follow:
Removed this:


> A playtest version of the Barbarian is planned for the October issue of Dragon (source).




Replaced this:


> A playtest version of the Barbarian is planned for the October issue of Dragon.  The final version will be in the Player's Handbook II.



with this:


> The Barbarian will be a Primal Striker, and a playtest version is available here. It will be in the Player's Handbook II.




Replaced this:


> Mike Mearls discusses the PHB2 on Gamer Radio Zero here.   Some highlights: "If there's stuff in the Player's Handbook that you're like, 'hey, where's this class', it's probably going to be in the Player's Handbook 2." Also new classes - a cleric that's a bit more on the spellcaster-y side, a striker that's a "deadly and dangerous" kind of guy.  The druid (I think the 3.5 druid, but I'm not sure) is the main example of a primal character, and other primal classes do things that will remind you of the druid, but in their own unique way. He lists the first letters of each class in the PHB2 - D, B, B, W, I, T, S, S  (after this correction). He also says "I think only three of those are classes that anyone has ever seen before. I think the other ones are all new classes, completely new to Dungeons & Dragons." However, when asked on his blog how many classes are new he says "Three are completely and utterly new. The rest are either classes or old concepts revisited." (source)
> 
> One of the classes is a Leader class that "travels with a 'buddy' who keeps the party in tip-top shape" (source).



with this:


> We also know:
> 
> The other classes start with W, I, T, and S (source).
> Discussing the classes: "Three are completely and utterly new. The rest are either classes or old concepts revisited." (source)
> There's a new class that's "like a cleric, but a bit more on the spellcaster-y side" (source).
> There's a new class that's a Striker with a different flavor - "a guy who's a little more, maybe, deadly and dangerous kind of guy, not like a rogue, but a killer guy in a different sort of way." (source).
> One of the classes is a Leader class that "travels with a 'buddy' who keeps the party in tip-top shape" (source).



and this:


> *Specific Power Sources*
> *Primal*
> They're using the aspects of the druid as the bedrock to build the other primal classes - they'll do things that will remind you of the druid, but in their own unique way (source).




I also removed this, because I don't think it's interesting info anymore:


> *Misc.*
> 
> On The Tome, Andy Collins was asked about upcoming Controllers, and said they're still in the early design phase of the next wave of classes, but mentioned the Sorcerer is possible for that role, and they're thinking about a Divine Controller and some form of Psionic Controller. (It's at about 23:25 in the podcast.)  He also mentioned "you're not going to see the Cleric throwing around Flame Strike type powers really frequently", but "when we get around to a Divine Controller class he will probably have more of those type of effects". (At about 27:30.)


----------



## Ondo

So I just noticed that the link to significant info on the Druid was to a Gleemax blog, and no longer works.  Does anyone know of a working source of that info?

Also, I added this note to the Druid: A later interview here suggests that the hybrid version may not have made it past playtesting.


----------



## fba827

I don't have a ddi subscription so I can't point to it in the original source.
However, according to a thread discussing the recent minotaur article ( http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/244251-playing-minotaurs.html ),  the article mentions the "Warden" as a class that the minotaur is suited for.

This may be the "W" class that will be in the PHB2 (and also suggests that the warden is best served by strength and or constitution abilities since those are the minotaur's racial bonuses).

Of course, this isn't hard confirmation, just conjecture based on the use of the class name, the timing, and an unknown "W" class in the PHB2.


----------



## Skornn2k7

The new Ampersand has at the bottom , the first 10 lvls of Bard class. It looks like it will be a better Arcane Controller than even the Wizard. Alot of nice controller stuff, sliding enemies for the allies to smack down. It looks pretty good, couple that with the Warlord, you have some serious battlefield control.


Sk


----------



## Nikosandros

Skornn2k7 said:


> The new Ampersand has at the bottom , the first 10 lvls of Bard class. It looks like it will be a better Arcane Controller than even the Wizard. Alot of nice controller stuff, sliding enemies for the allies to smack down. It looks pretty good, couple that with the Warlord, you have some serious battlefield control.



Well, the bard is a leader, but I agree that he has a nice splash of controller.


----------



## Urizen

Ondo said:


> Replaced this:
> Gnomes are in the PHB2 (source). Others races in the PHB2 start with D, G, H, and S, and have second letters O, E, and H, and one has the final letter R (source, source). A Goliath appears on the cover, as well as what may be a Gnome or Shifter.
> 
> With this:
> Gnomes, Half-Orcs, Goliaths, and Shifters will be in the PHB2 (source, source). There will also be a race that starts with a D, and a race (possibly the same one) that has a second letter of E (source, source).
> 
> Thanks for the catalog link, drothgery.  I'll try and update with the rest of the info people posted soon.




Hmm.. D race:

Deurgar?


----------



## Rechan

Skornn2k7 said:


> The new Ampersand has at the bottom , the first 10 lvls of Bard class. It looks like it will be a better Arcane Controller than even the Wizard. Alot of nice controller stuff, sliding enemies for the allies to smack down. It looks pretty good, couple that with the Warlord, you have some serious battlefield control.



No real area affects. The sliding is mainly on the part of allies. So it's more like a ranged warlord. 

The Artificer is more a leader/controller.



Urizen said:


> Hmm.. D race:
> 
> Deurgar?



The Forgotten Realms Players Guide talks about Daeva (Aasimar). It also mentions Half-Orcs, Goliaths, Gnomes and Shifters, all of which have been confirmed for PHBII. So my bet is Daeva.


----------



## docdonuts

There's a new article in Dragon today that outlines playing a minotaur as a PC race.  It states on the first page that minotaur's make excellent fighters, barbarians and *WARDENS*.  I think this is likely the new primal defender class being released in PHB2.  It does start with the *W* that was hinted at in an interview.  I suppose it could be a divine striker class as well.  With the minotaur's stat bonuses going to STR and CON, I'm inclined to believe that the warden is a defender, but you never know.


----------



## chitzk0i

docdonuts said:


> *WARDENS*.




Sounds like a Primal defender to me.


----------



## GMforPowergamers

chitzk0i said:


> Sounds like a Primal defender to me.




I feel the same, it feels like a wild barbarian defender type. Maybe empowered by spirits to adi him in battle???


----------



## Ruin Explorer

chitzk0i said:


> Sounds like a Primal defender to me.




Yep, and that could be very exciting if handled well.


----------



## yesnomu

GMforPowergamers said:


> I feel the same, it feels like a wild barbarian defender type. Maybe empowered by spirits to adi him in battle???



A couple of pages ago, there was a link to pictures of a party of minis made up only of PHBII classes, and at least two were shapeshifted (one was a salamander and the other was a wolf, IIRC). I bet the Warden is a shapeshifting defender, and Salamander is one of the forms they get. It makes sense, since Wild Shape was so versatile, that the druid and its forms got split up into defender ones and controller ones.


----------



## Hawke

That would answer my question about what a Primal Defender would be! 

I had anticipated that class to be divine. Which comes out first the Arcane splatbook or the Divine one? I'm wondering what else we'll be getting in terms of Divine classes prior to that book since Arcane looks to be fairly filled out by the end of PHB2. Any chances for a new divine class in the Eberron setting (I'm unfamiliar) that might be included in addition to the Artificer?


----------



## Flobby

So I guess the only ones we don't know are T and I. I'm sure they are divine, my guess would be divine controller and divine striker... But I can't imagine what a divine striker would be...


----------



## andarilhor

Flobby said:


> So I guess the only ones we don't know are T and I. I'm sure they are divine, my guess would be divine controller and divine striker... But I can't imagine what a divine striker would be...




My bets are Theurge (divine/controller) and Inquisitor (divine/striker).
I believe the first will be centered in buff/debuff in areas and the second will be a high damage against specific creatures (undeads, demons) or will be something like a striker/leader.

Other thing, as the PHBII release aproaches seems the dragons is leaking previews each month, barbarian in 368 and bard in 369, so what preview do you want to see in the 370? I am betting in the druid or the sorcerer (or both), so you can see a little of the new controllers...


----------



## eleventh

What do you think a martial controller would look like?


----------



## WalterKovacs

andarilhor said:


> My bets are Theurge (divine/controller) and Inquisitor (divine/striker).
> I believe the first will be centered in buff/debuff in areas and the second will be a high damage against specific creatures (undeads, demons) or will be something like a striker/leader.
> 
> Other thing, as the PHBII release aproaches seems the dragons is leaking previews each month, barbarian in 368 and bard in 369, so what preview do you want to see in the 370? I am betting in the druid or the sorcerer (or both), so you can see a little of the new controllers...




That seems to make sense that the book will be split:

2 arcane/2 divine/4 primal ... it fits with the 2/2/4 build of the first PHB, plus it allows for Complete Arcana, Complete Divine and Complete Primal to all have similar set-ups to Complete Martial. The interesting thing is that arcane gets more love since they have a class in both the FR player's guide, and will have one in the Eberon guide as well. I wonder if the non-PHB classes will be supported in the Power books (we have seen drow/genasi getting support in Martial Power so far).


----------



## Gort

eleventh said:


> What do you think a martial controller would look like?




Yeah, we've never asked _that_ question before.


----------



## cignus_pfaccari

Gort said:


> Yeah, we've never asked _that_ question before.




Big guy with a polearm.

Does AoE stuff with it, including (at higher levels) ranged blasts.  Shouts and fears people away, with the weaker foes literally dying of fright (i.e. psychic damage).

Brad


----------



## andarilhor

eleventh said:


> What do you think a martial controller would look like?




I think in a warlord like character, but with Intelligence or Charisma as primary instead of secondary.


----------



## garyh

Gort said:


> Yeah, we've never asked _that_ question before.




Cut eleventh some slack, they just joined the boards this week.

Welcome, eleventh!  There have been many attempts at a martial controller in the House Rules forum.  I haven't especially followed that topic myself, so I can't recommend a specific thread, but you can probably find something poking around that forum.

4e Fan Creations and House Rules - EN World D&D / RPG News


----------



## andarilhor

WalterKovacs said:


> That seems to make sense that the book will be split:
> 
> 2 arcane/2 divine/4 primal ... it fits with the 2/2/4 build of the first PHB, plus it allows for Complete Arcana, Complete Divine and Complete Primal to all have similar set-ups to Complete Martial. The interesting thing is that arcane gets more love since they have a class in both the FR player's guide, and will have one in the Eberon guide as well. I wonder if the non-PHB classes will be supported in the Power books (we have seen drow/genasi getting support in Martial Power so far).




The arcane has reference to the swordmage, the artificer i dont know.

You make me think what to expect in the future classes of settings:
Ravenloft - Shadow power source, maybe the necromancer...
Darksun - Psionic or Elemental power source
Dragonlance - Divine power source


----------



## Gort

garyh said:


> Cut eleventh some slack, they just joined the boards this week.




Heh, no offense meant. Usually martial controller suggestions are something like "whipmaster", "monk", or "trick archer", where the controller has a lot of powers that tie people up, throw them around the room, or affect areas with storms of arrows.

I haven't really seen one I thought was too convincing so far - the idea of a guy firing arrows at assault rifle rate of fire is just a bit too outlandish for the martial power source, in my opinion.

Maybe some kind of pikeman would work.


----------



## HazardCatcher

Oh jeez... empath?


That would certainly be the lamest name for a 4e class I've ever heard suggested. 


The 4e psionic leader should be called The Seer. 100%


If they call it an empath, and I agree that there would even be a lot of empathing going on with the class, I'm not buying the PHBIII.


----------



## tleilaxu

eleventh said:


> What do you think a martial controller would look like?



I've thought about what a martial controller would be like, and I think one possible answer is....

The Engineer


----------



## damngravity

fba827 said:


> I don't have a ddi subscription so I can't point to it in the original source.
> However, according to a thread discussing the recent minotaur article ( http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/244251-playing-minotaurs.html ),  the article mentions the "Warden" as a class that the minotaur is suited for.
> 
> This may be the "W" class that will be in the PHB2 (and also suggests that the warden is best served by strength and or constitution abilities since those are the minotaur's racial bonuses).
> 
> Of course, this isn't hard confirmation, just conjecture based on the use of the class name, the timing, and an unknown "W" class in the PHB2.




The confirmation is in the Digital Insider #14: Closed Beta article.

Digital Insider #14: Character Builder

" It's got unique racial abilities, feats, and paragon paths, plus it also spoils a previously unannounced PHB II class on the first page."


----------



## Amphimir Míriel

chitzk0i said:


> Sounds like a Primal defender to me.




Sounds like the _Large-Weapon-Ranger_ I was waiting for! Woot!


----------



## Flobby

andarilhor said:


> My bets are Theurge (divine/controller) and Inquisitor (divine/striker).
> I believe the first will be centered in buff/debuff in areas and the second will be a high damage against specific creatures (undeads, demons) or will be something like a striker/leader.
> 
> Other thing, as the PHBII release aproaches seems the dragons is leaking previews each month, barbarian in 368 and bard in 369, so what preview do you want to see in the 370? I am betting in the druid or the sorcerer (or both), so you can see a little of the new controllers...




Theurge! You're probably right. I was wracking my brain trying to think what the T would stand for.


----------



## andarilhor

Flobby said:


> Theurge! You're probably right. I was wracking my brain trying to think what the T would stand for.




For nothing. It was other guy in this thread who said this name before me. 

Other thing: Anyone knows (or guesses) what other races are going to appear in the "Playing with..." of Dragon Magazine?


----------



## Jhaelen

HazardCatcher said:


> The 4e psionic leader should be called The Seer. 100%



How is that not 'lame'?


HazardCatcher said:


> If they call it an empath, and I agree that there would even be a lot of empathing going on with the class, I'm not buying the PHBIII.



Frankly, I don't care about the class's name as long as it's implemented well.

We already have lots of class names that sound 'lame' or don't accurately describe the class's concept. It's bad enough we'll get yet another class starting with 'War', already: the *War*den - yuck!


----------



## Larrin

andarilhor said:


> .... the [inquisitor] will be a high damage against specific creatures (undeads, demons) or will be something like a striker/leader.




I'm betting they won't go overly specific for what types of creature a striker is good against.  If you want a character to deal extra damage to undead, give him radiant damage, but don't force him to go looking for undead and deamons to fight in order to fill his role.  He may have one or two powers (a la turn undead) the specifically targets a type, but that (hopefully) will never be a main schtick.

I also hope for the inquisitor...and i hope they don't go stereo typical "Witch hunting/spanish inquisitor Lawful Evil in the name of Good" in the description.  I think they should be field agents of the church...eyes and ears of the church and when needed, the fiery holy scalpel, (a nice counterpoint in millitary might to the paladin) but they should uphold ALL of their deities ideals.  Paladins of Bahamut should be upright and just in their questionings, they want the truth.  Once they have the truth, the gloves are off of course.  An inquisitor of an evil god has free liscence to be as corrupt as he wants.  I think a good term for their striker bonus damage would be 'censure'....


----------



## GMforPowergamers

I don't know how everyone missed it...or if I am missing the link somewhere...but there is a new power for artificer in the character builder. It is an @will so I am assumeing it will lead to info o other builds...it is called Magic weapon...an extra bonus to hit basic attack fuiled by INT with ranged or melee weapons...


----------



## WalterKovacs

GMforPowergamers said:


> I don't know how everyone missed it...or if I am missing the link somewhere...but there is a new power for artificer in the character builder. It is an @will so I am assumeing it will lead to info o other builds...it is called Magic weapon...an extra bonus to hit basic attack fuiled by INT with ranged or melee weapons...




Seems like they are addressing the "human" problem from what they put up ... which means they will probably do the same thing once they add the bard. The barbarian, since it seems to follow the Rogue/Ranger/Warlord ibuild type [2 neutral at-wills, 1 specific at-will for each build] were able to include 3 at-wills in case of human PCs, as opposed to the paladin/cleric concept where you have 2 at-wills per build and thus showing 1 build means showing only 2 at-wills.


----------



## Vass

FitzTheRuke said:


> For the record, there were european monks who were fighting men as well as asian ones.
> 
> Fitz




Yeah, the most notorious of which were called the Knights Templar. 
In D&D they have been traditionally been tied to the Cleric and Paladin classes since the olde days.


----------



## Vael

Well, according to this, the remaining two classes for the PH2 are the *Invoker* and the *Avenger*, likely a Divine Controller and Striker, respectively. The Avenger was probably originally called the Templar, giving us our "T" class, but was since renamed.


----------



## andarilhor

Vael said:


> Well, according to this, the remaining two classes for the PH2 are the *Invoker* and the *Avenger*, likely a Divine Controller and Striker, respectively. The Avenger was probably originally called the Templar, giving us our "T" class, but was since renamed.




That is a surprise! 

Possibly the Templar will appear in the Dark Sun Players Guide 

And I bet Inquisitor and Theurge will not be waisted either... or they will become classes (official or not) or paragon paths...


----------



## andarilhor

The december wizards editorial shows the druid and the invoker as playtests articles in Dragon#370.


----------



## andarilhor

The playtest of the druid is online: D&D Druid, Levels 1-3
It´s free, but do not deliver the announced 3rd level powers.


----------



## Vayden

andarilhor said:


> The playtest of the druid is online: D&D Druid, Levels 1-3
> It´s free, but do not deliver the announced 3rd level powers.




For those who don't have insider, it's a Primal Controller, with an at-will toggle called Wild Shape that lets it switch back and forth between ranged area attacks and melee attacks.

**edit - nevermind, it wasn't Insider. **


----------



## CapnZapp

Is it just me being blind, or aren't the playtest links (bard, druid etc) in the first post?


----------



## Ondo

So finally updating the OP again, after almost two months.

Biggest change is that all the PHB2 classes are known and confirmed by Amazon listing the power cards for each class.  So replaced this:


> Barbarians, Bards, Druids, and Sorcerers are all confirmed for the PHB2 (source, source).  We also know:



with this:


> The classes included are the Avenger, Barbarian, Bard, Druid, Invoker, Shaman, Sorcerer, and Warden (source).  We also know these tidbits about the classes:



Removed this:


> The other classes start with W, I, T, and S (source).
> Discussing the classes: "Three are completely and utterly new. The rest are either classes or old concepts revisited." (source)



Added guesses as to which class is being referred to to each of the tidbits - spellcaster-y cleric is probably the Invoker, deadly Striker is probably the Avenger, Leader with buddy is probably the Shaman.
Added this:


> [*]One of the classes is a Defender (source). _(Probably the Warden.)_



Removed this:


> Wizards has no plans to reprint races and classes in the Forgotten Realm's Player's Guide in the PHB2 (source).




Also some other new stuff. Added the following:


> The primal power source has a theme of transformation (source).





> *Avenger*
> The Avenger will be in the Player's Handbook II.





> There is a bard preview here (D&D Insider only).





> *Invoker*
> The Invoker will be in the Player's Handbook II.



For the Druid, replaced this:


> Significant Druid info here. (Link is dead, as it was to a Gleemax blog.  Anyone know of a new place to get the info?)  A later interview here suggests that the hybrid version may not have made it past playtesting.



with this:


> There is a druid preview here (D&D Insider only).




Also did some cleaning, removing the following:


> I'm not repeating most info that was in Races & Classes, at least for now.





> Martial Power will not include any new classes.





> *D&D Insider*
> Dragon will reveal new classes and races in playtest mode before they appear in a future Player's Handbook (source).
> 
> Rich Baker hopes to have Half-Orcs on DDi pretty soon after the Player's Handbook hits (source; note this is from January).  He expects to see at least a couple of returning classes (Barbarian, Druid, Bard, Sorcerer) on DDi by this summer (source); later he guesses we might see Bard or Druid by late summer or early fall (source).
> 
> Wizards has plans to release an annual "Best of" compendium each year (source).


----------



## Ondo

A few things I forgot: added a note to the Shaman that it will be in Player's Handbook II, and added this:


> *Warden*
> The Warden is one of the suggested classes for a Minotaur (source, D&D Insider only), so it presumably benefits from Strength and/or Constitution.  It will be in the Player's Handbook II.


----------



## Aust Diamondew

FitzTheRuke said:


> For the record, there were european monks who were fighting men as well as asian ones. The asian ones just spark the imagination better.
> 
> Fitz




Don't paladin, cleric and fighter largely cover the European Warrior Monk?

At least those are the classes I'd imagine your typical Knight Templar, Teutonic Knight or Hospitllar belonging to.  Cleric and paladin fit particuarly well in a fantasy setting.


----------



## Ondo

One more brief update - added a note to the Avenger and Invoker that they are Divine classes, as the blurb for Divine Power in Wizard's catalog (here) mentions them both.


----------



## fissionessence

The bladeling has racial stats in MoP. Not sure if it's a PHB- or MM-style writeup, nor what the legality will be for LFR.

Source: Manual of the Planes: Arriving Tomorrow!!! - Page 4 - RPGnet Forums

~

edit: The MoP table of contents previewed today shows 'Bladeling Characters' on page 117.


----------



## Ondo

fissionessence said:


> The bladeling has racial stats in MoP. Not sure if it's a PHB- or MM-style writeup, nor what the legality will be for LFR.
> 
> Source: Manual of the Planes: Arriving Tomorrow!!! - Page 4 - RPGnet Forums
> 
> ~
> 
> edit: The MoP table of contents previewed today shows 'Bladeling Characters' on page 117.



Thanks!  I've added this to the first post.

Also, today's Ampersand confirmed that Shamans and Wardens are Primal - which was extremely obvious before, but not technically confirmed.


----------



## fba827

According to: Digital Insider #18


> We preview the invoker from Player’s Handbook 2. This new controller class has mastered the original source of divine power, and will introduce summoning to D&D 4th Edition




So confirmations for Invokers, 1) PHB2 2) Divine 3) Controllers 4) introduces summoning


----------



## Ondo

fba827 said:


> So confirmations for Invokers, 1) PHB2 2) Divine 3) Controllers 4) introduces summoning



Indeed - I'm looking forward to the preview.

Updated the OP by replacing this:


> The Invoker uses the Divine power source (source)



with this:


> "This new controller class has mastered the original source of divine power, and will introduce summoning to D&D 4th Edition." (source)


----------



## Ondo

Added confirmation of the Warforged in the Eberron Player's Guide - it is strongly implied here.

Added links to the Invoker and Warden previews on D&D Insider.

Removed some info that seems redundant after the previews - specifically:


> [*]There's a new class that's "like a cleric, but a bit more on the spellcaster-y side" (source). _(Probably the Invoker.)_





> [*]One of the classes is a Defender (source). _(Probably the Warden.)_





> The Warden is a Primal class (source, D&D Insider only). It is one of the suggested classes for a Minotaur (source, D&D Insider only), so it presumably benefits from Strength and/or Constitution.


----------



## Smog

Has anyone playtested barbarians yet?  On paper it looks like they're going to do way too much damage.  Or perhaps I just got an initial bad taste in my mouth when I saw 9[W] under their base power.

Anyone with actual playtime under their belt that can comment?


----------



## yesnomu

Smog said:


> Has anyone playtested barbarians yet?  On paper it looks like they're going to do way too much damage.  Or perhaps I just got an initial bad taste in my mouth when I saw 9[W] under their base power.
> 
> Anyone with actual playtime under their belt that can comment?



Playing a level 3 Barbarian here. So far, my damage output is very spikey. I'll have rounds where I just hit something with my hammer and do fairly minor damage, and then ones where I one-shot a skirmisher with Avalanche Strike, and then charge another, crit, and hit it again. According to my DM, it seems to balance out. I should compare with the warlock next session.

I am very, very tough, though. I have a shield of temp HP near-constantly, and I've so far never even used half my surges in a day. (Although my DM doesn't seem to attack me much, for some reason.)

EDIT: Forgot to mention, I feel really, really awesome with him. Totally apart from damage output, he's just simply fun to play. Whacking monsters with a Mordenkrad never gets old.


----------



## Smog

yesnomu said:


> Playing a level 3 Barbarian here. So far, my damage output is very spikey. I'll have rounds where I just hit something with my hammer and do fairly minor damage, and then ones where I one-shot a skirmisher with Avalanche Strike, and then charge another, crit, and hit it again. According to my DM, it seems to balance out. I should compare with the warlock next session.
> 
> I am very, very tough, though. I have a shield of temp HP near-constantly, and I've so far never even used half my surges in a day. (Although my DM doesn't seem to attack me much, for some reason.)
> 
> EDIT: Forgot to mention, I feel really, really awesome with him. Totally apart from damage output, he's just simply fun to play. Whacking monsters with a Mordenkrad never gets old.




Anymore info you can give me after you get some additional play time in would be really appreciated.  If you have the time, or remember, feel free to pm/email me any comparisons you're able to draw from more playtime.  Keep in mind, though, with your comparisons against the warlock, that they're currently considered slightly weaker than the other strikers.


----------



## fba827

Smog said:


> Anymore info you can give me after you get some additional play time in would be really appreciated.  If you have the time, or remember, feel free to pm/email me any comparisons you're able to draw from more playtime.  Keep in mind, though, with your comparisons against the warlock, that they're currently considered slightly weaker than the other strikers.




People are discussing the barbarian playtest class over in this
http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/247932-hows-barbarian-beta-working-out.html
thread.

You may want to look there for more feedback and discussion on that topic.


----------



## Ondo

Updated the Sorcerer info with a link to the D&D Insider preview, and removed this:







> It appears the Sorcerer will be an Arcane Controller.  Rich Baker mentions thinking hard about "how it could occupy the same role and power source as the wizard but be a different class" (source), and Christopher Perkins mentions Sorcerer as a possibility for members of the Arcane Caste, along with Wizard and Warlock (source).
> 
> Significant info on the Sorcerer here. Sorcerers will get flying a little faster than wizards do (source).



Rich Baker noted when talking about the Sorcerer that things could change in process - apparently they did, since this early info doesn't seem to have much in common with the previewed class.


----------



## Eldorian

There is an article that mentions that Half Orcs make better fighters and rogues than barbarians, implying they have a racial bonus to dex.

Also, the same article talks about their origin story, and completes the gnome race for players.  (minus feats).


----------



## CubeKnight

Eldorian said:


> There is an article that mentions that Half Orcs make better fighters and rogues than barbarians, implying they have a racial bonus to dex.
> 
> Also, the same article talks about their origin story, and completes the gnome race for players.  (minus feats).



For some reason, I always thought Half-Orcs would be +Str/+Dex.


----------



## Vael

I originally thought the Half-Orcs would be STR/WIS, but I'm now pretty sure they're STR/DEX. it's a missing combination, only the Bugbear has that combination, and it's a good option.


----------



## andarilhor

The half-orc sheet from D&DXP indicates both Dex and Wis as possible options... and both funtion well to the race concept... seems we will have to wait to settle this doubt.


----------



## Alabast

Eldorian said:


> There is an article that mentions that Half Orcs make better fighters and rogues than barbarians, implying they have a racial bonus to dex.
> 
> Also, the same article talks about their origin story, and completes the gnome race for players.  (minus feats).




Link to the article?


----------



## Hawke

New Monk info is in the latest (and last) DDI update from wednesday - namely that there'll be a preview in May and it's confirmed in PHB3


----------



## Eldorian

Alabast said:


> Link to the article?




Design & Development: The Gnome, the Bad, & the Ugly


----------



## andarilhor

This Thread is abandoned?


----------



## drothgery

andarilhor said:


> This Thread is abandoned?




Well, there was a long period with no info between the PHB2 release and the Monk preview.


----------



## OU812

*Offical Cover is Up at WOTC for PHBIII*

So does anybody have any clear ideas yet on what will be in the PHB3?

The cover says Psionic, Divine, and Primal...so major clues there.

The cover shows a Gith (Zerai Monk probably) PC and a Minotaur PC (Yeah!).

The Monk preview is up too and it looks like it is the first "psionic" class too. (They focus their will through their bodies...which actually makes sense to me!)

I'm guessing races in the book will be Minotaurs, Ogres (1/2 ogres?) Gith (Both), Gnolls, Goblinoids, maybe Elans or other psionic race,,,(Half-Giants would be cool, but I doubt it after the goliaths were added in the PHB2)

Anybody know anything else that is definate yet? 

WOTC Page:

D&D Insider Announcement


----------



## Khaalis

What we know for Certain: 

* Races:
-- *Eberron:* Shifters have already been covered. That leaves Changelings/Doppelgangers, Kalashtar and Warforged. If we take the FRPG/PH2 as guidelines, 2 of these will end in the EPG and 1 in PH3. {Edit: Since the Warforged were already done in a Dragon article, I would be willing to be it is the one that goes PH3 with Changelings and Kalashtar being the EPG equivalents to the Genasi and Drow in FRPG.}
-- *PH3:* From the cover art we know - Minotaur and Gith (probably both Githzerai and Githyani in the same format the Shifter was done)

* Classes:
-- *PH3 Power Sources:* Psionic, Divine, Primal
-- *PH3 = Monk* - Psionic Striker  (the cover Gith is definitely a monk)
-- *EPG = Artificer* - Arcane Leader (from the cover art of PH3, I'd almost be willing to say it looks like the minotaur is an artificer with the magical glowing runes on his gear, but more likely its a representation of one of the new primal classes)


Opinions:
First off I am not really happy to see Divine and Primal on the list. I would rather there have been a second new power source, and perhaps a new Martial class.

We currently have the following class breakdowns by Power Source:

* *5 Arcane* (Controller, Defender, Leader, 2x Striker) and will be gaining another Arcane Leader with the Artificer taking it to 6 Arcane classes.

* *4 Divine* (Controller, Defender, Leader, Striker)

* *4 Martial* (Defender, Leader, 2x Striker)

* *4 Primal* (Controller, Defender, Leader, Striker)


Each Handbook has had 8 classes, so we can assume PH3 will have 8 classes, with 4 being the "New" Psionic power source (one for each Role the way they did Primal).  This will likely mean 2 more Primal and 2 More Divine classes making the class power source distribution:
* 6 Arcane
* 6 Divine
* 4 Martial
* 6 Primal
* 4 Psionic

Does this mean PHB 4 will have 4 New Power Source classes, 2 Martial and 2 Psionic?


----------



## Jhaelen

Khaalis said:


> Gith (probably both Githzerai and Githyani in the same format the Shifter was done)



I'm pretty sure they'll get separate entries. Unlike the shifter variants, they are actually different races with different racial abilities.


Khaalis said:


> Each Handbook has had 8 classes, so we can assume PH3 will have 8 classes, with 4 being the "New" Psionic power source (one for each Role the way they did Primal).  This will likely mean 2 more Primal and 2 More Divine classes making the class power source distribution:
> * 6 Arcane
> * 6 Divine
> * 4 Martial
> * 6 Primal
> * 4 Psionic
> 
> Does this mean PHB 4 will have 4 New Power Source classes, 2 Martial and 2 Psionic?



Assuming the subtitle is correct, that would be my guess, too. If we further assume the new setting will be Darksun, I could imagine the Templar being one of the new divine classes. Then again templars weren't really different from standard clerics in 2E. The Darksun clerics and druids deviated from the standard classes a lot more (and don't get me started on Darksun bards!).


----------



## andarilhor

Anyone noticed the Seeker class referency in the Githzerai article this month?!
Any bets? Psionic Defender or Leader?


----------



## Garthanos

How about the much wondered about Martial Controller 
or maybe a martial class with avenger like precision all over it.


----------



## Obryn

Garthanos said:


> How about the much wondered about Martial Controller
> or maybe a martial class with avenger like precision all over it.



The Fighter is, more or less, already a Martial Controller. 

-O


----------



## Garthanos

Handwaving the controller "definitions" are we... I thought the fighter was just extremely difficult terrain with the tack warlord being the one who created it.


----------

