What's the next class you feel should get an archetype?

[unbongwah]

Archetypee should have really been racial based instead of class based for 2 reasons...
It builds cultural characterization of the races and it would have open up to more diverse character creation.

Why not both?

Some of us still remember when SSG né Turbine promised to add more racial Prestige Enhancements besides Arcane Archer. Back when they were still called "Prestige Enhancements." Be cool if they dusted that idea off again.

 

[l_remmie]

Let's be honest, this game's devs hate casters. Why would they put out a new caster that has SP ED, and why would we want it. Lets look at the latest Iconic put out, they had 4 classes that didn't have iconic representation, all of which were caster types. What did they do, put out a new and second version of fighter in iconic representation. They want this game mostly if not all melee. This goes for lock picks too, I haven't played the new pack yet, but chill had what, a single trap to disable and it was so easily negotiable you didn't need to disarm it.

It's the path of least resistance. Making another melee is easier than another ranger and both are leagues easier than making a caster. Why make something that would either suck like every other caster or worse, not suck so every other caster is even more ridiculously unplayable compared to it.

 

[voenixa121]

you mean a pseudo caster. Trickster is a rogue that can cast not a true caster. And what they can cast is extremely limited. Which is great, because no one should get everything and be op at everything. A jack of all trades should be sub par at everything.

It has spellpoints, it casts spells, it has the magical training feat, it deals most of its damage through spellpower.
What's your definition of caster?
Are Dragon Disciples, Warlocks, Artificers and Bards casters?

Anyway I still hope the next one is something interesting.

 

[paddymaxson]

Wizard, timed with spellcaster buffs to show said buffs off. It's a shame pale master is already a wizard tree because that's the obvious one.

I don't think Theurge is necessarily a good idea if it sticks to its core principles because DDO's system for making archetypes which would be prestige classes is to make them half casters with weird small spell selections and stunted spell progression.
I feel like if there's to be a Wizard archetype it should be a DC caster, really lean into the Wizardiness of it all.

I guess they could go hardcore on a mystic theurge and just give it both the cleric and wizard spellbook with full caster level and just shout "screw balance" but then nobody would ever play a normal wizard again.

 

[norriskwondo]

It has spellpoints, it casts spells, it has the magical training feat, it deals most of its damage through spellpower.
What's your definition of caster?
Are Dragon Disciples, Warlocks, Artificers and Bards casters?

Anyway I still hope the next one is something interesting.

Then are we including ranger, and paladin, and dragon disciple as casters too then? Seriously

 

[Lazuli]

Until the developers fix the caster problems and understand casters, no more caster archetypes, please. Blightcaster, Dark Apostate, Wild Mage, Acolyte of the skin... all bad archetypes with significant problems.

 

[Fizban]

Wizards need an Archtype.

 

[norriskwondo]

It's the path of least resistance. Making another melee is easier than another ranger and both are leagues easier than making a caster. Why make something that would either suck like every other caster or worse, not suck so every other caster is even more ridiculously unplayable compared to it.

I agree, quality is better than just pumping out quantity. But is was quantity that allies used to win WWII. LOL In that, maybe they should slow down the rate of new races and iconics so we get better quality. People quite buying american cars because German and Japanese cars are better quality. Maybe the Axis did win WWII. LOL

 

[norriskwondo]

Until the developers fix the caster problems and understand casters, no more caster archetypes, please. Blightcaster, Dark Apostate, Wild Mage, Acolyte of the skin... all bad archetypes with significant problems.

I would disagree on all except blightcaster. Anything that uses poison (blightcaster) is useless after level 7ish. I had fun playing the others. They're just different, and people generally aren't flexible enough to handle variances to what they expect. Or simply put, people don't like change.

 

[Lazuli]

I would disagree on all except blightcaster. Anything that uses poison (blightcaster) is useless after level 7ish. I had fun playing the others. They're just different, and people generally aren't flexible enough to handle variances to what they expect. Or simply put, people don't like change.

They're all bad archetypes in the cap. For leveling, they're all okay, and the Blightcaster is actually good for leveling. The trick with the Blightcaster is not to rely on poison. You have force first and acid second, focus on that.

Problem on the cap? The Blightcaster has so many elements and so many DCs to manage that it's impossible to equip it properly. It has all the problems of generalist casters, which can be summed up in one phrase: developers don't design for generalist casters.

 

[norriskwondo]

They're all bad archetypes in the cap. For leveling, they're all okay, and the Blightcaster is actually good for leveling. The trick with the Blightcaster is not to rely on poison. You have force first and acid second, focus on that.

Problem on the cap? The Blightcaster has so many elements and so many DCs to manage that it's impossible to equip it properly. It has all the problems of generalist casters, which can be summed up in one phrase: developers don't design for generalist casters.

They could solve that problem easily by adding crafting shards of potency, spell focus mastery, and universal lore for shields. Orbs too, but mostly shields. Oh, and add spell school for crafting weapons.

 

[unbongwah]

Problem on the cap? The Blightcaster has so many elements and so many DCs to manage that it's impossible to equip it properly.

I don't play at endgame anymore, but I thought the main issue was Blightcaster's primary DPS spells are acid which is not as well supported by gear and Epic Destinies as cold. So "Blightcaster for leveling, water elemental for Legendary" is the usual advice I saw.

 

[Lazuli]

I don't play at endgame anymore, but I thought the main issue was Blightcaster's primary DPS spells are acid which is not as well supported by gear and Epic Destinies as cold. So "Blightcaster for leveling, water elemental for Legendary" is the usual advice I saw.

That cold is more pampered than acid is undeniable; cold is the most pampered element. But it's not just the equipment; a normal druid has many cold spells at their disposal. Blightcaster needs to diversify more; many of their spells are DoTs, and they really require too many elements and schools.

 

[Ratman]

Githyanki Psionic Warrior Anti-Paladin and Githzerai Psionicist Monk! PLANESCAPE. Astral Swords. LFG

 

[voenixa121]

The current archetypes (minus dragonlord) all seem to be designed for past lives, not endgame play. Lots of great flavor though, much better than most of the original classes. That alone makes it worth it to play them even if they are a little weaker.
The same goes for most of the new races that come with the new expansions. Lots of great fluff, but designed to sell past lives, not for endgame play.
That is what we can expect. And why I think Wild Magic Barbarian would be such a great thing.
For Wizard my wish is just anything that isn't undead or a necromancer or really a melee fighter.

 

[karthunk]

Barbarian was the natural choice for our upcoming expansion....

 

[Solarpower]

Until the developers fix the caster problems and understand casters, no more caster archetypes, please. Blightcaster, Dark Apostate, Wild Mage, Acolyte of the skin... all bad archetypes with significant problems.

Blightcaster is good. Well at least till R1 (and I don't care about something above, sorry; actually I don't care even about R1...)
Still prefer a normal Druid though.

The Blightcaster has so many elements and so many DCs to manage that it's impossible to equip it properly. It has all the problems of generalist casters, which can be summed up in one phrase: developers don't design for generalist casters.

a normal druid has many cold spells at their disposal. Blightcaster needs to diversify more

Normal Druid : Tsunami
Blightcaster : Acid Well

Literally 1 spell per class for all occasions. The rest are simply not needed.
Although, of course, if you judge from the position from which the local forum is accustomed to judging (R10 solo), then yes, one single spell, apparently, will not be enough.

 

[Chacka]

Barbarian was the natural choice for our upcoming expansion....

Indeed, a Duergar iconic barbarian and, in addition, a new barbarian archetype would have been really cool for the Terror of Demogorgon expansion in my opinion – a missed chance.

I would also like to see a bard archetype able to do traps, similar to the Dark Hunter. Even better, of course, would be if doing traps and locks were a general option for all classes, like in the newer D&D versions – but more archetypes with the "natural" ability to do traps would be a nice second-best solution too. And since the bard is a specialist class as well, and the well-known "jack of all trades" class on top of that, it would fit even better than another ranger archetype with trap and lock access. Bards and alchemists are currently the only specialist classes without any trap access at all, and of those two the bard is clearly the most natural fit for it.

 

[FaceDancer]

Indeed, a Duergar iconic barbarian and, in addition, a new barbarian archetype would have been really cool for the Terror of Demogorgon expansion in my opinion – a missed chance.

I would also like to see a bard archetype able to do traps, similar to the Dark Hunter. Even better, of course, would be if doing traps and locks were a general option for all classes, like in the newer D&D versions – but more archetypes with the "natural" ability to do traps would be a nice second-best solution too. And since the bard is a specialist class as well, and the well-known "jack of all trades" class on top of that, it would fit even better than another ranger archetype with trap and lock access. Bards and alchemists are currently the only specialist classes without any trap access at all, and of those two the bard is clearly the most natural fit for it.

Would have loved a Duergar barbarian..

I always thought of a rogue as more of a bard with thieving skills (which I think was PnP 2nd. edition?!?) That would be a great combo.
Scoundrel would be another good name for that, but that's already an iconic. Swindler???

 

[Phaedra]

Would have loved a Duergar barbarian..

I always thought of a rogue as more of a bard with thieving skills (which I think was PnP 2nd. edition?!?) That would be a great combo.
Scoundrel would be another good name for that, but that's already an iconic. Swindler???

A rogue isn't a bard with thief skills, a bard is a rogue who stole a lute and a spellbook written in meter.