Talk:Spider Rider (4e Class)

From D&D Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

This Really Should be a Paragon Path[edit]

My main beef with this as a base class is the same as 3e druid at level 1: the player effectively gets 2 moves a round. This has a big problem in terms of game balance. Secondly, serving Lolth/Arachne doesn't fit with the point of base classes (generality and options), it's just too specific, and dare I say it, too flavoursome. Shrink is probably too powerful. You can use it as the ultimate scout. 1-2 step is better. Aside: I saw Ghost in the Shell 2nd GiG the other day, and the class reminds me of the tachikoma a lot. I do like the flavour but not the mechanics. --Pwsnafu 21:34, 4 June 2008 (MDT)

First thing; this was a pre-emtive attempt at class design (the riding rules actually prevent you from making two moves a turn, and I'm re-writing it anyway), and secondly, I don't want it to be a paragon path because of the 10 level wait, and because the way paragon paths work it woudn't really work... The class is basically designed as a base class for people who want strong theme to their character rather than a generical thing like the fighter. --Sam Kay 03:59, 5 June 2008 (MDT)
And antother thing: mounted combat has changed loads in 4e. Now the rider and his mount share actions between them rather than having a turn each. So your "main beef" is no problem at all! --Sam Kay 08:44, 5 June 2008 (MDT)
Druids don't have mounted combat at level 1 (unless you're small), so I don't know where you're getting that impression from. A level 1 druid has an animal companion which takes orders (i.e. tricks). Same here. No rules say you must ride in combat, so you can bark orders to the spider (and the spider understands!) and get two moves. Even if they move on the same initiative, that's still big. Haven't checked the familiars section. I would expect the rules would be same in that sense.
On another note, you said it wouldn't work as PP. Please explain? --Pwsnafu 19:51, 5 June 2008 (MDT)
PPs are too small to fit in everything I would like to. PPs can only be taken at 11th level, so if you wanted to be a spider rider you'd have to wait 10 levels, PPs are only supposed to be a tiny part of your character's identity, there is currently no class I can see taking a spider rider PP. I can't really do themed powers the way I'd like to. You would not be able to play a 1st level spider rider. The list goes on. I like PPs, but I'd rather have this as a class.
I've sorted the two rounds thing; firstly all but the at-will rider powers are based around the riding consept, and so now you simply cannot use them unless mounted (it makes some sense; how do you do a mounted overrun on foot?). So if you want to use you powers (and adequacy in 4e relys on powers), you need to be mounted. Problem sorted!
Druids don't actually exist in 4e yet, and neither do familliars.--Sam Kay 03:56, 6 June 2008 (MDT)


Power - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because you did an excellent job of making something potentially overpowered very well balanced. However, i think this class is a bit overpowered because of the rider/mound versatility and potential loopholes from this versatility (for example, being able to see through your mounds eyes at all times could get abused) --Shadow Dragon 12:07, 11 August 2008 (MDT)

Rating system removed (templates now used instead). --Green Dragon 23:19, 10 November 2009 (MST)

Wording - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because the wording is both complete and fluent --Shadow Dragon 12:07, 11 August 2008 (MDT)

Rating system removed (templates now used instead). --Green Dragon 23:19, 10 November 2009 (MST)

Formatting - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it is standard and complete --Shadow Dragon 12:07, 11 August 2008 (MDT)

Rating system removed (templates now used instead). --Green Dragon 23:19, 10 November 2009 (MST)

Flavor - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because i cant give it a six --Shadow Dragon 12:07, 11 August 2008 (MDT)

Rating system removed (templates now used instead). --Green Dragon 23:19, 10 November 2009 (MST)

This is a very well made and from what i can tell complete class. My only suggestion would be add some variation to the spider riders attack powers, they all seem similar with small differences, especially at level 1. --Shadow Dragon 12:07, 11 August 2008 (MDT)


This looks very similar to the Beast Companion class feature in Martial Power. Maybe the spider rider's mount could follow the same rules, instead of having to finagle new ones? --Ddragon Necrophades 15:59, 31 January 2009 (MST)

It was descided way before the Ranger Beast Companion Rules, how the spider rider would work (I know this as I talked to Sam Kay quite a bit about the ranger rules and how his spider rider differs). As with the summon rules in this sourcebook work different so do the spider rider's mounts. ShadowyFigure 10:23, 4 June 2009 (MDT)


Given that this is a mounted class, shouldn't they really start with lance proficiency? --Redgaia 13:22, 31 May 2009 (GMT)

It was supposed to. There wasn't a set of rules for lances, so it got longspear prof instead. I have made rules for lances, I just forgot to make the change. --Sam Kay 06:28, 31 May 2009 (MDT)
Ok, thanks =D Also, what about spidersilk armor? --Redgaia 21:36, 03 June 2009 (GMT)
Look here. ShadowyFigure 00:47, 4 June 2009 (MDT)
I know where it is. I'm sorry I wasn't more clear in my meaning, but what I meant was "why don't spider riders have spidersilk armor proficiency?"--Redgaia 16:24, 04 June 2009 (GMT)
As Spider Silk is better then hide in every way, other then gp cost, I think it's worth a proficiency feat.ShadowyFigure 10:21, 4 June 2009 (MDT)
Yep. That is exactly why you don't gain proficiency with it. -- SamAutosig.JPG Sam Kay   talk    contribs    email   13:18, 4 June 2009 (MDT)
Personal tools
admin area
Terms and Conditions for Non-Human Visitors