What class do you want next? And a few fan made monk cards.

Multi class??

Warrior / mage (assasin?) - Robes only, no helmet. Arcane items and weapons

Warrior / Priest (paladin?)- Same as Priest but with weapons (not divine )

Mage / Priest (monk?)- Robes only, Divine items, Staffs

 

Anything undead or monster themed would be my preference.

 

I agree with this. One extra class is the sweet spot IMO because it gives you four mixed combinations (up from one) and yet there is not a ton of gear you can't use. Furthermore, you can probably develop a 4-character team and select three for a particular mission.

 

Once again I vote for one thing but support another (well the Rogue didn't need my vote to win this, so I went for Ninja... and the two concepts are very similar to me).

I think the Rogue would be the best compromise, since it's a more general concept (and an iconic one as well) which could be tailored into a Ranger/Duelist or a Ninja/Assassin depending on the items he has equipped.
What I would like to see is a Rogue class which:

• has flexible weapons slots: Bows, daggers and maybe even exotic ones like a kusari-gama (i quite like mcfluffins' idea of "pull in" cards);
• has three "gadget" equipment slots (these could be kunai, shuriken or... help me out here, been a while since my last D&D session);
• has access to Duck, Cowardly Attack, Steal, Parrying Strike, Smoke Bomb and bow attacks if they are implemented
• has high mobility

I'd also love to see a druid class, but I guess properly implementing summons and shapeshifting would take a lot of time.

 

I would really like to see a Ranger. More ranged attacks would be really nice. Also would love another character slot. Warrior, Priest, Wizard, and Ranger would be a great team. 2 ranged for the critters that move around alot, 1 pure melee and one melee/support class.

 

I tend to think of character classes not by name, but by function. There is the "holy trinity" of damage dealer, tank, and healer in nearly all class-based games. Then there are secondary functions like crowd control. Right now what we have is:

• A mediocre tank class with good melee damage output (for a good tank the warrior would need cards like Taunt)
• A healer with some damage output (mostly melee and short range)
• A ranged damage dealer with some crowd control (walls, terrain modifications)

While a rogue as melee damage dealer would play somewhat different than the ranged wizard, he would probably end up playing a lot like the warrior. He would need not only gadgets like Pickpocket, but also some other forms of crowd control, e.g. stuns or halts, to really be different.

 

That's why I suggested weapons like a kusari-gama (but really, any chain weapon would do) that could have halt attacks, as well as attacks that pull enemies to you.

It's a nice and flavorful idea, but a rogue class with animal pets would feel weird to me. Also, if they ever introduce proper summoning they might have to rework something like that.

 

The issue with CH classes is that they can fulfill more than one role, depending on your deck. However, in the broadest sense, I'd break them down as:

Wizard: Ranged controller. Moderate damage output, but high range.
Warrior: Melee attacker. High damage output with decent defense but no range.
Priest: Melee supporter. Low damage output (and mostly defensive attacks) but helps other classes.

The design of the game precludes having a "tank" class. Mobility and positioning is paramount in CH, and a tank is contrary to that spirit. The best defense is positioning.

Right now I'm not convinced there's enough design space for another melee class. However, when I think of the CH Rogue I picture something like the Guard Dogs. That is to say, highly mobile and position dependent with a moderate damage output. Basically they are a harasser. One design space I could see is a reversal of Step cards where attack first and then move. I could see also see them having something like a weak Stun, and maybe some minor terrain attachments (caltrops, etc). Ranged Piercing attacks would probably be apt here too.

Any new class would have to bring something relatively unique to the table. For example, a Paladin can be modeled fairly well by a melee-focused Mace Priest. So why have bother to have a Paladin class? This is the question that needs asking and answering for every class idea.

What about Red/Orange cards in contrast to Red/Black? Then you have an interesting tactical choice - keep the Boost, or attack the enemy. What about some sort of Aura effect similar to Healing Presence? Do you keep your characters close by to buff them, or keep them spread apart to avoid Bursts/Chops/Wall of Fire? If you want the Paladin to be tanky, what about melee-focused Red/Green cards akin to Counterspell?

Of course, the follow-up question is - why not just make these cards available to Priests and Warriors? Is a new class really necessary to implement these ideas? Well, in this case, it depends on how different the concept plays to existing concepts. A tanky "sacrifice" Paladin might just be different enough to warrant its own class. However, a simple melee-oriented Priest probably isn't.

 

The most obvious thing unavailable to current classes is projectile attacks; the only PC usable ones I've seen are the roots. But that would be for a ninja, archer, or ranger class, and not really appropriate for a rogue or monk.

 

There's already a ranged attacker - the Wizard. They even have non-elemental attacks (the Arcane line). There's not a lot of functional difference between Sorcerous Bolt, a 4/6 Magic Arcane attack, and a 4/6 Projectile Piercing attack. Yes there are keyword interactions, but those are relatively minimal.

 

As I said earlier, the concept of rogue is not that far from that of a ninja or an archer. Rogue is the basic class, which would then be defined by its equipped items (a core concept of this game).
Taking as an example D&D, to which Card Hunter is obviously inspired, I've played many rogue characters who used bows for ranged sneak attacks.

I don't know how to quote in edit <_< but I agree with LightPhoenix in the fact that a rogue should have high mobility and stuns/halts. Incidentally that is very similar to my previous suggestions.

 

I'd love to see a type of spellsword added. Medium armor quality, elemental sword attacks, lots of teleportation, and some defensive abilities.

 

Well, if a rouge is going to be added, it needs to have some kind of stealth card. It could have a lot of variants. Here's a idea:

Name: Shadow Walk
Rarity: Common
Color Class: Assist
Play Effect 1: Character turns invisible to enemy units. If a enemy is 2 squares of range this card will be dissabled. Self target onlyPlay Effect 2: When attached Encumber 1.Duration: 2
Keep: No
Flavour Text: "Now you see me. Now you don't"

P.S.: Beacuse of the "if a enemy is 2 squares of range..." the rouge should be provided of various step\attack cards and\or knife throwing.

 

That seems pretty complicated to be a Common card. Personally, I'd go with something simpler - Free Moves are the logical choice here.

Personally, if I were going to model a stealth/invisibility mechanic in CH, I'd make it something simple. Off the cuff, I'd make it an attachment that does not allow allies and enemies to target that character. If you want a more D&D invisibility, it could be cancelled if you play an Attack.

 

I'd do something like this:

Stealthy
Trait. Attach to self. Duration 3.
You can only be targeted by adjacent chars.

 

Rogue is in keeping with the traditional RPG elements of the game and adds a stealth element as well as a secondary long range element. Depending of course on how you outfit your character.