Have we seen any info on gems yet?
Nope, the only thing weâve seen about sockets/jewels/additions is the Trigger/Effect runes. And yes, thatâs yet ANOTHER reason why I suspect theyâre trying with the Gems (as a class-specific feature, power, or even resource for that matter) something untraditionalâŚ
Not so sure about that. I just donât think they have finalized how they want to do gems. Do they want gems to be like before where they start off small and grow as you level, or merge them to more powerful ones? Do they even want to give power, maybe just utility and defensive properties? Do they even want legendary gems? Maybe they only want gems to go in jewelry and leave runes for gear?
Would seem odd to make gems a class specific power/system for the last class, or a new class down the road. Everything they are doing seems pretty traditional. Nothing is really breaking the mold with the current class systems.
All good points, and kinda glad thereâs not specific kind of âlimitationâ so far on those at all
This is partially true, remember that we donât know what the class-specific feature of the Druid is yet (kinda surprised noone asked that one in the Q&A tbh :P)
Pretty sure it was the seamless shapeshifting.
THAT one doesnât seem to me like a power-source
I mean sure you may combine skills quicker or whatever, but donât think thatâs the thing that classifies Druid, would be a disappointment for him to not have an additional feature that other classes donât have (even small things that can add up but arenât âsignificantâ at the very first use, like charms or weather-control) 
Maybe create a thread about it and see if we can get an official response.
We have seen affixes that boost gem effects. So gems should at least be a thing. Would be quite weird if it as an affix used only for an unannounced class system.
Heh, I already find the Druid shapeshifting to be really sad and lackluster, but yeah, if it is also their class system⌠
Exactly thatâs why I thought about the Warlock.
But the Shield thingy and the Holy argument is also completly viable.
For me Priest has a high chance of filling both, except that it will most likely not being a summoner class.
Desert Mercenaries / Paladin
In 3rd ed d&d there was a cleric summoner class that called on angels and celestial animals. I always thought that was a pretty cool twist.
Look at the Sorceressâ hairline, the headline of the shadow seems very similar. Thatâs because itâs where the Necromancerâs magnificent flowing long white hair will be!
I hope itâs a new class at this point. A Warlock!
A rebel faction of Necromancers specialized in summoning and using demons from hell, elements from hell, pacts with demons for temporary buffing with a price to pay at the end of it, or for enemy debuffs.
How about an Assassin
Check my thread I did yesterday about gems please, tell me what you think
1 Like
Okey guys I was at work, let me give some answers for Arguments you guys laid out against a possible Paladin variant Sword and board/holy variant:
- âWe have 3 Classes that can melee, we need a rangedâ : Wrong, we have 1 pure melee Class that is Barb, 1 Pure range class that is Sorc, 1 Class (Rogue) that literally does both Ranged and Melee and also Both at the same time, and a 4th Flexible (druid) Which does Storm and Earth Magic (as Ranged) and Shapeshifting (As melee) and Also has 1 Skill row for Summoning Called Companion, we know each skill row in D4 has 5 skills for now, In that Skill row Druid Summons Wolves, Ravens and Vines with 2 companion not unveiled yet.
So As it stand we Have 3 Melee and 3 Ranged, the next class could be either or both. - âBarb can wield shields, We donât need another one for nowâ: so is nearly every class in nearly every RPG, but Only one Class will have Spells requiring a Shield, that is The Sword and Board Class. Itâs fine that other classes can use shield but it isnât required for any of their skills, A Sword and Board Class uses the shield in combat, Will have Spells usable only with shieldsâŚetc
- âSword and Board isnât an Archetypeâ : itâs an Archetype in any RPG or fantasy setting, a Noble Holy Righteous Warrior Wield Sword and Shield, a Protector. It is one of the Most Popular Archetypes there is, in D2 along with Sorceress were the most popular classes, in WoW Paladin is always in the top 3 most popular classes.
- âAdding Holy Damage is a nightmare to balanceâ, we are going to have Holy damage now or later, there is resistance to it.
- âThe Silhouette doesnât seem to be wearing Plateâ: The Classes in the Camp fire in Diablo All wear their Basic Gear, its not the High End Gear, check the Barb or the Rogue of the Sorceress, which Class its gonna be will be wearing basic gear.
- âReturn to Darknessâ it doesnât mean in any way that the Paladin will contradict with that, Diablo 2 is Dark had Paladin, The Darkness is about the Tone, and the gritty and dark World, There version of Paladin wonât have shining Armor, they know how to do that. There is Light in the Darkness, the Heavens gates are closed but will surely get involved, and comeback.
The Archetype of Holy+SowrdandBoard is Going to be in the game. Thatâs a given the Question is When?, the When? Depends which Archetype is lacking more Holy+SoB or Summoner? I would Argue as it stands now, We will have Summoning or Summoning/Hybrid builds in the Druid, not enough (there is room for a True Summoner like a Necro, ofc he will be in the game sooner of later) but itâs there and it can fill the void for the base game in the other hand, we wonât have Builds that uses Holy damage or Shields, As even if the Barb can Wear it isnât required for any of his skills. even a Tanky Barb is gonna rely on his attacks to heal and large vitality pool and not on a shield that will lower his damage (and so his healing). There is also the possibility that the 5th can bring Support, Holy/SoB will provide Auras and Maybe healing, the Summoner like Necro wonât (a + for Holy/SoB). I think As is The Holy/SoB archetype is more lacking than a Summoner, But both Classes will eventually be in the game, and other ofc, but for The base I think the Paladin or a variant of it is closer⌠Weâll see
1 Like
xxxhttps://us.forums.blizzard.com/en/d3/t/gemsrunesjewels-in-diablo-4/27434
I donât mind it. Iâd keep gems to jewelry only or not have them give damage bonuses just to keep power creep and mandatory things at a minimum.
1 Like
Pretty sure the Barb cannot wield shields. He may beable to but heâs got 4 weapon slots, 2 for DW, and 2 for 2H.
Sword and board isnât exclusively tied to holy knights, but more recently in games it usually is with the warrior archetype being DW/2H oriented fighter.
The silhouette is clearly a Paladin/Crusader/Templar/Cleric of some sort in chain mail.
2 Likes
I think the point is; it is not the sword and board that makes those archetyps.
Lots of classes in RPGs can equip a sword and a shield. A wizard with sword and shield is very much a stable in RPGs too. But I assume if they added another wizard, and gave them a sword and shield, it is not what people who want a paladin were asking for.
So, I would still not consider S&B an archetype. Just like a 2handed axe wielder isnt an archetype. Paladin/Holy warrior is certainly an archetype though. And paladins should definitely be able to use shields. They should also be able to not use a shield.
The silhouette is pointless tbh. It might be something Blizzard added to have a little fun.
Gems are hardly a power creep concern. If anything it seems unlikely they can compete with runewords. Hopefully they dont repeat the âRequired Crit gem in weaponâ however.
1 Like